Association of an Emergency Critical Care Program With Survival and Early Downgrade Among Critically Ill Medical Patients in the Emergency Department.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether implementation of an Emergency Critical Care Program (ECCP) is associated with improved survival and early downgrade of critically ill medical patients in the emergency department (ED). DESIGN: Single-center, retrospective cohort study using ED-visit data between 2015 and 2019. SETTING: Tertiary academic medical center. PATIENTS: Adult medical patients presenting to the ED with a critical care admission order within 12 hours of arrival. INTERVENTIONS: Dedicated bedside critical care for medical ICU patients by an ED-based intensivist following initial resuscitation by the ED team. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Primary outcomes were inhospital mortality and the proportion of patients downgraded to non-ICU status while in the ED within 6 hours of the critical care admission order (ED downgrade <6 hr). A difference-in-differences (DiD) analysis compared the change in outcomes for patients arriving during ECCP hours (2 pm to midnight, weekdays) between the preintervention period (2015-2017) and the intervention period (2017-2019) to the change in outcomes for patients arriving during non-ECCP hours (all other hours). Adjustment for severity of illness was performed using the emergency critical care Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (eccSOFA) score. The primary cohort included 2,250 patients. The DiDs for the eccSOFA-adjusted inhospital mortality decreased by 6.0% (95% CI, -11.9 to -0.1) with largest difference in the intermediate illness severity group (DiD, -12.2%; 95% CI, -23.1 to -1.3). The increase in ED downgrade less than 6 hours was not statistically significant (DiD, 4.8%; 95% CI, -0.7 to 10.3%) except in the intermediate group (DiD, 8.8%; 95% CI, 0.2-17.4). CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of a novel ECCP was associated with a significant decrease in inhospital mortality among critically ill medical ED patients, with the greatest decrease observed in patients with intermediate severity of illness. Early ED downgrades also increased, but the difference was statistically significant only in the intermediate illness severity group.

Effectiveness of mRNA Vaccines Against COVID-19 Hospitalization by Age and Chronic Medical Conditions Burden Among Immunocompetent US Adults, March-August 2021.

Vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19 hospitalization was evaluated among immunocompetent adults (≥18 years) during March-August 2021 using a case-control design. Among 1669 hospitalized COVID-19 cases (11% fully vaccinated) and 1950 RT-PCR-negative controls (54% fully vaccinated), VE was 96% (95% confidence interval [CI], 93%-98%) among patients with no chronic medical conditions and 83% (95% CI, 76%-88%) among patients with ≥ 3 categories of conditions. VE was similar between those aged 18-64 years versus ≥65 years (P > .05). VE against severe COVID-19 was very high among adults without chronic conditions and lessened with increasing comorbidity burden.

Effectiveness of the Ad26.COV2.S (Johnson & Johnson) Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Vaccine for Preventing COVID-19 Hospitalizations and Progression to High Disease Severity in the United States.

Background . Adults in the United States (US) began receiving the adenovirus vector coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine, Ad26.COV2.S (Johnson & Johnson [Janssen]), in February 2021. We evaluated Ad26.COV2.S vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19 hospitalization and high disease severity during the first 10 months of its use. Methods . In a multicenter case-control analysis of US adults (≥18 years) hospitalized 11 March to 15 December 2021, we estimated VE against susceptibility to COVID-19 hospitalization (VEs), comparing odds of prior vaccination with a single dose Ad26.COV2.S vaccine between hospitalized cases with COVID-19 and controls without COVID-19. Among hospitalized patients with COVID-19, we estimated VE against disease progression (VEp) to death or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), comparing odds of prior vaccination between patients with and without progression. Results . After excluding patients receiving mRNA vaccines, among 3979 COVID-19 case-patients (5% vaccinated with Ad26.COV2.S) and 2229 controls (13% vaccinated with Ad26.COV2.S), VEs of Ad26.COV2.S against COVID-19 hospitalization was 70% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 63-75%) overall, including 55% (29-72%) among immunocompromised patients, and 72% (64-77%) among immunocompetent patients, for whom VEs was similar at 14-90 days (73% [59-82%]), 91-180 days (71% [60-80%]), and 181-274 days (70% [54-81%]) postvaccination. Among hospitalized COVID-19 case-patients, VEp was 46% (18-65%) among immunocompetent patients. Conclusions . The Ad26.COV2.S COVID-19 vaccine reduced the risk of COVID-19 hospitalization by 72% among immunocompetent adults without waning through 6 months postvaccination. After hospitalization for COVID-19, vaccinated immunocompetent patients were less likely to require IMV or die compared to unvaccinated immunocompetent patients.

Effectiveness of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Messenger RNA Vaccines for Preventing Coronavirus Disease 2019 Hospitalizations in the United States.

BACKGROUND: As severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination coverage increases in the United States, there is a need to understand the real-world effectiveness against severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and among people at increased risk for poor outcomes. METHODS: In a multicenter case-control analysis of US adults hospitalized March 11-May 5, 2021, we evaluated vaccine effectiveness to prevent COVID-19 hospitalizations by comparing odds of prior vaccination with a messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna) between cases hospitalized with COVID-19 and hospital-based controls who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2. RESULTS: Among 1212 participants, including 593 cases and 619 controls, median age was 58 years, 22.8% were Black, 13.9% were Hispanic, and 21.0% had immunosuppression. SARS-CoV-2 lineage B0.1.1.7 (Alpha) was the most common variant (67.9% of viruses with lineage determined). Full vaccination (receipt of 2 vaccine doses ≥14 days before illness onset) had been received by 8.2% of cases and 36.4% of controls. Overall vaccine effectiveness was 87.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 80.7-91.3). Vaccine effectiveness was similar for Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines, and highest in adults aged 18-49 years (97.4%; 95% CI, 79.3-9.7). Among 45 patients with vaccine-breakthrough COVID hospitalizations, 44 (97.8%) were ≥50 years old and 20 (44.4%) had immunosuppression. Vaccine effectiveness was lower among patients with immunosuppression (62.9%; 95% CI,20.8-82.6) than without immunosuppression (91.3%; 95% CI, 85.6-94.8). CONCLUSION: During March-May 2021, SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines were highly effective for preventing COVID-19 hospitalizations among US adults. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination was beneficial for patients with immunosuppression, but effectiveness was lower in the immunosuppressed population.

Natural language processing of head CT reports to identify intracranial mass effect: CTIME algorithm.

BACKGROUND: The Mortality Probability Model (MPM) is used in research and quality improvement to adjust for severity of illness and can also inform triage decisions. However, a limitation for its automated use or application is that it includes the variable "intracranial mass effect" (IME), which requires human engagement with the electronic health record (EHR). We developed and tested a natural language processing (NLP) algorithm to identify IME from CT head reports. METHODS: We obtained initial CT head reports from adult patients who were admitted to the ICU from our ED between 10/2013 and 9/2016. Each head CT head report was labeled yes/no IME by at least two of five independent labelers. The reports were then randomly divided 80/20 into training and test sets. All reports were preprocessed to remove linguistic and style variability, and a dictionary was created to map similar common terms. We tested three vectorization strategies: Term Frequency-Inverse Document frequency (TF-IDF), Word2Vec, and Universal Sentence Encoder to convert the report text to a numerical vector. This vector served as the input to a classification-tree-based ensemble machine learning algorithm (XGBoost). After training, model performance was assessed in the test set using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). We also divided the continuous range of scores into positive/inconclusive/negative categories for IME. RESULTS: Of the 1202 CT reports in the training set, 308 (25.6%) reports were manually labeled as "yes" for IME. Of the 355 reports in the test set, 108 (30.4%) were labeled as "yes" for IME. The TF-IDF vectorization strategy as an input for the XGBoost model had the best AUROC:-- 0.9625 (95% CI 0.9443-0.9807). TF-IDF score categories were defined and had the following likelihood ratios: "positive" (TF-IDF score > 0.5) LR = 24.59; "inconclusive" (TF-IDF 0.05-0.5) LR = 0.99; and "negative" (TF-IDF < 0.05) LR = 0.05. 82% of reports were classified as either "positive" or "negative". In the test set, only 4 of 199 (2.0%) reports with a "negative" classification were false negatives and only 8 of 93 (8.6%) reports classified as "positive" were false positives. CONCLUSION: NLP can accurately identify IME from free-text reports of head CTs in approximately 80% of records, adequate to allow automatic calculation of MPM based on EHR data for many applications.

Point-of-Care Ultrasound Predicts Clinical Outcomes in Patients With COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) detects the pulmonary manifestations of COVID-19 and may predict patient outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study at four hospitals from March 2020 to January 2021 to evaluate lung POCUS and clinical outcomes of COVID-19. Inclusion criteria included adult patients hospitalized for COVID-19 who received lung POCUS with a 12-zone protocol. Each image was interpreted by two reviewers blinded to clinical outcomes. Our primary outcome was the need for intensive care unit (ICU) admission versus no ICU admission. Secondary outcomes included intubation and supplemental oxygen usage. RESULTS: N = 160 patients were included. Among critically ill patients, B-lines (94 vs 76%; P < .01) and consolidations (70 vs 46%; P < .01) were more common. For scans collected within 24 hours of admission (N = 101 patients), early B-lines (odds ratio [OR] 4.41 [95% confidence interval, CI: 1.71-14.30]; P < .01) or consolidations (OR 2.49 [95% CI: 1.35-4.86]; P < .01) were predictive of ICU admission. Early consolidations were associated with oxygen usage after discharge (OR 2.16 [95% CI: 1.01-4.70]; P = .047). Patients with a normal scan within 24 hours of admission were less likely to require ICU admission (OR 0.28 [95% CI: 0.09-0.75]; P < .01) or supplemental oxygen (OR 0.26 [95% CI: 0.11-0.61]; P < .01). Ultrasound findings did not dynamically change over a 28-day scanning window after symptom onset. CONCLUSIONS: Lung POCUS findings detected within 24 hours of admission may provide expedient risk stratification for important COVID-19 clinical outcomes, including future ICU admission or need for supplemental oxygen. Conversely, a normal scan within 24 hours of admission appears protective. POCUS findings appeared stable over a 28-day scanning window, suggesting that these findings, regardless of their timing, may have clinical implications.

Three-Dimensional Perioral Assessment Following Subnasal Lip Lift.

BACKGROUND: The subnasal lip lift is a surgical technique that elevates the "lip line" (interface between vertical maxillary incisor height and upper lip) to achieve a more youthful aesthetic. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to offer the first ever definition, to their knowledge, of 3-dimensional (3D) changes to the upper lip due to subnasal lip lift. METHODS: A lip lift procedure was performed (on cadaveric samples) in a sequential manner from 2.5- to 5.0-mm intervals (n = 13). 3D photographs were taken with the VECTRA H1 system (Canfield Scientific, Fairfield, NJ), and 3D analysis was performed including vermillion height and width, philtral height, sagittal lip projection, vermillion surface area, and incisor show. A subset of samples (n = 9) underwent a modification of the technique by undermining the upper lip subcutaneous tissue off the underlying muscular fascia. RESULTS: Vermillion surface area (baseline range, 1.45-5.52 cm2) increased by an average of 20.5% and 43.1% with 2.5-mm and 5.0-mm lip lift, respectively. Anterior projection of the vermillion increased in all cases by an average of 2.13 and 4.07 mm at 2.5 and 5.0 mm, respectively. Philtral height decreased in all cases by an average of 3.37 and 7.23 mm at 2.5 and 5.0 mm, whereas incisal show increased on average of 1.9 and 4.09 mm, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to our knowledge to define the 3D morphometric changes to the upper lip following subnasal lip lift. Quantifying these changes aids the surgeon in preoperative planning and guiding patient expectations.

Sustained Effectiveness of Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna Vaccines Against COVID-19 Associated Hospitalizations Among Adults - United States, March-July 2021.

Real-world evaluations have demonstrated high effectiveness of vaccines against COVID-19-associated hospitalizations (1-4) measured shortly after vaccination; longer follow-up is needed to assess durability of protection. In an evaluation at 21 hospitals in 18 states, the duration of mRNA vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna) effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19-associated hospitalizations was assessed among adults aged ≥18 years. Among 3,089 hospitalized adults (including 1,194 COVID-19 case-patients and 1,895 non-COVID-19 control-patients), the median age was 59 years, 48.7% were female, and 21.1% had an immunocompromising condition. Overall, 141 (11.8%) case-patients and 988 (52.1%) controls were fully vaccinated (defined as receipt of the second dose of Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccines ≥14 days before illness onset), with a median interval of 65 days (range = 14-166 days) after receipt of second dose. VE against COVID-19-associated hospitalization during the full surveillance period was 86% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 82%-88%) overall and 90% (95% CI = 87%-92%) among adults without immunocompromising conditions. VE against COVID-19- associated hospitalization was 86% (95% CI = 82%-90%) 2-12 weeks and 84% (95% CI = 77%-90%) 13-24 weeks from receipt of the second vaccine dose, with no significant change between these periods (p = 0.854). Whole genome sequencing of 454 case-patient specimens found that 242 (53.3%) belonged to the B.1.1.7 (Alpha) lineage and 74 (16.3%) to the B.1.617.2 (Delta) lineage. Effectiveness of mRNA vaccines against COVID-19-associated hospitalization was sustained over a 24-week period, including among groups at higher risk for severe COVID-19; ongoing monitoring is needed as new SARS-CoV-2 variants emerge. To reduce their risk for hospitalization, all eligible persons should be offered COVID-19 vaccination.

Comparative Effectiveness of Moderna, Pfizer-BioNTech, and Janssen (Johnson & Johnson) Vaccines in Preventing COVID-19 Hospitalizations Among Adults Without Immunocompromising Conditions - United States, March-August 2021.

Three COVID-19 vaccines are authorized or approved for use among adults in the United States (1,2). Two 2-dose mRNA vaccines, mRNA-1273 from Moderna and BNT162b2 from Pfizer-BioNTech, received Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in December 2020 for persons aged ≥18 years and aged ≥16 years, respectively. A 1-dose viral vector vaccine (Ad26.COV2 from Janssen [Johnson & Johnson]) received EUA in February 2021 for persons aged ≥18 years (3). The Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine received FDA approval for persons aged ≥16 years on August 23, 2021 (4). Current guidelines from FDA and CDC recommend vaccination of eligible persons with one of these three products, without preference for any specific vaccine (4,5). To assess vaccine effectiveness (VE) of these three products in preventing COVID-19 hospitalization, CDC and collaborators conducted a case-control analysis among 3,689 adults aged ≥18 years who were hospitalized at 21 U.S. hospitals across 18 states during March 11-August 15, 2021. An additional analysis compared serum antibody levels (anti-spike immunoglobulin G [IgG] and anti-receptor binding domain [RBD] IgG) to SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, among 100 healthy volunteers enrolled at three hospitals 2-6 weeks after full vaccination with the Moderna, Pfizer-BioNTech, or Janssen COVID-19 vaccine. Patients with immunocompromising conditions were excluded. VE against COVID-19 hospitalizations was higher for the Moderna vaccine (93%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 91%-95%) than for the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine (88%; 95% CI = 85%-91%) (p = 0.011); VE for both mRNA vaccines was higher than that for the Janssen vaccine (71%; 95% CI = 56%-81%) (all p<0.001). Protection for the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine declined 4 months after vaccination. Postvaccination anti-spike IgG and anti-RBD IgG levels were significantly lower in persons vaccinated with the Janssen vaccine than the Moderna or Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines. Although these real-world data suggest some variation in levels of protection by vaccine, all FDA-approved or authorized COVID-19 vaccines provide substantial protection against COVID-19 hospitalization.

eccSOFA: SOFA illness severity score adapted to predict in-hospital mortality in emergency critical care patients.

BACKGROUND: Boarding of ICU patients in the ED is increasing. Illness severity scores may help emergency physicians stratify risk to guide earlier transfer to the ICU and assess pre-ICU interventions by adjusting for baseline mortality risk. Most existing illness severity scores are based on data that is not available at the time of the hospital admission decision or cannot be extracted from the electronic health record (EHR). We adapted the SOFA score to create a new illness severity score (eccSOFA) that can be calculated at the time of ICU admission order entry in the ED using EHR data. We evaluated this score in a cohort of emergency critical care (ECC) patients at a single academic center over a period of 3 years. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study using EHR data to assess predictive accuracy of eccSOFA for estimating in-hospital mortality risk. The patient population included all adult patients who had a critical care admission order entered while in the ED of an academic medical center between 10/24/2013 and 9/30/2016. eccSOFA's discriminatory ability for in-hospital mortality was assessed using ROC curves. RESULTS: Of the 3912 patients whose in-hospital mortality risk was estimated, 2260 (57.8%) were in the low-risk group (scores 0-3), 1203 (30.8%) in the intermediate-risk group (scores 4-7), and 449 (11.5%) in the high-risk group (scores 8+). In-hospital mortality for the low-, intermediate, and high-risk groups was 4.2% (95%CI: 3.4-5.1), 15.5% (95% CI 13.5-17.6), and 37.9% (95% CI 33.4-42.3) respectively. The AUROC was 0.78 (95%CI: 0.75-0.80) for the integer score and 0.75 (95% CI: 0.72-0.77) for the categorical eccSOFA. CONCLUSIONS: As a predictor of in-hospital mortality, eccSOFA can be calculated based on variables that are commonly available at the time of critical care admission order entry in the ED and has discriminatory ability that is comparable to other commonly used illness severity scores. Future studies should assess the calibration of our absolute risk predictions.

Association Between mRNA Vaccination and COVID-19 Hospitalization and Disease Severity.

Importance: A comprehensive understanding of the benefits of COVID-19 vaccination requires consideration of disease attenuation, determined as whether people who develop COVID-19 despite vaccination have lower disease severity than unvaccinated people. Objective: To evaluate the association between vaccination with mRNA COVID-19 vaccines-mRNA-1273 (Moderna) and BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech)-and COVID-19 hospitalization, and, among patients hospitalized with COVID-19, the association with progression to critical disease. Design, Setting, and Participants: A US 21-site case-control analysis of 4513 adults hospitalized between March 11 and August 15, 2021, with 28-day outcome data on death and mechanical ventilation available for patients enrolled through July 14, 2021. Date of final follow-up was August 8, 2021. Exposures: COVID-19 vaccination. Main Outcomes and Measures: Associations were evaluated between prior vaccination and (1) hospitalization for COVID-19, in which case patients were those hospitalized for COVID-19 and control patients were those hospitalized for an alternative diagnosis; and (2) disease progression among patients hospitalized for COVID-19, in which cases and controls were COVID-19 patients with and without progression to death or mechanical ventilation, respectively. Associations were measured with multivariable logistic regression. Results: Among 4513 patients (median age, 59 years [IQR, 45-69]; 2202 [48.8%] women; 23.0% non-Hispanic Black individuals, 15.9% Hispanic individuals, and 20.1% with an immunocompromising condition), 1983 were case patients with COVID-19 and 2530 were controls without COVID-19. Unvaccinated patients accounted for 84.2% (1669/1983) of COVID-19 hospitalizations. Hospitalization for COVID-19 was significantly associated with decreased likelihood of vaccination (cases, 15.8%; controls, 54.8%; adjusted OR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.13-0.18), including for sequenced SARS-CoV-2 Alpha (8.7% vs 51.7%; aOR, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.06-0.16) and Delta variants (21.9% vs 61.8%; aOR, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.10-0.21). This association was stronger for immunocompetent patients (11.2% vs 53.5%; aOR, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.09-0.13) than immunocompromised patients (40.1% vs 58.8%; aOR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.35-0.69) (P < .001) and weaker at more than 120 days since vaccination with BNT162b2 (5.8% vs 11.5%; aOR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.27-0.49) than with mRNA-1273 (1.9% vs 8.3%; aOR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.09-0.23) (P < .001). Among 1197 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, death or invasive mechanical ventilation by day 28 was associated with decreased likelihood of vaccination (12.0% vs 24.7%; aOR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.19-0.58). Conclusions and Relevance: Vaccination with an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine was significantly less likely among patients with COVID-19 hospitalization and disease progression to death or mechanical ventilation. These findings are consistent with risk reduction among vaccine breakthrough infections compared with absence of vaccination.

3D Printed Surgical Guides Applied in Rhinoplasty to Help Obtain Ideal Nasal Profile.

INTRODUCTION: As computer simulation for rhinoplasty continues to rise, the technology's utility extends beyond increasing patient conversion. Virtual simulation of the surgical result can assist with surgical planning and intraoperative decision-making. 3D printed anatomic models or surgical guides based on 3D images may help align surgeons with their original surgical plan. This study aims to evaluate the utility of 3D printed surgical guides as an intraoperative tool to help establish dorsal height and tip position. METHODS: Patients undergoing rhinoplasty had preoperative virtual 3D surgical simulations performed. Simulations were used to create a 3D printed nasal kits containing ceramic models of the preoperative nose and simulated nose, sagittal contour guide, and customized postoperative nasal splint. Nasal guides were sterilized for continual intraoperative assessment of profile contour (i.e., dorsal height and tip position). Postoperative 3D images (1-3 months post-op) were then compared to preoperative simulations. The difference between z coordinates and y coordinates determined the difference in projection and rotation, respectively. RESULTS: Fifteen patients met inclusion criteria for this study. With the use of 3D printed surgical guides, the final tip position was on average of 0.8±0.7mm from simulated projection and 0.3±0.2mm from simulated rotation. Similarly, projection for the cartilaginous and bony dorsum was within 1.0±0.8 and 0.8±0.7mm of the simulation, respectively. CONCLUSION: Virtual simulation is useful in defining aesthetic goals preoperatively, but the potential clinical value extends beyond this. 3D printed rhinoplasty guides extend the simulation's utility to decision-making intraoperatively. This technology offers a novel medium for anatomic reference, which may improve adherence to desired aesthetic goals. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE V: 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 Table of Contents or online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

The 2019 Isdell:Flowers Cross Border Malaria Initiative Round Table: community engagement in the context of malaria elimination.

Government officials, representatives from malaria endemic communities, and nonprofit, academic, and private sector partners convened at the 2019 Isdell:Flowers Cross Border Malaria Initiative Round Table in Livingstone, Zambia from February 28-March 1, 2019 to discuss the necessity of community engagement and the involvement of those directly affected by malaria in malaria elimination efforts. Participants shared practical examples and principles of successful community engagement over the course of the Round Table. Three core principles of effective community engagement emerged: (1) there is no "one size fits all" community engagement strategy, (2) community engagement must be a bidirectional activity, and (3) community members must be at the heart of malaria elimination efforts.

The Impact of Alar Flare Reduction Goes Beyond Just the Ala.

BACKGROUND: Alar flare reduction (AFR) is a widely used technique in rhinoplasty. Although the impact of AFR on the alar base has been well studied, its effect on the surrounding tissues is largely unknown. This study aims to elucidate the potential effect of AFR on the overall nasal and perinasal anatomy. METHODS: AFR was performed on cadavers ( n = 7) with sequential crescent-shaped alar excisions of 2, 4, and 6 mm. Two- and three-dimensional photographs were obtained at baseline and subsequent intervals. Analysis was performed with Adobe Photoshop and Vectra. Standardized landmarks were placed at the nasal tip point (NTP) and alar base point to quantify NTP vector distances, NTP surface distances, and alar crease angle. RESULTS: The surface and vector distances between the NTP and alar base point decreased for increasing AFR intervals. AFR created a surface decrease of 1.90 ± 1.60, 3.54 ± 1.85, and 4.91 ± 1.89 mm, respectively. AFR created a vector decrease of 1.50 ± 1.14, 2.83 ± 1.37, and 3.97 ± 1.38 mm, respectively. NTP projection decreased by 0.54 ± 0.31 mm for 6-mm excision. AFR led to cheek elevation of 0.87 ± 0.70, 1.25 ± 0.60, and 1.96 ± 0.48 mm, respectively. This alar crease elevation blunted the transition between the cheek and upper lip skin at the level of the alar rim with the angle of this transition increasing 26.62 ± 12.78 degrees from baseline to 6 mm. CONCLUSIONS: Three-dimensional analysis demonstrates the influence of AFR on the alar base and surrounding perinasal contour. AFR results in nasal tip deprojection, alar crease elevation, and alar flare width narrowing. Further investigation into the impact of modifying the alar base on surrounding structures is warranted.

Comparing Postoperative Taping vs Customized 3D Splints for Managing Nasal Edema after Rhinoplasty.

Background: Significant swelling after rhinoplasty can temporarily obscure results and lead to distress for patients and surgeons. We recently developed three dimensional (3D)-printed nasal splints that aim to protect the nose and limit edema by applying gentle compression. This prospective, randomized study compares postoperative nasal edema in patients being treated with traditional taping versus 3D-printed splints. Methods: Patients undergoing primary rhinoplasty (2019-2020) were randomized into two groups: taping versus 3D-printed splinting. For 12 weeks, patients either applied steri-strips to the dorsum and tip, or used 3D-printed splints, which were based on nasal simulations. The percentage change in volume (cm3) was calculated for the total nose, dorsum, and nasal tip at various time points. Results: Nasal taping (n = 34) demonstrated a volume reduction of 4.8%, 9.9%, 10.0%, 10.3%, and 10.6% (compared with baseline) at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year, respectively. In contrast, the resolution of swelling with 3D splints (n = 36) was 5.0%, 8.6%, 11.0%, 14.9%, and 15.1% at the same time points. Inter-group comparison showed that 3D splints led to significantly less edema of the total nose at 6 months and 1 year (P ≤ 0.05), as well as consistent reductions in the tip and dorsum, specifically (1 year, P ≤ 0.1, 0.01, respectively). Conclusions: 3D-printed splints after rhinoplasty leads to a significant reduction of edema, most noticeable at 6 months and 1 year. This study suggests that customized 3D-printed splints offer an effective clinical alternative to traditional taping to reduce postoperative edema after rhinoplasty.

Current Trends in Ideal Nasal Aesthetics Show Younger Patients Have a Preference Toward Longer Augmented Noses.

Background: Aesthetic norms fluctuate over time and often result in generational differences in preferred ideal nasal aesthetics. While some traditional concepts of the ideal nasal aesthetic have been suggested in our literature, there has been no study to date that has identified contemporary preferences across different age groups. Objectives: To understand the general population's current perception of ideal nasal profiles. Methods: Two-dimensional images of female noses (n = 10) of varying ethnicities were simulated to alter either the radix height or nasolabial angle (NLA) independently. Radix height was manipulated by increasing or decreasing the height by 5 mm relative to baseline. For NLA, 3 images were created with the following measurements: (1) 90°, (2) 100°, and (3) 110°. Groups were categorized by generation and age at the time of completing the study: Generation Z (Gen Z; age 18-23), Millennial 20s (age 24-30), Millennial 30s (age 31-39), and Generation X (Gen X; age 40-55). Each figure consisted of either 3 variations in radix height (n = 10) or 3 variations in NLA (n = 10). Within each figure, volunteers were asked to choose their preferred nose. Results: The younger generations, Gen Z and Millennial 20s and 30s, preferred a more augmented radix compared to Gen X which preferred a baseline radix height. Gen Z, Millennial 20s, and Gen X preferred a 90° NLA, while Millennial 30s preferred an NLA of 100°. Conclusions: The authors found that younger populations (Gen Z, Millennial 20s, and Millennial 30s) preferred a more augmented appearance to the nasal radix and, on average, a more acute NLA than published data suggest.

Absolute and Relative Vaccine Effectiveness of Primary and Booster Series of COVID-19 Vaccines (mRNA and Adenovirus Vector) Against COVID-19 Hospitalizations in the United States, December 2021-April 2022.

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine effectiveness (VE) studies are increasingly reporting relative VE (rVE) comparing a primary series plus booster doses with a primary series only. Interpretation of rVE differs from traditional studies measuring absolute VE (aVE) of a vaccine regimen against an unvaccinated referent group. We estimated aVE and rVE against COVID-19 hospitalization in primary-series plus first-booster recipients of COVID-19 vaccines. Methods: Booster-eligible immunocompetent adults hospitalized at 21 medical centers in the United States during December 25, 2021-April 4, 2022 were included. In a test-negative design, logistic regression with case status as the outcome and completion of primary vaccine series or primary series plus 1 booster dose as the predictors, adjusted for potential confounders, were used to estimate aVE and rVE. Results: A total of 2060 patients were analyzed, including 1104 COVID-19 cases and 956 controls. Relative VE against COVID-19 hospitalization in boosted mRNA vaccine recipients versus primary series only was 66% (95% confidence interval [CI], 55%-74%); aVE was 81% (95% CI, 75%-86%) for boosted versus 46% (95% CI, 30%-58%) for primary. For boosted Janssen vaccine recipients versus primary series, rVE was 49% (95% CI, -9% to 76%); aVE was 62% (95% CI, 33%-79%) for boosted versus 36% (95% CI, -4% to 60%) for primary. Conclusions: Vaccine booster doses increased protection against COVID-19 hospitalization compared with a primary series. Comparing rVE measures across studies can lead to flawed interpretations of the added value of a new vaccination regimen, whereas difference in aVE, when available, may be a more useful metric.

Intraoperative Navigation in Plastic Surgery with Augmented Reality: A Preclinical Validation Study.

BACKGROUND: Augmented reality allows users to visualize and interact with digital images including three-dimensional holograms in the real world. This technology may have value intraoperatively by improving surgical decision-making and precision but relies on the ability to accurately align a hologram to a patient. This study aims to quantify the accuracy with which a hologram of soft tissue can be aligned to a patient and used to guide intervention. METHODS: A mannequin's face was marked in a standardized fashion with 14 incision patterns in red and nine reference points in blue. A three-dimensional photograph was then taken, converted into a hologram, and uploaded to HoloLens (Verto Studio LLC, San Diego, Calif.), a wearable augmented reality device. The red markings were then erased, leaving only the blue points. The hologram was then viewed through the HoloLens in augmented reality and aligned onto the mannequin. The user then traced the overlaid red markings present on the hologram. Three-dimensional photographs of the newly marked mannequin were then taken and compared with the baseline three-dimensional photographs of the mannequin for accuracy of the red markings. This process was repeated for 15 trials (n = 15). RESULTS: The accuracy of the augmented reality-guided intervention, when considering all trials, was 1.35 ± 0.24 mm. Markings that were positioned laterally on the face were significantly more difficult to reproduce than those centered around the facial midline. CONCLUSIONS: Holographic markings can be accurately translated onto a mannequin with an average error of less than 1.4 mm. These data support the notion that augmented reality navigation may be practical and reliable for clinical integration in plastic surgery.

External validation of the 4C Mortality Score for hospitalised patients with COVID-19 in the RECOVER network.

OBJECTIVES: Estimating mortality risk in hospitalised SARS-CoV-2+ patients may help with choosing level of care and discussions with patients. The Coronavirus Clinical Characterisation Consortium Mortality Score (4C Score) is a promising COVID-19 mortality risk model. We examined the association of risk factors with 30-day mortality in hospitalised, full-code SARS-CoV-2+ patients and investigated the discrimination and calibration of the 4C Score. This was a retrospective cohort study of SARS-CoV-2+ hospitalised patients within the RECOVER (REgistry of suspected COVID-19 in EmeRgency care) network. SETTING: 99 emergency departments (EDs) across the USA. PARTICIPANTS: Patients ≥18 years old, positive for SARS-CoV-2 in the ED, and hospitalised. PRIMARY OUTCOME: Death within 30 days of the index visit. We performed logistic regression analysis, reporting multivariable risk ratios (MVRRs) and calculated the area under the ROC curve (AUROC) and mean prediction error for the original 4C Score and after dropping the C reactive protein (CRP) component. RESULTS: Of 6802 hospitalised patients with COVID-19, 1149 (16.9%) died within 30 days. The 30-day mortality was increased with age 80+ years (MVRR=5.79, 95% CI 4.23 to 7.34); male sex (MVRR=1.17, 1.05 to 1.28); and nursing home/assisted living facility residence (MVRR=1.29, 1.1 to 1.48). The 4C Score had comparable discrimination in the RECOVER dataset compared with the original 4C validation dataset (AUROC: RECOVER 0.786 (95% CI 0.773 to 0.799), 4C validation 0.763 (95% CI 0.757 to 0.769). Score-specific mortalities in our sample were lower than in the 4C validation sample (mean prediction error 6.0%). Dropping the CRP component from the 4C Score did not substantially affect discrimination and 4C risk estimates were now close (mean prediction error 0.7%). CONCLUSIONS: We independently validated 4C Score as predicting risk of 30-day mortality in hospitalised SARS-CoV-2+ patients. We recommend dropping the CRP component of the score and using our recalibrated mortality risk estimates.

Selection bias in estimating the relationship between prolonged ED boarding and mortality in emergency critical care patients.

OBJECTIVES: Studies have found that prolonged boarding time for intensive care unit (ICU) patients in the emergency department (ED) is associated with higher in-hospital mortality. However, these studies introduced selection bias by excluding patients with ICU admission orders who were downgraded and never arrived in the ICU. Consequently, they may overestimate mortality in prolonged ED boarders. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study at a single center covering the period from August 14, 2015 to August 13, 2019. Adult ED patients with medical ICU admission orders and at least 6 hours of subsequent critical care in either the ED or the ICU were included. Patients were classified as having either prolonged (>6 hours) or non-prolonged (≤6 hours) ED boarding. Downgraded patients were identified, and mortality was compared, both including and excluding downgraded patients. RESULTS: Of 1862 patients, 612 (32.9%) had prolonged boarding; at 6 hours after ICU admission order entry, they were still in the ED. The remaining 1250 (67.1%) had non-prolonged boarding; at 6 hours after the ICU admission order entry, they were already in the ICU. In-hospital mortality in the non-prolonged boarding group was 18.9%. In the prolonged boarding group, 296 (48.4%) patients were downgraded in the ED and never arrived in the ICU. Including these ED downgrades, the mortality in the prolonged boarding group was 13.4% (risk difference -5.5%, 95% confidence interval [CI] -8.9% to -2.0%, P = 0.0031). When we excluded downgrades, the mortality in the prolonged boarding group increased to 17.4% (risk difference -1.5%, 95% CI -6.2% to 3.2%, P = 0.5720). The lower mortality in the prolonged group was attributable to lower severity of illness (mean emergency critical care SOFA [eccSOFA] difference: -0.8, 95% CI -1.1 to -0.4, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Excluding critical care patients who were downgraded in the ED leads to selection bias and overestimation of mortality among prolonged ED boarders.