A comparison of airborne bacterial fallout between orthopaedic and vascular surgery.

INTRODUCTION The objective of the study was to compare bacterial fallout during vascular prosthesis insertion and orthopaedic major joint replacement performed in conventional and laminar flow ventilation, respectively. MATERIALS AND METHODS A prospective single-centre case control study of 21 consecutive elective vascular procedures involving prosthetic graft insertion and 24 consecutive elective orthopaedic major joint replacements were tested for degree of bacterial fallout using agar settle plates. Preparation time, waiting time and total procedure duration were collected at the time of surgery, and bacterial colony counts on the agar settle plates from airborne bacterial fallout were counted after an incubation period. RESULTS Bacterial fallout count in vascular prosthetic graft insertion was 15-fold greater than in orthopaedic prosthetic joint insertion (15, (IQR 15) vs 1, (IQR 3) respectively, P < 0.0001, Wilcoxon). Waiting time and patient transfer did not significantly increase bacterial fallout counts during the procedure (P = 0.9). CONCLUSIONS Vascular surgical theatres have significantly higher bacterial fallout compared with orthopaedic theatres. This may be partly explained by orthopaedic surgery being routinely performed in laminar flow ventilation, a practice which has not been widely adopted for vascular surgery, in which prosthetic infection may also result in significant mortality and morbidity.

Baseline donor chronic renal injury confers the same transplant survival disadvantage for DCD and DBD kidneys.

Histological assessment of baseline chronic kidney injury may discriminate kidneys that are suitable for transplantation, but has not been validated for appraisal of donation after circulatory death (DCD) kidneys. 'Time-zero' biopsies for 371 consecutive, solitary, deceased-donor kidneys transplanted at our center between 2006 and 2010 (65.5% DCD, 34.5% donation after brain death [DBD]) were reviewed and baseline chronic degenerative injury scored using Remuzzi's classification. High scores correlated with donor age and extended criteria donors (42% of donors), but the spectrum of scores was similar for DCD and DBD kidneys. Transplant outcomes for kidneys scoring from 0 to 4 were comparable (1 and 3 year graft survival 95% and 92%), but were much poorer for kidneys scoring ≥5, with 1 year graft survival only 73%, and 12.5% suffering primary nonfunction. Critically, high Remuzzi scores conferred the same survival disadvantage for DCD and DBD kidneys. On multi-variable regression analysis, time-zero biopsy score was the only independent predictor for graft survival, whereas one-year graft estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) correlated with donor age and biopsy score. In conclusion, the relationship between severity of chronic kidney injury and transplant outcome is similar for DCD and DBD kidneys. Kidneys with Remuzzi scores of ≤4 can be implanted singly with acceptable results.

Feasibility study of a randomised controlled trial to compare (deferred) androgen deprivation therapy and cryotherapy in men with localised radiation-recurrent prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Salvage therapeutic options for biochemical failure after primary radiation-based therapy include radical prostatectomy, cryoablation, high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), brachytherapy (for post-EBRT patients) and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). ADT and salvage prostate cryoablation (SPC) are two commonly considered treatment options for RRPC. However, there is an urgent need for high-quality clinical studies to support evidence-based decisions on treatment choice. Our study aims to determine the feasibility of randomising men with RRPC for treatment with ADT and SPC. METHODS: The randomised controlled trial (CROP) was developed, which incorporated protocols to assess parameters relating to cryotherapy procedures and provide training workshops for optimising patient recruitment. Analysis of data from the recruitment phase and patient questionnaires was performed. RESULTS: Over a period of 18 months, 39 patients were screened for eligibility. Overall 28 patients were offered entry into the trial, but only 7 agreed to randomisation. The majority reason for declining entry into the trial was an unwillingness to be randomised into the study. 'Having the chance of getting cryotherapy' was the major reason for accepting the trial. Despite difficulty in retrieving cryotherapy temperature parameters from prior cases, 9 of 11 cryotherapy centres progressed through the Cryotherapists Qualification Process (CQP) and were approved for recruiting into the CROP study. CONCLUSIONS: Conveying equipoise between the two study arms for a salvage therapy was challenging. The use of delayed androgen therapy may have been seen as an inferior option. Future cohort studies into available salvage options (including prostate cryotherapy) for RRPC may be more acceptable to patients than randomisation within an RCT.