Combined autologous blood patch-immediate patient rollover does not reduce the pneumothorax or chest drain rate following CT-guided lung biopsy compared to immediate patient rollover alone.

PUPROSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate a combined autologous blood-patch (ABP)-immediate patient rollover (IPR) technique compared with the IPR technique alone on the incidence of pneumothorax and chest drainage following CT-guided lung biopsy. METHODS: In this interventional cohort study of both prospectively and retrospectively acquired data, 652 patients underwent CT-guided lung biopsy. Patient demographics, lesion characteristics and technical biopsy variables including the combined ABP-IPR versus IPR alone were evaluated as predictors of pneumothorax and chest drain rates using regression analysis. RESULTS: The combined ABP-IPR technique was performed in 259 (39.7 %) patients whilst 393 (60.3 %) underwent IPR alone. There was no significant difference in pneumothorax rate or chest drains required between the combined ABP-IPR vs IPR groups (p =.08, p =.60 respectively). Predictors of pneumothorax adjusted for the combined ABP-IPR and IPR alone groups included age (p =.02), lesion size (p =.01), location (p =.005), patient position (p =.008), emphysema along the needle track (p =.005) and lesion distance from the pleura (p =.02). Adjusted predictors of chest drain insertion included lesion location (p =.09), patient position (p =.002), bullae crossed (p =.02) and lesion distance from the pleura (p =.02). CONCLUSION: The combined ABP-IPR technique does not reduce the pneumothorax or chest drain rate compared to the IPR technique alone. Utilising IPR without an ABP following CT-guided lung biopsy results in similar pneumothorax and chest drain rates while minimising the potential risk of systemic air embolism.

Short notice cancellations - an insight into Irish surgical waiting lists.

BACKGROUND: The reasons underlying prolonged waiting lists for surgery in Ireland are multifactorial. Patient-related factors including non-attendances contribute in part to the current waiting times. AIMS: To determine the rate of short notice cancellation for day case surgery in a model 2 HSE hospital over a 1-month period and to implement an intervention to try and reduce the rate of cancellation. METHODS: The cancellation rate was documented over a 1-month period in the hospital. An intervention was then implemented, involving a phone call to the patient from a member of the surgical team to attempt to reduce the cancellation rate. Cancellations were re-audited after the implementation of the phone intervention. RESULTS: The initial audit revealed a cancellation rate of 39.7% during the first month prior to implementation of the phone intervention. A phone call intervention from a member of the surgical team was associated with a decrease in cancellations from 39.7 to 14.6% (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: While cancellations remained high even after our intervention, a simple phone call was effective and more than halved our cancellation rate. Future efforts need to focus on increasing awareness of patient responsibility for attending scheduled appointments and procedures.

Coronectomy (intentional partial odontectomy of lower third molars).

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluates the rate of infection of retained lower third molar roots after coronectomy in teeth judged to be in intimate relation to the inferior alveolar nerve. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective study of 52 patients who were operated on over a 10-year period. RESULTS: Only 3 of 52 patients had to have roots removed because of pain or infection. Postoperative findings and aspects of the surgical technique are also discussed. CONCLUSIONS: Coronectomy is a worthwhile option to extraction where a lower third molar is judged to be in close proximity to the inferior alveolar nerve. In lower third molar removal the potential damage is high when certain radiographic signs are present, whereas the infection rate of roots remaining after coronectomy is, by contrast, low.