Laboratory Reconstructions of Bicycle Helmet Damage: Investigation of Cyclist Head Impacts Using Oblique Impacts and Computed Tomography.

Although head injuries are common in cycling, exact conditions associated with cyclist head impacts are difficult to determine. Previous studies have attempted to reverse engineer cyclist head impacts by reconstructing bicycle helmet residual damage, but they have been limited by simplified damage assessment and testing. The present study seeks to enhance knowledge of cyclist head impact conditions by reconstructing helmet damage using advanced impact testing and damage quantification techniques. Damage to 18 helmets from cyclists treated in emergency departments was quantified using computed tomography and reconstructed using oblique impacts. Damage metrics were related to normal and tangential velocities from impact tests as well as peak linear accelerations (PLA) and peak rotational velocities (PRV) using case-specific regression models. Models then allowed original impact conditions and kinematics to be estimated for each case. Helmets were most frequently damaged at the front and sides, often near the rim. Concussion was the most common, non-superficial head injury. Normal velocity and PLA distributions were similar to previous studies, with median values of 3.4 m/s and 102.5 g. Associated tangential velocity and PRV medians were 3.8 m/s and 22.3 rad/s. Results can inform future oblique impact testing conditions, enabling improved helmet evaluation and design.

Not all protected bike lanes are the same: Infrastructure and risk of cyclist collisions and falls leading to emergency department visits in three U.S. cities.

OBJECTIVE: Protected bike lanes separated from the roadway by physical barriers are relatively new in the United States. This study examined the risk of collisions or falls leading to emergency department visits associated with bicycle facilities (e.g., protected bike lanes, conventional bike lanes demarcated by painted lines, sharrows) and other roadway characteristics in three U.S. cities. METHODS: We prospectively recruited 604 patients from emergency departments in Washington, DC; New York City; and Portland, Oregon during 2015-2017 who fell or crashed while cycling. We used a case-crossover design and conditional logistic regression to compare each fall or crash site with a randomly selected control location along the route leading to the incident. We validated the presence of site characteristics described by participants using Google Street View and city GIS inventories of bicycle facilities and other roadway features. RESULTS: Compared with cycling on lanes of major roads without bicycle facilities, the risk of crashing or falling was lower on conventional bike lanes (adjusted OR = 0.53; 95 % CI = 0.33, 0.86) and local roads with (adjusted OR = 0.31; 95 % CI = 0.13, 0.75) or without bicycle facilities or traffic calming (adjusted OR = 0.39; 95 % CI = 0.23, 0.65). Protected bike lanes with heavy separation (tall, continuous barriers or grade and horizontal separation) were associated with lower risk (adjusted OR = 0.10; 95 % CI = 0.01, 0.95), but those with lighter separation (e.g., parked cars, posts, low curb) had similar risk to major roads when one way (adjusted OR = 1.19; 95 % CI = 0.46, 3.10) and higher risk when they were two way (adjusted OR = 11.38; 95 % CI = 1.40, 92.57); this risk increase was primarily driven by one lane in Washington. Risk increased in the presence of streetcar or train tracks relative to their absence (adjusted OR = 26.65; 95 % CI = 3.23, 220.17), on downhill relative to flat grades (adjusted OR = 1.92; 95 % CI = 1.38, 2.66), and when temporary features like construction or parked cars blocked the cyclist's path relative to when they did not (adjusted OR = 2.23; 95 % CI = 1.46, 3.39). CONCLUSIONS: Certain bicycle facilities are safer for cyclists than riding on major roads. Protected bike lanes vary in how well they shield riders from crashes and falls. Heavier separation, less frequent intersections with roads and driveways, and less complexity appear to contribute to reduced risk in protected bike lanes. Future research should systematically examine the characteristics that reduce risk in protected lanes to guide design. Planners should minimize conflict points when choosing where to place protected bike lanes and should implement countermeasures to increase visibility at these locations when they are unavoidable.

Postoperative impedance-pH testing is unreliable after Nissen fundoplication with or without giant hiatal hernia repair.

INTRODUCTION: Combined 24-h multichannel intralumenal impedance-pH monitoring (MII-pH) is gaining popularity as a diagnostic tool for gastroesophageal reflux. Since the surgical reduction of hiatal hernias and creation of a fundoplication anatomically restores the gastroesophageal reflux barrier, one would assume that it effectively stops all reflux regardless of composition. Our aim is to evaluate the results of routine MII-pH testing in successful Nissen fundoplication patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixty-two patients with normal acid exposure, confirmed by 24-h pH testing, after Nissen fundoplication were evaluated with symptomatic questionnaire, esophageal manometry and MII-pH testing more than 6 months after surgery. Patients were grouped into normal and abnormal based on postoperative impedance results. Patients with Nissen alone were separately compared to patients with Nissen + giant hiatal hernia (GHH). RESULTS: Twenty-nine (47%) patients exhibited abnormal impedance after successful Nissen fundoplication. Abnormal impedance was associated with GHH repair, lower bolus pressures, and lower distal esophageal contraction amplitudes. CONCLUSION: Postoperative testing with the standard MII-pH catheters using published normative values seems to be clinically irrelevant. Clinicians should analyze the results of routine MII-pH testing in the setting of a fundoplication critically as the current technology is associated with a high false positive rate.

A natural orifice transrectal approach for oncologic resection of the rectosigmoid: an experimental study and comparison with conventional laparoscopy.

BACKGROUND: A transrectal (TR) approach for natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) makes sense for colorectal surgery because the colotomy can be incorporated into subsequent anastomosis. Because cancer is a primary indication for left-sided colon resection, oncologic standards will have to be met by a NOTES procedure. This study aimed to assess whether pure TR rectosigmoidectomy can be performed with strict adherence to oncologic principles compared with a conventional laparoscopically assisted approach (LAP). METHODS: Human male cadavers were allocated to either TR (n = 4) or LAP (n = 2). A simulated sigmoid lesion was created at 25 cm. Transrectal retrograde mobilization of the rectosigmoid was performed using conventional transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) instrumentation. After ligation of the superior hemorrhoidal artery and further mobilization, the specimen was delivered transanally and divided extracorporeally. Using a circular stapler, NOTES colorectal anastomosis was performed. Lymph node yield, adequate resection margins, and operative time were compared with LAP. RESULTS: Transrectal retrograde rectosigmoid dissection was achieved in all attempts (4/4) and showed numbers of lymph nodes (median, 5; range, 3-6) similar to the LAP group (median, 4.5; range, 2-7). One pure TR approach failed to resect the lesion. Three TR procedures required additional mobilization via an abdominal approach to provide adequate margins. The mean length of TR specimens was 16 ± 4 cm compared with 31 ± 9 cm achieved by LAP (p < 0.01). The TR operative time was significantly longer (247 ± 15 vs 110 ± 14 min). CONCLUSION: Lymph node yield during TR rectosigmoidectomy was similar to that achieved by the LAP approach. However, conventional TEM instrumentation alone did not permit adequate colon mobilization. This indicates a need for flexible instrumentation or other technical solutions to perform true NOTES colectomies.

Transcervical heller myotomy using flexible endoscopy.

INTRODUCTION: Esophageal achalasia is most commonly treated by laparoscopic myotomy. Transesophageal approaches using flexible endoscopy have recently been described. We hypothesized that using techniques and flexible instruments from our NOTES experience through a small cervical incision would be a safer and less traumatic route for esophageal myotomy. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and success rate of using flexible endoscopes to perform anterior or posterior Heller myotomy via a transcervical approach. METHODS: This animal (porcine) and human cadaver study was conducted at the Legacy Research and Technology Center. Mediastinal operations on ten live, anesthetized pigs and two human cadavers were performed using standard flexible endoscopes through a small incision at the supra-sternal notch. The esophagus was dissected to the phreno-esophageal junction using balloon dilatation in the peri-esophageal space followed by either anterior or posterior distal esophageal myotomy. Success rate was recorded of esophageal dissection to the diaphragm and proximal stomach, anterior and posterior myotomy, perforation, and complication rates. RESULTS: Dissection of the esophagus to the diaphragm and performing esophageal myotomy was achieved in 100% of attempts. Posterior Heller myotomy was always extendable onto the gastric wall, while anterior gastric extension of the myotomy was found to be more difficult (4/4 and 2/8, respectively; P = 0.061). CONCLUSION: Heller myotomy through a small cervical incision using flexible endoscopes is feasible. A complete Heller myotomy was performed with a higher success rate posteriorly possibly due to less anatomic interference.

A comparison of early learning curves for complex bimanual coordination with open, laparoscopic, and flexible endoscopic instrumentation.

BACKGROUND: This study takes an initial step towards understanding the learning process of flexible endoscopic surgery. Bimanual coordination learning curves were contrasted between three different surgical paradigms. We hypothesized that use of an open or laparoscopic paradigm would result in better performance and a shorter learning process (reaching a learning plateau earlier) than an endoscopic paradigm. METHODS: Our model required seven subjects to perform identical bimanual coordination tasks with three different tools (a dual-channel endoscope with graspers, laparoscopic Maryland graspers, and straight hemostats for open surgery). The task required subjects to coordinate two instruments in order to perform a series of standardized maneuvers. Performance was measured by movement speed and accuracy. The learning process was broken down into three distinct phases: the practice phase, the short-term retention phase, and the long-term retention phase. The learning curves of four surgical novices for 33 tasks with each device were compared with the performance of three surgeons. RESULTS: Overall performance speed was significantly faster using open or laparoscopic tools than endoscopy for all groups (open 13 ± 1 s; lap 28 ± 3 s; endo 202 ± 82 s; P < 0.001). The difference between open and laparoscopy was not significant (P = 0.149). There was no significant difference (P = 0.434) in accuracy (number of ring drops) between any of the devices. Novices performed significantly slower than the expert in the endoscopy task (P = 0.010). Their performance improved with practice (P = 0.005) but they failed to reach the level of the expert after the practice phase (novices: 202.3 ± 23.4 s versus expert: 89.0 ± 34 s, P = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: Bimanual coordination tasks have shortest performance time and are easiest to learn using an open surgery paradigm. Performance times and the learning process take longer for the laparoscopic paradigm and significantly longer for the endoscopic paradigm.