Comparative study of left vertebral artery revascularization in patients with and without aberrant left vertebral anatomy.

OBJECTIVE: Left vertebral artery revascularization is indicated in surgery involving zone 2 of the aortic arch and is typically accomplished indirectly via subclavian artery revascularization. For aberrant left vertebral anatomy, direct revascularization is indicated. Our objective was to compare the outcomes of direct vertebral artery revascularization with indirect subclavian artery revascularization for treating aortic arch pathology and to identify predictors of mortality. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted at a single tertiary hospital, including patients who underwent open or endovascular vertebral artery revascularization from 2005 to 2022. Those who underwent direct vertebral revascularization were compared with those who were indirectly revascularized via subclavian artery revascularization. The outcomes of interest were a composite outcome (any of death, stroke, nerve injury, and thrombosis) and mortality. Univariate logistic regression models were fitted to quantify the strength of differences between the direct and indirect revascularization cohorts. Cox regression was used to identify mortality predictors. RESULTS: Of 143 patients who underwent vertebral artery revascularization, 21 (14.7%) had a vertebral artery originating from the aortic arch. The median length of stay was 10 days (interquartile range, 6-20 days), and demographics were similar between cohorts. The incidence of composite outcome, bypass thrombosis, and hoarseness was significantly higher in the direct group (42.9% vs 18.0%, P = .019; 33.3% vs 0.8%, P < .0001; 57.1% vs 18.0%, P < .001, respectively). The direct group was approximately three times more likely to experience the composite outcome (odds ratio, 3.41; 95% confidence interval, 1.28, 9.08); similarly, this group was approximately six times more likely to have hoarseness (odds ratio, 5.88; 95% confidence interval, 2.21, 15.62). There was no significant difference in mortality rates at 30 days, 1, 3, 5, and 10 years of follow-up. Age, length of hospital stay, and congestive heart failure were identified as predictors of higher mortality. After adjusting for these covariates, the group itself was not an independent predictor of mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Direct vertebral revascularization was associated with higher rates of composite outcome (death, stroke, nerve injury, and thrombosis), bypass thrombosis and hoarseness. Patients with aberrant vertebral anatomy are at higher risks of these complications compared with patients with standard arch anatomy. However, after adjusting for other factors, mortality rates were not significantly different between the groups.

Futility considerations in surgical ethics.

The topic of futility has been intensely debated in bioethical discourse. Surgical futility encompasses considerations across a continuum of care, from decision-making during initial triage, to the choice to operate or refrain from operating on the critically ill, to withdrawal of life-supporting care. Determinations over futility may result in discord between providers and patients or their families, who might insist that treatment be provided at all costs to sustain life. In this manuscript, we will explore some of the possible sources for and manifestations of these disputes, and describe approaches by which to resolve them. Part I will briefly address some of the reasons that families ask for life-sustaining measures against medical advice in the surgical setting. These include variable determinations of both the quality of life and the inherent value of life (stemming from religious, cultural, and personal beliefs). Part II will detail some general instances in which physicians and surgeons can override requests to provide futile treatment, namely: instances of resource scarcity, interventions which carry a high probability of harm, and those that carry significant moral distress. To conclude, Part III will provide concrete guidelines for navigating futility, making an argument for individual case-based communication models in surgical decision-making.

Early effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the North American cardiothoracic surgery job market.

Background: The present study aims to report the early effect of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on the cardiothoracic surgery job market in North America. Methods: The Cardiothoracic Surgery Network (CTSNet) job market database was queried, and patterns from January to May for 2019 versus January to May 2020 were compared for trends in job postings and job seekers. Results: Our study is comprised of 395 cardiothoracic surgery job postings, of which 98% were positions located in North America and 63% were academic. The negative impact of the pandemic on the cardiothoracic surgery job market was greatest in the cardiothoracic/cardiovascular combined subspecialty, followed by congenital and adult cardiac surgery, whereas general thoracic surgery experienced an increase in proportion of jobs available. Despite an increase in views per job posted in 2020 vs. 2019 (532 vs. 290), employer views of job seeker curriculum vitae declined over the same time period in 2020 (January, 380 views/month to May, 3 views/month) compared to 2019 (January, 100 views/month to May, 54 views/month). Conclusions: An analysis of job postings from CTSNet suggests a decline in job availability in the North American cardiothoracic surgical job market following declaration of the pandemic with acknowledgement that there is month to month variability and a supply-demand mismatch. The COVID-19 pandemic has had an unprecedented impact on our field, and the ultimate consequences remain unknown.

Could Behavioral Economics Mitigate Shortcomings in Shared Decision-Making?

While shared decision-making (SDM) is generally considered to be the standard in current clinical practice, strict application of SDM can result in adverse outcomes in certain contexts. This article examines two illustrative cases-antibiotic over-prescription and decision-making at or near the end of life-to highlight how strictly applied SDM can result in suboptimal outcomes. The article continues to describe how strategies from libertarian paternalism, particularly default setting, framing, and nudging, can be valuable tools in supplementing strict applications of SDM, resulting in improved outcomes and patient care on both individual and societal levels.

Novel Neurotechnological Interventions for Pediatric Drug-Resistant Epilepsy: Physician Perspectives.

This qualitative study investigated factors that guide physicians' choices for minimally invasive and neuromodulatory interventions as alternatives to conventional surgery or medical management for pediatric drug-resistant epilepsy. North American physicians were recruited to one of 4 focus groups at national conferences. Discussions were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. A pragmatic neuroethics framework was applied to interpret results. Discussions revealed 2 major thematic branches: (1) clinical decision making and (2) ethical considerations. Under clinical decision making, physicians emphasized scientific evidence and patient candidacy when assessing neurotechnologies for patients. Ongoing seizures without intervention was important for safety and neurodevelopment. Under ethical considerations, resource allocation, among other financial considerations for technology adoption, were considerable sources of pressure on decision making. Access to neurotechnology was a salient theme differentiating Canadian and American contexts. When assessing novel neurotechnological interventions for pediatric drug-resistant epilepsy, physicians balance clinical and ethical factors to guide decision making and best practice.

Youth Weigh In: Views on Advanced Neurotechnology for Drug-Resistant Epilepsy.

BACKGROUND: Epilepsy affects over 500,000 children in North America of whom 30% have drug-resistant epilepsy. Advancements with neurotechnologies show promising benefits, but the perceptions of these procedures by youth is unknown. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with 10 youth in British Columbia, Canada who underwent procedures for drug-resistant epilepsy involving different forms of neurotechnology (subdural grids, vagus nerve stimulation, responsive neurostimulation). Interviews were analyzed using the constant comparative qualitative method. RESULTS: Four major thematic categories emerged from the interviews. Treatment values, impact of the disorder, personal context, and impact of neurotechnology. CONCLUSIONS: Besides the predictable goal of seizure reduction, a desire for autonomy and the importance of trust in the medical team emerged as dominant values within the 4 thematic categories that were explicit to the use of new neurotechnologies for the management of drug-resistant epilepsy.

An Ethicolegal Analysis of Involuntary Treatment for Opioid Use Disorders.

Supply-side interventions such as prescription drug monitoring programs, "pill mill" laws, and dispensing limits have done little to quell the burgeoning opioid crisis. An increasingly popular demand-side alternative to these measures - now adopted by 38 jurisdictions in the USA and 7 provinces in Canada - is court-mandated involuntary commitment and treatment. In Massachusetts, for example, Part I, Chapter 123, Section 35 of the state's General Laws allows physicians, spouses, relatives, and police officers to petition a court to involuntarily commit and treat a person whose alcohol or drug abuse poses a likelihood of serious harm. This paper explores the ethical underpinnings of this law as a case study for others. First, we highlight the procedural and substantive standards of Section 35 and evaluate the application of the law in practice, including the frequency with which it has been invoked and outcomes. We then use this background to inform an ethical critique of the law. Specifically, we argue that the infringement of autonomy and privacy associated with involuntary intervention under Section 35 is not currently justified on the grounds of a lack of evidenced benefits and a risk of significant of harm. Further ethical concerns also arise from a lack of standard of care provided under the Section 35 pathway. Based on this analysis, we advance four recommendations for change to mitigate these ethical shortcomings.

Starting the conversation: CRISPR's role in India.

The applications of gene editing technologies such as CRISPR (Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats) have grown significantly in recent years. Several countries have adopted different stances on the regulation of such technology; however, India does not have any legally enforceable regulations in place. There is a need for such a development as India's regulatory, sociocultural, and economic landscape is unique. First, we discuss the uncertainty regarding India's regulatory capacity to enforce ethical standards for CRISPR use. Then, we discuss unique driving forces that could lead to the misuse of CRISPR in India, such as certain sociocultural norms like preferences for fair skin and public demand for sex determination. Given these previous concerns, we posit the question; where on the priority list does CRISPR stand in the context of public health in India?