RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: TransCarotid Artery Revascularization (TCAR) has been effectively performed to prevent stroke in patients with carotid artery stenosis (CS). Prior studies established that TCAR can be safely performed in high-risk patients such as octogenarians, patients with prior carotid endarterectomy (CEA), contralateral occlusion, and heavily calcified lesions. Hemodialysis patients are at an increased risk of exhibiting cardiovascular complications. This study aims to investigate how dialysis may affect TCAR outcomes. METHODS: The Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) dataset was queried for patients undergoing TCAR from November 2016 to November 2021. Patients were divided into dialysis and nondialysis groups. The primary outcome was the composite endpoint of in-hospital stroke, death, or myocardial infarction (MI). Secondary outcomes were in-hospital stroke, stroke, or transient ischemic attack (TIA), death, prolonged length of stay (more than 1 day) (PLOS), MI, and stroke or death. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to assess in-hospital outcomes. Kaplan-Meier survival and log-rank test were used to assess 1-year survival. RESULTS: A total of 22,619 patients underwent TCAR during the study period. Of these, 327 patients were undergoing dialysis. On univariable analysis, dialysis patients were associated with a higher risk of mortality compared to nondialysis patients (1.2% vs. 0.6%, P = 0.030). However, after adjusting for potential confounders, this difference did not persist (odd ratio [OR]: 1.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] (0.8-4.9), P = 0.136). Dialysis patients were more likely to experience PLOS (OR: 1.6, 95% CI (1.2-2), P < 0.001). There was no difference between dialysis and nondialysis patients in the risk of stroke or death, stroke, stroke or TIA, MI, and stroke or death, or MI on univariable and multivariable analyses. At 1 year, the overall survival for dialysis versus nondialysis patients was 81.5% vs. 95.5%, P < 0.001. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first study to date of dialysis patients who have undergone TCAR. We have shown that there was no difference in the risk of stroke, death, and MI between dialysis and nondialysis patients. Therefore, TCAR can be safely offered to patients undergoing dialysis. Future studies with larger number of patients are warranted to confirm these results.
Asunto(s)
Estenosis Carotídea , Procedimientos Endovasculares , Ataque Isquémico Transitorio , Infarto del Miocardio , Accidente Cerebrovascular , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Humanos , Ataque Isquémico Transitorio/etiología , Procedimientos Endovasculares/efectos adversos , Factores de Riesgo , Medición de Riesgo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Diálisis Renal/efectos adversos , Estenosis Carotídea/complicaciones , Estenosis Carotídea/diagnóstico por imagen , Estenosis Carotídea/terapia , Arterias , Infarto del Miocardio/etiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Stents/efectos adversosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Studies have demonstrated that pediatric patients have an increased risk of failure with allograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR); however, there is no study investigating whether allograft ACLR may be safe in older adolescent patients who are not returning to competitive pivoting sports (ie, low risk). The purpose of this study was to assess outcomes for low-risk older adolescents selected for allograft ACLR. METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of patients younger than 18 years who received a bone-patellar-tendon-bone allograft or autograft ACLR by a single orthopaedic surgeon from 2012 to 2020. Patients were offered allograft ACLR if they did not intend to return to pivoting sports for 1 year. The autograft cohort was matched 1:1 based on age, sex, and follow-up. Patients were excluded for skeletal immaturity, multiligamentous injury, prior ipsilateral ACLR, or concomitant realignment procedure. Patients were contacted to obtain patient-reported outcomes at ≥2 years follow-up, including single assessment numerical evaluation, surgery satisfaction, pain scores, Tegner Activity Scale, and the Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale. Parametric and nonparametric tests were used as appropriate. RESULTS: Of the 68 allografts, 40 (59%) met inclusion and 28 (70%) were contacted. Among the 456 autografts, 40 (8.7%) were matched and 26 (65%) were contacted. Two allograft patients (2/40; 5%) failed at a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 36 (12, 60) months. There were 0/40 failures in the autograft cohort and 13/456 (2.9%) among the overall autografts; neither were significantly different from the allograft failure rate (both P > 0.05). Two (5.0%) patients in the autograft cohort required manipulation under anesthesia and arthroscopic lysis of adhesions. There were no significant differences between cohorts for single assessment numerical evaluation, Lysholm, Tegner, pain, and satisfaction scores (all P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Although ACL allograft failure rates remain nearly two times higher than autograft failure rates in older adolescents, our study suggests that careful patient selection can potentially bring this failure rate down to an acceptable level. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III; retrospective matched cohort study.
Asunto(s)
Lesiones del Ligamento Cruzado Anterior , Reconstrucción del Ligamento Cruzado Anterior , Humanos , Adolescente , Niño , Anciano , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estudios de Cohortes , Lesiones del Ligamento Cruzado Anterior/cirugía , Reconstrucción del Ligamento Cruzado Anterior/métodos , Autoinjertos/cirugía , Trasplante Autólogo , Atletas , Aloinjertos/cirugíaAsunto(s)
Betacoronavirus , Infecciones por Coronavirus/transmisión , Contaminación de Equipos , Transmisión de Enfermedad Infecciosa de Paciente a Profesional , Neumonía Viral/transmisión , Estetoscopios/virología , Adulto , COVID-19 , Infecciones por Coronavirus/diagnóstico , Infecciones por Coronavirus/prevención & control , Femenino , Humanos , Pandemias/prevención & control , Neumonía Viral/diagnóstico , Neumonía Viral/prevención & control , SARS-CoV-2RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To determine whether open (O) or closed (C) geriatric ankle fractures had different patient characteristics or outcomes. METHODS: . DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Urban Level 1 trauma center. PATIENT SELECTION CRITERIA: Patients, age 60 years and older, who underwent operative fixation of a rotational ankle fracture (OTA/AO 44A-C) between January 2012 and September 2021. OUTCOME MEASURES AND COMPARISONS: Morbidity, defined as 90-day reoperation, 90-day readmission, or loss of mobility, as well as 1-year mortality compared between patients with closed and open fractures. RESULTS: The open cohort was older (75 years vs. 68 years; P = 0.003) but had similar Charlson comorbidity indices (4.6 O vs. 4.0 C; P = 0.323) and preinjury rates of independent ambulation (70.4% O vs. 80.9% C; P = 0.363). There were higher rates of 1-year mortality (11% vs. 0%; P < 0.001), deep infection (14.8% vs. 3.9%; P = 0.019), and loss of mobility (64.7% vs. 23.0%; P < 0.001) in the open cohort. Multivariate regression identified open fracture as an independent predictor of 90-day reoperation (OR: 20.6; P = 0.022) and loss of mobility (OR: 5.1; P = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: Despite having comorbidities and preinjury function similar to the closed geriatric ankle fracture cohort, open ankle fracture was independently predictive of greater loss of mobility. Nearly two-thirds of geriatric patients with open ankle fractures experienced a decline in functional independence, compared with 1 in 4 of those with closed fractures. Open fracture was associated with higher rates of deep infection, reoperation, and 1-year mortality. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Asunto(s)
Fracturas de Tobillo , Traumatismos del Tobillo , Fracturas Abiertas , Humanos , Anciano , Persona de Mediana Edad , Fracturas de Tobillo/epidemiología , Fracturas de Tobillo/cirugía , Fracturas de Tobillo/complicaciones , Fracturas Abiertas/complicaciones , Fracturas Abiertas/cirugía , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Comorbilidad , Traumatismos del Tobillo/complicaciones , Fijación Interna de Fracturas/efectos adversos , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
Background: Increased posterior tibial slope angle (PTSA) has been shown to be an important risk factor for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury. PTSA modulation is not utilized routinely to reduce risk of primary rupture or graft failure. Displaced tibial tubercle (TT) fractures in the skeletally immature are associated with potential growth arrest and may be used as a model to study PTSA changes in this setting. Purpose/Hypothesis: To quantify the change in PTSA (ΔPTSA) after operative treatment of displaced TT fractures in skeletally immature patients. It was hypothesized that there would be a progressive decrease in PTSA after TT injury and that rate of ΔPTSA would be highest during peak growth velocity. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: Included were 22 patients (n = 23 knees; mean chronological and bone age at injury, 14 years; 86% male) who underwent surgery for displaced TT fracture. PTSA was measured on lateral radiographs at time of surgery and subsequent follow-up, and bone age at the time of injury was determined using radiographic standards. The rate of ΔPTSA for individual patient, total cohort, and sex-based subgroup trends were determined via linear regression (degrees per month; positive value indicates relatively anterior). Individual patient regression coefficients were averaged into bone age cohorts. Results: Average follow-up was 17 months (range, 6-52 months). The mean PTSA was -12°± 2.4° at the time of injury, and the mean ΔPTSA for the cohort was 0.30°± 0.31° per month (range, -0.27° to 0.97° per month). Linear regression demonstrated a significant relationship between months postfixation and PTSA, demonstrating a ΔPTSA of 0.31° per month (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.24° to 0.38°; P < .001). The highest ΔPTSA was seen at bone age 14 years (mean, 0.58°± 0.44° per month). The mean absolute change in PTSA from injury to final follow-up was 4.1° (range, -3.4° to 21°). Conclusion: Our data suggested that PTSA becomes more anterior after operatively treated pediatric TT fractures and that ΔPTSA may be influenced by bone age. This concept may be useful in considering surgical modulation of excessive PTSA in the pediatric ACL-deficient knee.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Recent adult studies have demonstrated that decreased posterior tibial slope angle (PTSA) may be a risk factor for posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) injury. However, there is no study investigating this phenomenon in a pediatric population. Understanding risk factors for PCL injuries among a pediatric population is important given the recent rise in athletic competition/specialization and sports-related injuries. HYPOTHESIS/PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare PTSA between pediatric patients sustaining a primary PCL tear compared with age- and sex-matched controls. It was hypothesized that pediatric patients sustaining a PCL tear would have a decreased PTSA compared with controls, with decreased PTSA being associated with higher odds of PCL injury. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: The records of all patients sustaining a PCL injury between 2006 and 2021 at a level 1 pediatric trauma center were reviewed. Patients aged ≤18 years with magnetic resonance imaging-confirmed PCL tear were included. Excluded were patients with concomitant anterior cruciate ligament tears, previous PCL reconstruction, or previous coronal plane realignment. A control cohort, with their ligament shown as intact on magnetic resonance imaging scans, was matched based on age and sex. PTSA was measured on lateral radiographs of the injured knee or tibia. The mean PTSA was compared between cohorts, and odds ratios were calculated based on the normal slope range (7°-10°) described in the literature, an upper range (>10°), and a lower range (<7°). Inter- and intrarater reliability were determined via calculation of an intraclass correlation coefficient. RESULTS: Of the 98 patients who sustained a PCL injury in this study period, 59 (60%) met inclusion criteria, and 59 healthy knee controls were matched. There were no differences between the cohorts for age (P = .90), sex (P > .99), or body mass index (P = .74). The PCL cohort had a lower mean ± SD PTSA compared with the control group (5.9°± 2.7° vs 7.3°± 4.3°; P = .03). PTSA <7° was associated with a 2.8 (95% CI, 1.3-6.0; P = .01) times risk of PCL tear. Conversely, PTSA >10° was associated with a 0.27 (95% CI, 0.09-0.81; P = .02) times risk of PCL tear. These PTSA measurements demonstrated acceptable intrarater and interrater reliability. CONCLUSION: PTSA <7° was associated with an increased odds of PCL injury, whereas a slope >10° was associated with a decreased odds of PCL injury in a pediatric population. These findings corroborate similar outcomes in adult studies; however, further studies are needed to elucidate PTSA as a risk factor for PCL injury.
Asunto(s)
Ligamento Cruzado Posterior , Tibia , Humanos , Femenino , Masculino , Ligamento Cruzado Posterior/lesiones , Ligamento Cruzado Posterior/diagnóstico por imagen , Adolescente , Niño , Tibia/diagnóstico por imagen , Traumatismos de la Rodilla/diagnóstico por imagen , Factores de Riesgo , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética , Radiografía , Estudios de CohortesRESUMEN
Background: We sought to determine whether management of LDL-C following invasive angiography and assessment by fractional flow reserve (FFR) differs between those with obstructive vs non-obstructive CAD. Methods: Retrospective study of 721 patients undergoing coronary angiography involving assessment by FFR between 2013 and 2020 at a single academic center. Groups with obstructive vs non-obstructive CAD by index angiographic and FFR findings were compared over 1 year of follow-up. Results: Based on index angiographic and FFR findings, 421 (58%) patients had obstructive CAD vs 300 (42%) with non-obstructive CAD, mean (±SD) age 66±11 years, 217 (30%) women, and 594 (82%) white. There was no difference in baseline LDL-C. At 3-months follow-up, LDL-C was lower than baseline in both groups, with no between group difference. In contrast, at 6-months, median (Q1, Q3) LDL-C was significantly higher in non-obstructive vs obstructive CAD (LDL-C 73 (60, 93) vs 63 (48, 77) mg/dL, respectively (p = 0.003), (p = 0.001 in multivariable linear regression)). At 12-months, LDL-C remained higher in non-obstructive vs obstructive CAD (LDL-C 73 (49, 86) vs 64 (48, 79) mg/dL, respectively, although not statistically significant (p = 0.104)). The rate of high-intensity statin use was lower among those with non-obstructive CAD vs obstructive CAD at all time points (p < 0.05). Conclusions: After coronary angiography involving FFR, there is intensification of LDL-C lowering at 3-months follow-up in both obstructive and non-obstructive CAD. However, by 6-months follow-up LDL-C is significantly higher among those with non-obstructive CAD vs obstructive CAD. Following coronary angiography involving FFR, patients with non-obstructive CAD may benefit from greater attention to LDL-C lowering to reduce residual ASCVD risk.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Industry funding and corporate sponsorship have played a significant role in the advancement of orthopaedic research and technology. However, this relationship raises concerns for how industry association may bias research findings and influence clinical practice. PURPOSE: To determine whether industry affiliation plays a role in the outcomes of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating platelet-rich plasma (PRP). STUDY DESIGN: Meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: A search of the PubMed, Cochrane, and MEDLINE databases for RCTs published between 2011 and the present comparing PRP versus hyaluronic acid, corticosteroid, or placebo for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis was performed. To determine industry affiliation, the conflict of interest, funding, and disclosure sections of publications were assessed, and all authors were assessed through the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons disclosure database and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services open payments database. Studies were classified as industry affiliated (IA) or non-industry affiliated (NIA). The outcomes of each study were rated as favorable, analogous, or unfavorable according to predefined criteria. RESULTS: A total of 37 studies (6 IA and 31 NIA) were available for analysis. Overall, 19 studies (51.4%) reported PRP as favorable compared with other treatment options, while 18 studies (48.6%) showed no significant differences between PRP and other treatment methods. There was no significant difference in qualitative conclusions between the IA and NIA groups, with the IA group having 3 favorable studies and 3 analogous studies and the NIA group having 16 favorable studies and 15 analogous studies (P = .8881). When comparing IA versus NIA studies using 6- and 12-month Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index and International Knee Documentation Committee scores, there were no significant differences in outcomes. CONCLUSION: The results of this study demonstrated that qualitative conclusions and outcome scores were found to not be associated with industry affiliation. Although the results of this study suggest that there is no influence of industry involvement on RCTs examining PRP, it is still necessary to carefully evaluate pertinent commercial affiliations when reviewing recommendations from studies before adopting new treatment approaches, such as the use of PRP for knee osteoarthritis.
Asunto(s)
Osteoartritis de la Rodilla , Plasma Rico en Plaquetas , Humanos , Osteoartritis de la Rodilla/tratamiento farmacológico , Resultado del Tratamiento , Inyecciones Intraarticulares , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Ácido Hialurónico/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
The stethoscope is a tool cherished by the field of cardiology and ubiquitous throughout medicine. However, little consideration has been given to its safe usage regarding its potential for pathogenic contamination despite thorough evidence that stethoscopes can harbor pathogens that can be transmitted to patients upon contact. The COVID-19 (SARS-COV-2) pandemic has led to increased infection control vigilance, including toward the stethoscope, as evidenced by a recent increase in literature highlighting stethoscope hygiene/contamination. A consequence of this increase in awareness is that stethoscopes may be implicated in medical malpractice lawsuits as a potential cause of healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). While there is limited evidence demonstrating a direct connection between stethoscope contamination and HAIs, malpractice lawsuits often do not require direct causative evidence. Regardless, efforts should be made to bolster stethoscope hygiene to not only mitigate patient harm, but also prevent providers from potential medical-legal conflicts. The continued relevance and utility of the stethoscope as a rapid, cost-effective diagnostic tool needs to be appropriately balanced with increased hygiene performance. Providers should anticipate increased scientific evidence and patient awareness regarding stethoscope contamination in the post-COVID-19 era.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether Clostridioides (formerly Clostridium) difficile-contaminated stethoscope diaphragms remained aseptic by the placement of an aseptic diaphragm barrier. METHODS: On November 1, 2019, fresh cultures of C difficile were diluted to 107 colony-forming units (CFU)/mL and used to inoculate 16 stethoscope diaphragms; 8 had an aseptic diaphragm barrier applied and 8 served as nonbarrier controls. Contaminated stethoscopes were anaerobically incubated, then swabbed at 15 and 30 minutes, 2 and 4 hours, and 1, 2, 3, and 7 days after inoculation and subsequently plated onto blood, chocolate, and cycloserine-cefoxitin fructose agar. Plates were incubated for 48 hours and on November 9, 2019, the resulting colonies were manually counted. Statistical analyses (RStudio, version 1.0.153) used analysis of variance with post hoc Tukey honestly significant difference. RESULTS: Overall, mean colony count was 33 CFU on stethoscopes without barriers vs zero on those with barriers (P≤.05). Growth was greatest at 48 hours, with colony counts as high as 160 CFU. The presence of the barrier resulted in no growth in 100% of stethoscope diaphragms for up to 1 week. CONCLUSION: We found that stethoscope diaphragm barriers provide an aseptic patient contact point, thus reducing the potential for transmission of C difficile during the physical examination. In critical care environments, in which many hospitals use acoustically inferior disposable stethoscopes, the option of a disposable aseptic stethoscope barrier may allow high-quality auscultation while reducing the potential for pathogen transmission.
RESUMEN
Healthcare-acquired infections are a tremendous challenge to the US medical system. Stethoscopes touch many patients, but current guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention does not support disinfection between each patient. Stethoscopes are rarely disinfected between patients by healthcare providers. When cultured, even after disinfection, stethoscopes have high rates of pathogen contamination, identical to that of unwashed hands. The consequence of these practices may bode poorly in the coronavirus 2019 disease (COVID-19) pandemic. Alternatively, the CDC recommends the use of disposable stethoscopes. However, these instruments have poor acoustic properties, and misdiagnoses have been documented. They may also serve as pathogen vectors among staff sharing them. Disposable aseptic stethoscope diaphragm barriers can provide increased safety without sacrificing stethoscope function. We recommend that the CDC consider the research regarding stethoscope hygiene and effective solutions to contemporize this guidance and elevate stethoscope hygiene to that of the hands, by requiring stethoscope disinfection or change of disposable barrier between every patient encounter.
Asunto(s)
Contaminación de Equipos/prevención & control , Estetoscopios/normas , COVID-19/prevención & control , COVID-19/transmisión , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S./normas , Infección Hospitalaria/prevención & control , Infección Hospitalaria/virología , Desinfección/métodos , Equipos Desechables , Desinfección de las Manos , Humanos , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Estetoscopios/efectos adversos , Estetoscopios/virología , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
The stethoscope has long been at the center of patient care, as well as a symbol of the physician-patient relationship. While advancements in other diagnostic modalities have allowed for more efficient and accurate diagnosis, the stethoscope has evolved in parallel to address the needs of the modern era of medicine. These advancements include sound visualization, ambient noise reduction/cancellation, Bluetooth (Bluetooth SIG Inc, Kirkland, Wash) transmission, and computer algorithm diagnostic support. However, despite these advancements, the ever-changing climate of infection prevention, especially in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, has led many to question the stethoscope as a vector for infectious diseases. Stethoscopes have been reported to harbor bacteria with contamination levels comparable with a physician's hand. Although disinfection is recommended, stethoscope hygiene compliance remains low. In addition, disinfectants may not be completely effective in eliminating microorganisms. Despite these risks, the growing technological integration with the stethoscope continues to make it a highly valuable tool. Rather than casting our valuable tool and symbol of medicine aside, we must create and implement an effective method of stethoscope hygiene to keep patients safe.
Asunto(s)
Infecciones por Coronavirus/diagnóstico , Neumonía Viral/diagnóstico , Estetoscopios , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Infecciones por Coronavirus/transmisión , Humanos , Higiene , Pandemias , Relaciones Médico-Paciente , Neumonía Viral/transmisión , SARS-CoV-2RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a single-use stethoscope diaphragm barrier surface remains aseptic when placed on pathogen-contaminated stethoscopes. METHODS: From May 31 to August 5, 2019, we tested 2 separate barriers using 3 different strains of 7 human pathogens, including extended-spectrum ß-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, and vancomycin resistant Enterococcus faecium. RESULTS: For all diaphragms with either of the 2 barriers tested, no growth was recorded for any of the pathogens. Stethoscopes with aseptic barriers remained sterile for up to 24 hours. These single-use barriers also provided aseptic surfaces when stethoscope diaphragms were inoculated with human specimens, including saliva, stool, urine, and sputum. CONCLUSION: Disposable aseptic diaphragm barriers may provide robust and efficient solutions to reduce transmission of pathogens via stethoscopes.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Stethoscopes harbor pathogens that can be transferred to patients when proper sanitary measures are not taken. Our aim was to assess medical provider stethoscope cleaning and hand hygiene in an emergency department setting. METHODS: The frequency and methods of stethoscope cleaning during and after provider-patient encounters were observed anonymously in an emergency department of the VA San Diego Healthcare System. RESULTS: Among the total of 426 encounters, 115 (26.9%) involved the use of a personal stethoscope. In 15 of these 115 encounters (13.0%), the provider placed a glove over the stethoscope before patient contact. In 13 of these 115 encounters (11.3%), the provider cleaned the stethoscope with an alcohol swab after patient interaction. Stethoscope hygiene with water and a hand towel before patient interaction was observed in 5 of these 115 encounters (4.3%). Hand sanitizer use or handwashing was observed in 213 of the 426 encounters (50.0%) before patient interaction. Gloves were used before patient interaction in 206 of these 426 encounters (48.4%). Hand sanitizer or handwashing was used in 332 of the 426 encounters (77.9%) after patient interaction. CONCLUSIONS: Rates of stethoscope and hand hygiene performance were lower than expected. Further investigation of stethoscope contamination and the associated risk of nosocomial infection are needed. Perhaps clearer guidelines on proper stethoscope cleaning would reduce this risk.