Policies for Mandatory Ethics Consultations at U.S. Academic Teaching Hospitals: A Multisite Survey Study.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the number of top-ranked U.S. academic institutions that require ethics consultation for specific adult clinical circumstances (e.g., family requests for potentially inappropriate treatment) and to detail those circumstances and the specific clinical scenarios for which consultations are mandated. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey study, conducted online or over the phone between July 2016 and October 2017. SETTING: We identified the top 50 research medical schools through the 2016 U.S. News and World Report rankings. The primary teaching hospital for each medical school was included. SUBJECTS: The chair/director of each hospital's adult clinical ethics committee, or a suitable alternate representative familiar with ethics consultation services, was identified for study recruitment. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A representative from the adult ethics consultation service at each of the 50 target hospitals was identified. Thirty-six of 50 sites (72%) consented to participate in the study, and 18 (50%) reported having at least one current mandatory consultation policy. Of the 17 sites that completed the survey and listed their triggers for mandatory ethics consultations, 20 trigger scenarios were provided, with three sites listing two distinct clinical situations. The majority of these triggers addressed family requests for potentially inappropriate treatment (9/20, 45%) or medical decision-making for unrepresented patients lacking decision-making capacity (7/20, 35%). Other triggers included organ donation after circulatory death, initiation of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, denial of valve replacement in patients with subacute bacterial endocarditis, and posthumous donation of sperm. Twelve (67%) of the 18 sites with mandatory policies reported that their protocol(s) was formally documented in writing. CONCLUSIONS: Among top-ranked academic medical centers, the existence and content of official policies regarding situations that mandate ethics consultations are variable. This finding suggests that, despite recent critical care consensus guidelines recommending institutional review as standard practice in particular scenarios, formal adoption of such policies has yet to become widespread and uniform.

Giant thoracic osteophyte: a distinct clinical entity.

Calcified lesions described within the neural axis are classified as either an ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament, diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis, or ossification of the ligamentum flavum. We aim to describe a unique pathologic entity: the giant thoracic osteophyte. We identified four patients who were surgically treated at the Massachusetts General Hospital from 2006 to 2012 with unusual calcified lesions in the ventral aspect of the spinal canal. In order to differentiate giant thoracic osteophytes from calcified extruded disc material, disc volumetrics were performed on actual and simulated disc spaces. All patients underwent operative resection of the calcific lesion as they had signs and/or symptoms of spinal cord compression. The lesions were found to be isolated, large calcific masses that originated from the posterior aspect of adjacent thoracic vertebral bodies. Pathological examination was negative for tumor. Adjacent disc volumes were not significantly different from the index disc (p=0.91). A simulated calculation hypothesizing that the calcific mass was extruded disc material demonstrated a significant difference (p=0.01), making this scenario unlikely. In conclusion, giant thoracic osteophyte is a unique and rare entity that can be found in the thoracic spine. The central tenant of surgical treatment is resection to relieve spinal cord compression.

The incidence of complications in elective cranial neurosurgery associated with dural closure material.

OBJECT: Dural closure with synthetic grafts has been suggested to contribute to the incidence of infection and CSF leak. The objective of this study was to assess the contribution of choice of dural closure material, as well as other factors, to the incidence of infection and CSF leak. METHODS: A retrospective, consecutive cohort study of adult patients undergoing elective craniotomy was established between April 2010 and March 2011 at a single center. Exclusion criteria consisted of trauma, bur hole placement alone, and temporary CSF fluid diversion. RESULTS: Three hundred ninety-nine patients were included (mean follow-up 396.6 days). Nonautologous (synthetic) dural substitute was more likely to be used (n = 106) in cases of reoperation (p = 0.001). Seventeen patients developed a surgical site infection and 12 patients developed a CSF leak. Multivariate logistic regression modeling identified estimated blood loss (OR 1.002, 95% CI 1.001-1.003; p < 0.001) and cigarette smoking (OR 2.198, 95% CI 1.109-4.238; p = 0.019) as significant predictors of infection. Synthetic dural graft was not a predictor of infection in multivariate analysis. Infratentorial surgery (OR 4.348, 95% CI 1.234-16.722; p = 0.024) and more than 8 days of postoperative corticosteroid treatment (OR 3.886, 95% CI 1.052-16.607; p = 0.048) were significant predictors for the development of CSF leak. Synthetic dural graft was associated with a lower likelihood of CSF leak (OR 0.072, 95% CI 0.003-0.552; p = 0.036). CONCLUSIONS: The use of synthetic dural closure material is not associated with surgical site infection and is associated with a reduced incidence of CSF leak. Modifiable risk factors exist for craniotomy complications that warrant vigilance and further study.