Minimally invasive approaches versus conventional sternotomy for aortic valve replacement in patients with aortic valve disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 17 269 patients.

Background: Aortic valve replacement (AVR) is a common procedure for aortic valve pathologies, particularly in the elderly. While traditional open AVR is established, minimally invasive techniques aim to reduce morbidity and enhance treatment outcomes. The authors' meta-analysis compares these approaches with conventional sternotomy, offering insights into short and long-term mortality and postoperative results. This study provides valuable evidence for informed decision-making between conventional and minimally invasive approaches for AVR. Materials and methods: Till August 2023, PubMed, Embase, and MEDLINE databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCT) and propensity score matched (PSM) studies comparing minimally invasive approaches [mini-sternotomy (MS) and right mini-thoracotomy (RMT)] with full sternotomy (FS) for AVR. Various outcomes were analyzed, including mortality rates, bypass and clamp times, length of hospital stay, and complications. Risk ratios (RR) and the weighted mean differences (WMD) with corresponding 95% CIs were calculated using Review Manager. Results: Forty-eight studies were included having 17 269 patients in total. When compared to FS, there was no statistically significant difference in in-hospital mortality in MS (RR:0.80; 95% CI:0.50-1.27; I2=1%; P=0.42) and RMT (RR:0.70; 95% CI:0.36-1.35; I2=0%; P=0.29). FS was also linked with considerably longer cardiopulmonary bypass duration than MS (MD:8.68; 95% CI:5.81-11.56; I2=92%; P=0.00001). The hospital length of stay was determined to be shorter in MS (MD:-0.58; 95% CI:-1.08 to -0.09; I2=89%; P=0.02) with no statistically significant difference in RMT (MD:-0.67; 95% CI:-1.42 to 0.08; I2=84%; P=0.08) when compared to FS. Conclusions: While mortality rates were comparable in minimally invasive approaches and FS, analysis shows that MS, due to fewer respiratory and renal insufficiencies, as well as shorter hospital and ICU stay, may be a safer approach than both RMT and FS.

Pediatric penetrating brain injuries with intact neurological function: Two case reports of a pencil and a toy wheel encounter.

Accidental injuries in the pediatric population are common. The response to injury also differs owing to anatomical and physiological differences in children. While such injuries carry a risk of lifelong morbidity, some cases may follow a benign course despite their distressing appearance. We report two cases of accidentally incurred penetrating trauma in the pediatric population with unusual objects, including a pencil and a toy wheel. Despite their intracranial extension, neither of the patients exhibited any discernible neurological deficits. Penetrating brain injuries require early removal and meticulous perioperative care to minimize the risk of long-term adverse neurological events in children.

Self-inflicted penetrating brain injuries with preserved neurological function: a case series.

BACKGROUND: Penetrating trauma to the brain is a rare mode of self-harm in individuals with depressive psychosis. It may have variable presentations ranging from intact neurological status to non-survivable damage and the subjects may be surprisingly apathetic to pain. It is even unusual for such an injury to have an excellent prognosis despite coming late to clinical attention. CASE PRESENTATIONS: We report two cases of patients with psychotic depression who attempted suicide by hammering nails into their heads. On imaging, deep penetration within the brain parenchyma was noted; however, neither case had any neurological deficit or symptoms attributable to brain trauma. CONCLUSIONS: Self-inflicted penetrating brain injuries with peculiar objects such as nails are rarely encountered in practice. They need prompt management for their removal and addressing the underlying mental health illnesses.

Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of Aorta Versus Aortic Cross-Clamping by Thoracotomy for Noncompressible Torso Hemorrhage: A Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The effect of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of aorta (REBOA) in lowering mortality rate compared to resuscitative thoracotomy (RT) is inconclusive. In this updated systematic review and meta-analysis, we determined the effectiveness of the two techniques in patients with noncompressible torso hemorrhage (NCTH). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Online databases (PubMed, Embase, and MEDLINE) were searched until April 23, 2021, for original articles investigating the effect of REBOA on relevant outcomes (e.g., mortality in ED, mortality before discharge, in-hospital mortality, length of hospital stay and length of ICU stay) among NCTH patients in contrast to open aortic occlusion by RT. Data on baseline characteristics and endpoints were extracted. Review Manager version 5.4.1 and OpenMetaAnalyst were used for analyses. Risk ratios (RR) and the weighted mean differences (WMD) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals were calculated. RESULTS: Eight studies were included having 3241 patients in total (REBOA: 1179 and RT: 2062). The pooled analysis demonstrated that compared to RT, mortality was significantly lower in the REBOA group in all settings: In emergency department (ED) (RR 0.63 [0.45, 0.87], P = 0.006, I2 = 81%), before discharge (RR= 0.86 [0.75, 0.98], P = 0.03, I2 = 93%), and in-hospital mortality (RR 0.80 [0.68, 0.95], P = 0.009, I2 = 85%). Similarly, the length of ICU stay was significantly lower in REBOA group (WMD = 0.50 [-0.48, 1.48], P = 0.32, I2 =97%). However, no significant differences were observed in the length of hospital stay (WMD = 0.0 [-0.26, 0.26] P = 1). CONCLUSIONS: Our pooled analysis shows REBOA to be effective in reducing mortality among NCTH patients. However, due to limited studies, the positive findings should be viewed discreetly and call for further investigation.

COVID-19 pandemic and antimicrobial resistance in developing countries.

A wide range of antimicrobial agents were touted as potential remedies during the COVID-19 pandemic. While both developed and developing countries have recorded an increase in the use of antimicrobial drugs, use and misuse have occurred to a far greater degree in developing countries. This can have deleterious consequences on antimicrobial resistance, especially when various developing countries have already reported the emergence of various drug-resistant organisms even before the pandemic. Telemedicine services, societal and cultural pressures, and bacterial co-infections can predispose to overwhelming antimicrobial prescriptions. The emergence of new multidrug resistance species is a major concern for the developing world especially since health services are already overburdened and lack the diagnostic capabilities and basic amenities for infection prevention and control. This can lead to outbreaks and the rampant spread of such microorganisms. Improper waste management and disposal from hospitals and communities establish freshwater runoffs as hubs of various microorganisms that can predispose to the rise of multidrug-resistant species. Microplastics' ability to act as vectors for antibiotic-resistant organisms is also particularly concerning for lower-middle-income countries. In this review, we aim to study the impact of antimicrobial use during the COVID-19 pandemic and antimicrobial resistance in lower middle-income countries, by understanding various determinants of resistance unique to the developing world and exploring solutions to combat the problem.