The Efficacy of Intercostal Nerve Block in the Management of Postoperative Pain After Costal Cartilage Harvest for Craniofacial Reconstruction Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Autologous costal cartilage harvest is a common procedure in craniofacial reconstruction due to its stability, dependability, and diversity. However, such a procedure is associated with severe donor-site pain postoperatively. Therefore, we aim through this study to compare the efficacy of intercostal nerve block in the management of postoperative pain in patients undergoing costal cartilage harvest for craniofacial reconstruction. METHOD: This systematic review was reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. The study systematically reviewed MEDLINE, Cochrane, and EMBASE databases without time-limitation. RESULTS: As a result of reviewing the literature, 33 articles were screened by full-text resulting in 14 articles which met our inclusion/exclusion criteria. However, only four high-quality RCT articles were included in the quantitative synthesis (meta-analysis). The findings of this study suggest that there is no significant difference in pain scores between ICNB and control groups at 12, 24, and 48 h postoperatively, both at rest and with coughing. Therefore, both techniques are considered safe and effective. CONCLUSION: Our results show evidence of favorable outcome of preventive donor-site analgesia with ICNB for harvesting autologous costal cartilage in multiple studies. However, the overall outcomes were insignificant between the two arms. NO LEVEL ASSIGNED: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each submission to which Evidence-Based Medicine rankings are applicable. This excludes Review Articles, Book Reviews, and manuscripts that concern Basic Science, Animal Studies, Cadaver Studies, and Experimental Studies. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.

The Impact of Diabetes Mellitus on Breast Reconstruction Outcomes and Complications: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: As the incidence of breast cancer and diabetes rises, so does the number of patients with diabetes undergoing breast reconstruction (BR). Patients with diabetes are at a higher risk for post-operative complications. The current study examined the effects of diabetes on BR wound outcomes and overall complications post-operatively. METHODS: This study followed the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We conducted a systematic search and meta-analysis for published articles on the effects of DM on BR in January 2022 using the PubMed, MEDLINE, and Cochrane databases. Diabetes, breast reconstruction, and complications were used as keywords. RESULTS: Forty-three studies were included in the qualitative synthesis, and five provided data to be included in the meta-analysis published between 2006 and 2020. A total of 19,731 patients (9.07%) had diabetes, whereas 197,812 patients had no diabetes. The results of the pooled outcomes revealed no differences in the risk of total flap loss (p = 0.892) and wound infection (p = 0.579,). Nevertheless, the risk of wound dehiscence was significantly higher among patients with diabetes than their non-diabetic counterparts (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Diabetic patients undergoing BR have a significantly higher risk of wound dehiscence. As a result of the adverse effects of diabetes status on BR outcomes, patients need to be counseled about optimizing their diabetes management before surgery. Because of the heterogeneity in our results, prospective randomized studies are needed to shed light on the consequences of diabetes mellitus in BR surgeries. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Ocular Complications Post-Cosmetic Periocular Hyaluronic Acid Injections: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: With the global rise in the use of hyaluronic acid (HA) fillers as a minimally invasive cosmetic procedure, significant adverse effects such as vascular compromise and blindness have become common. Hence, we present the first systematic review aimed to investigate ocular complications secondary to a facial HA injection and to understand the presentation, cause, management, and outcome of these complications. METHODS: The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were used to report this review. A systematic search was performed in July 2021 for published literature using the PubMed, MEDLINE, and Cochrane databases. The following terms were used: facial fillers, facial injections, hyaluronic acid, blindness, ophthalmoplegia, diplopia, ptosis, ophthalmic artery occlusion, posterior ciliary artery occlusion, and ocular ischemic syndrome. RESULTS: A total of 2496 publications were searched, and 34 articles published between January 2000 and July 2021 were included. Twenty-seven case reports and seven case series were evaluated. The nose was the most common site of injection (n = 25; 40.67%). Ocular pain was the most common initial symptom of ocular complications (n = 13, 22.41 %). The most common complication was vision loss (n = 17, 50%). The majority of patients received hyaluronidase, aspirin, and steroids. Regarding the outcome, 15 (45.45%) of the published studies showed no improvement in complications even after management. CONCLUSION: HA is gaining popularity in cosmetic applications. Post-HA ocular complications nearly always have an immediate onset. Proper knowledge of potential adverse events is crucial for clinicians to attempt to decrease complications and improve outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.

Risk Models to Predict Mortality in Burn Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

The predictive capability of various risk assessment models (RAMs) in evaluating the risk of mortality in burn patients is not well established. It is also unclear which RAM provides the highest discriminative ability and presents the highest clinical utility. We pooled all available studies to establish this validity and compare the predictive capability of the various RAMs. Methods: We reviewed PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase from their inception up until December 2021 for studies evaluating risk of mortality in burn patients as stratified by RAMs. Data were pooled using random-effect models and presented as area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve. Results: Thirty-four studies, comprising of a total of 98,610 patients, were included in our analysis. Most studies were found to have a low risk of bias and a good measure of applicability. Nine RAMs were evaluated. We discovered that the classic Baux; the revised Baux; and the Fatality by Longevity, APACHE II score, Measured Extent of burn, and Sex (FLAMES) scores presented with the highest discriminative power with there being no significant difference between the results presented by them [AUROCs (95% CI), 0.92 (0.90-0.95), 0.92 (0.90-0.93), 0.94 (0.91-0.97), respectively, with P < 0.00001 for all]. Conclusions: Many RAMs exist with no consensus on the optimal model to utilize and assess risk of mortality for burn patients. This study is the first systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the current RAMs' discriminative ability to predict mortality in patients with burn injuries. This meta-analysis demonstrated that RAMs designed for assessing mortality in individuals with burns have acceptable to great discriminative capacity, with the classic Baux, revised Baux, and FLAMES demonstrating superior discriminative performance in predicting death. FLAMES exhibited the highest discriminative ability among the RAMs studied.

Employment and Career Choice Satisfaction among Saudi Plastic Surgeons: A Cross-sectional, Questionnaire-based Study.

BACKGROUND: Career choice satisfaction among plastic surgeons has a significant effect on the quality of patient care and workforce shortages. This study investigated career choice satisfaction among Saudi plastic surgeons to identify associated factors. METHOD: A cross-sectional study was conducted via an online self-administered questionnaire sent in April 2021 to all Saudi plastic surgeons. The questionnaire was composed of 23 items in four domains: demographics, plastic surgery training, current practice workload, and job satisfaction. The analysis was performed at a 95% confidence interval using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences, version 23.0 (IBM, Armonk, N.Y.). RESULTS: A total of 63 plastic surgeons were included in this study (82.5% men; 17.5% women), with an overall response rate of 76.8%. The leading cause of job dissatisfaction for women was financial remuneration (28.8%) (P = 0.008). The main factor for men was work-life balance (38.5%) (P = 0.028). Of the different backgrounds, the highest satisfaction was among those with a background in German residency programs, and the lowest was among those with French residency programs (P = 0.045). Surgeons from the southern region had a higher satisfaction rate than those from other regions; those from the central region had the lowest rate (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our survey-based study found that Saudi plastic surgeons with German residency training, practicing in the southern region or who exceeded 11-20 years post-training had the highest job satisfaction. As such, surgeons' job satisfaction can be improved by ensuring work-life balance.

Cardiovascular health and lifestyle habits of hospital staff in Jeddah: A cross-sectional survey.

OBJECTIVES: Cardiovascular disease is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Cardiovascular disease was responsible for over 17.9 million deaths in 2016, accounting for 31% of deaths globally and 37% of deaths in Saudi Arabia. With a lifetime risk exceeding 60% for the general population, healthcare professionals are continuously monitoring the health of others but often do not find time to care for themselves. This study aimed to assess the prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors; medical conditions, such as, hypertension and diabetes mellitus; stress; and attitudes and barriers against healthy lifestyle choices among healthcare professionals at King Abdulaziz University Hospital. METHODS: A cross-sectional study based on a self-administered questionnaire was conducted among the staff at King Abdulaziz University Hospital over a period of 12 weeks. A validated questionnaire was adopted from a study that had previously been conducted in the United Kingdom. RESULTS: The study included 400 healthcare workers, of whom, 78% were clinical staff and 22% were non-clinical staff. Approximately, two-thirds of the clinical staff were aged ⩽25 years, whereas 43.2% of the non-clinical staff were aged 26-35 years. Most of the clinical staff (70.5%) were female, compared to 56.8% of the non-clinical staff. Significantly higher rates of hypertension and smoking were observed among the non-clinical staff than among the clinical staff. However, no other significant differences were observed in the prevalence of diseases between the groups. Overall, poor lifestyle, in terms of low compliance with the recommended dietary and physical activity guidelines, was observed in both groups. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors among the clinical staff at King Abdulaziz University Hospital was not markedly different from that among the non-clinical staff, except the prevalence of hypertension and smoking, which was significantly higher among the non-clinical staff. Further studies that include staff from other institutions are recommended.