Patients with body mass index ≥25 kg/m2 as a target population for improvement of rate of follow-up duplex venous ultrasound examinations following initial incomplete examinations.

OBJECTIVE: Obesity is highly prevalent and a major risk factor for deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and chronic venous disease. It can also technically limit duplex ultrasound evaluations for lower extremity DVT. We compared the rates and results of repeat lower extremity venous duplex ultrasound (LEVDUS) after an initial incomplete and negative (IIN) LEVDUS in overweight (body mass index [BMI] ≤25-30 kg/m2) and obese (BMI ≥30 kg/m2) patients with those of patients with a BMI <25 kg/m2 to evaluate whether increasing the rate of follow-up examinations in overweight and obese patients might facilitate improved patient care. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of 617 patients with an IIN LEVDUS study from December 31, 2017 to December 31, 2020. Demographic and imaging data of the patients with an IIN LEVDUS and the frequency of repeat studies performed within 2 weeks were abstracted from the electronic medical records. The patients were divided into three BMI-based groups: normal (BMI <25 kg/m2), overweight (BMI 25-30 kg/m2), and obese (BMI ≥30 kg/m2). RESULTS: Of the 617 patients with an IIN LEVDUS, 213 (34.5%) were normal weight, 177 (29%) were overweight, and 227 (37%) were obese. The repeat LEVDUS rates were significantly different across the three weight groups (P < .001). After an IIN LEVDUS, the rate of repeat LEVDUS for the normal weight, overweight, and obese groups was 46% (98 of 213), 28% (50 of 227), and 32% (73 of 227), respectively. The overall rates of thrombosis (both DVT and superficial vein thrombosis) in the repeat LEVDUS examinations were not significantly different among the normal weight (14%), overweight (11%), and obese (18%) patients (P = .431). CONCLUSIONS: Overweight and obese patients (BMI ≥25 kg/m2) received fewer follow-up examinations after an IIN LEVDUS. Follow-up LEVDUS examinations of overweight and obese patients after an IIN LEVDUS study have similar rates of venous thrombosis compared with normal weight patients. Targeting improving usage of follow-up LEVDUS studies for all patients, but especially for those who are overweight and obese, with an IIN LEVDUS through quality improvement efforts could help minimize missed diagnoses of venous thrombosis and improve the quality of patient care.

Improving follow-up of incomplete lower extremity venous duplex ultrasound examinations performed for deep and superficial vein thromboses.

OBJECTIVE: A lower extremity venous duplex ultrasound (LEVDUS) examination is the standard diagnostic test to evaluate patients for lower extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT). However, some studies will be incomplete for a variety of reasons, including patient-related factors such as pain, edema, a large leg circumference, or the presence of overlying bandages or orthopedic devices. We previously reported that the frequency of obtaining a follow-up examination after an incomplete and negative (I/N) LEVDUS examination was low but that the rates of DVT found on the follow-up studies of initially I/N LEVDUS studies were similar to the rates of DVT found with initially complete LEVDUS examinations. Therefore, we recommended process improvements to increase follow-up LEVDUS studies after an I/N LEVDUS examination. In the present study, we have described the results of appending a recommendation to obtain a follow-up LEVDUS study to preliminary and final reports of I/N LEVDUS. METHODS: Starting in January 2019 through December 2019, a recommendation to obtain a repeat LEVDUS examination after an I/N study was appended to the preliminary and final reports of all I/N LEVDUS examination of patients who did not, otherwise, have an indication for anticoagulation (group 2). The patients were identified on an ongoing basis through the study period and entered into an Excel database (Microsoft Corp, Redmond, Wash). Group 2 was compared with a previously reported historic control cohort of patients identified from January 2017 to December 2017 (group 1). We compared groups 1 and 2 with respect to the frequency of the repeat studies performed within 4 weeks after an I/N LEVDUS examination and the DVT rates found from the follow-up LEVDUS examinations after an I/N LEVDUS study. RESULTS: Of the patients in groups 1 and 2, 187 and 229 had had I/N LEVDUS examinations, with 28% and 40.2% of group 1 and 2 studies having follow-up LEVDUS examinations (P < .01). Previously unidentified lower extremity thrombi were discovered in 21% of the group 2 follow-up examinations. Also, the rate of new thrombi detected was not different between groups 2 and 1 (historic controls; DVT, 14.3% vs 18.5% [P = .25]; SVT, 6.3% vs 3.3% [P = .15]). A definitive finding of either positive or negative for DVT and SVT with a complete examination in 50% of the group 2 patients with follow-up examinations. CONCLUSIONS: A recommendation to obtain a follow-up examination appended to the preliminary and final I/N LEVDUS reports was associated with an increased rate of follow-up examinations, which revealed many previously undetected DVTs and SVTs or had allowed for definitive exclusion of DVT.

Enhanced Detection of Community-Acquired Pneumonia Pathogens With the BioFire® Pneumonia FilmArray® Panel.

BACKGROUND: Although most observational studies identify viral or bacterial pathogens in 50% or less of patients hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), we previously demonstrated that a multi-test bundle (MTB) detected a potential pathogen in 73% of patients. This study compares detection rates for potential pathogens with the MTB versus the Biofire® Pneumonia FilmArray® panel (BPFA) multiplex PCR platform and presents an approach for integrating BPFA results as a foundation for subsequent antibiotic stewardship (AS) activities. METHODS: Between January 2017 to March 2018, all patients admitted for CAP were enrolled. Patients were considered evaluable if all elements of the MTB and the BPFA were completed, and they met other a priori inclusion criteria. The primary endpoint was the percentage of potential pathogens detected using the MTB (8 viral and 6 bacterial targets) versus the BPFA (8 viral and 18 bacterial targets). Blood and sputum cultures were performed on all patients. Two or more procalcitonin (PCT) levels assisted clinical assessments as to whether detected bacteria were invading or colonizing. RESULTS: Of 585 enrolled patients, 274 were evaluable. A potential viral pathogen was detected in 40.5% with MTB versus 60.9% of patients with BPFA with an odds ratio (95% CI) of 9.00 (4.12 to 23.30) p<0.01. A potential bacterial pathogen was identified in 66.4% with the MTB vs 75.5% with the BPFA odds ratio (95% CI) of 2.09 (1.24 to 3.59), p 0.003). Low PCT levels helped identify detected bacteria as colonizers.

The tooth on-a-chip: a microphysiologic model system mimicking the biologic interface of the tooth with biomaterials.

The tooth has a unique configuration with respect to biomaterials that are used for its treatment. Cells inside of the dental pulp interface indirectly with biomaterials via a calcified permeable membrane, formed by the dentin matrix and several thousands of dentinal tubules (∼2 µm in diameter). Although the cytotoxic response of the dental pulp to biomaterials has been extensively studied, there is a shortage of in vitro model systems that mimic the dentin-pulp interface and enable an improved understanding of the morphologic, metabolic and functional influence of biomaterials on live dental pulp cells. To address this shortage, here we developed an organ-on-a-chip model system which integrates cells cultured directly on a dentin wall within a microfluidic device that replicates some of the architecture and dynamics of the dentin-pulp interface. The tooth-on-a-chip is made out of molded polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) with a design consisting of two chambers separated by a dentin fragment. To characterize pulp cell responses to dental materials on-chip, stem cells from the apical papilla (SCAPs) were cultured in odontogenic medium and seeded onto the dentin surface, and observed using live-cell microscopy. Next, to evaluate the tooth-on-a-chip as a platform for materials testing, standard dental materials used clinically (2-hydroxyethylmethacrylate - HEMA, phosphoric acid - PA, and Adper-Scotchbond - SB) were tested for cytotoxicity, cell morphology, and metabolic activity on-chip, and compared against standardized off-chip controls. All dental materials had cytotoxic effects in both on-chip and off-chip systems in the following order: HEMA > SB > PA (p < 0.05), and cells presented consistently higher metabolic activity on-chip than off-chip (p < 0.05). Furthermore, the tooth-on-a-chip enabled real-time tracking of gelatinolytic activity in a model hybrid layer (HL) formed in the microdevice, which suggests that dental pulp cells may contribute to the proteolytic activity in the HL more than endogenous proteases. In conclusion, the tooth-on-a-chip is a novel platform that replicates near-physiologic conditions of the pulp-dentin interface and enables live-cell imaging to study dental pulp cell response to biomaterials.