RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Tranexamic acid (TXA) is an FDA-approved antifibrinolytic that is seeing increased popularity in spine surgery owing to its ability to reduce intraoperative blood loss (IOBL) and allogeneic transfusion requirements. The present study aimed to summarize the current literature on these formulations in the context of short-segment instrumented lumbar fusion including ≥ 1-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). METHODS: The PubMed, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases were queried for all full-text English studies evaluating the use of topical TXA (tTXA), systemic TXA (sTXA), or combined tTXA+sTXA in patients undergoing PLIF. The primary endpoints of interest were operative time, IOBL, and total blood loss (TBL); secondary endpoints included venous thromboembolic complication occurrence, and allogeneic and autologous transfusion requirements. Outcomes were compared using random effects. Comparisons were made between the following treatment groups: sTXA, tTXA, and sTXA+tTXA. Given that sTXA is arguably the standard of care in the literature (i.e., the most common route of administration that to this point has been studied the most), the authors compared sTXA versus tTXA and sTXA versus sTXA+tTXA. Study heterogeneity was assessed with the I2 test, and grouped analysis using the Hedge's g test was performed for measurement of effect size. RESULTS: Forty-five articles were identified, of which 17 met the criteria for inclusion with an aggregate of 1008 patients. TXA regimens included sTXA only, tTXA only, and various combinations of sTXA and tTXA. There were no significant differences in operative time, TBL, or postoperative drainage between the sTXA and tTXA groups or between the sTXA and sTXA+tTXA groups. CONCLUSIONS: The present meta-analysis suggested clinical equipoise between isolated sTXA, isolated tTXA, and combinatorial tTXA+sTXA formulations as hemostatic adjuvants/neoadjuvants in short-segment fusion including ≥ 1-level PLIF. Given the theoretically lower venous thromboembolism risk associated with tTXA, additional investigations using large cohorts comparing these two formulations within the posterior fusion population are merited. Although TXA has been shown to be effective, there are insufficient data to support topical or systemic administration as superior within the open PLIF population.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Despite significant advances in understanding of skull base reconstruction principles, the role of tissue sealants in modifying postoperative cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak outcomes remains controversial. We evaluate postoperative CSF leak incidence associated with tissue sealant use in skull base defect repair during endoscopic skull base surgery (ESBS). DATA SOURCES: Web of Science, PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane Library. REVIEW METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis of risk differences (RD). A search strategy identified original studies reporting CSF leakage following ESBS with disaggregation by tissue sealant use and/or type. RESULTS: 27 non-randomized studies (n = 2,403) were included for qualitative and meta-analysis. Reconstruction with a tissue sealant did not significantly reduce postoperative CSF leak risk compared with reconstruction without sealant (RD[95% CI] = 0.02[-0.01, 0.05]). Sub-analyses of dural sealant (-0.02[-0.11, 0.07]) and fibrin glue (0.00[-0.07, 0.07]) compared with no sealant were similarly unremarkable. Postoperative CSF leakage was not significantly modulated in further sub-analyses of DuraSeal (0.02[-0.02, 0.05]), Adherus (-0.03[-0.08, 0.03]), or Bioglue (-0.06[-0.23, 0.12]) versus no dural sealant use, or Tisseel/Tissucol versus fibrin glue nonuse (0.00[-0.05, 0.05]). No significant association was seen comparing dural sealant use versus fibrin glue use on pairwise (0.01[-0.03, 0.05]) or network meta-analysis (-0.01[-0.05, 0.04]). Limitations in source literature prevented sub-analyses stratified by leak characteristics, defect size and location, and accompanying reconstruction materials. CONCLUSION: Tissue sealant use did not appear to impact postoperative CSF leak incidence when compared with nonuse. Higher quality studies are warranted to thoroughly elucidate the clinical value of adjunct sealant use in endoscopic skull base reconstruction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A Laryngoscope, 2024.
RESUMO
Objectives: To evaluate trends in botulinum toxin (BTX) industry payments to physicians. Methods: Cross-sectional analysis of nonroyalty, BTX-specific payments made by Allergan (Botox), Ipsen (Dysport), and Merz (Xeomin) to physicians using the 2016-2020 Open Payments Database. Results: Between 2016 and 2020, >$27 million in payments was made for BTX-related activities to dermatologists, neurologists, ophthalmologists, otolaryngologists, and plastic surgeons, with payments ranging from $3.9 million in 2016 to $8.7 million in 2019. 21.7% was paid to dermatologists, 57.5% to neurologists, 5.9% to ophthalmologists, 5.7% to otolaryngologists, and 9.1% to plastic surgeons. Conclusions: Growing amounts are being paid to physicians for BTX-related activities-both medical and aesthetic. Despite the variety of indications for BTX within otolaryngology, otolaryngology payments were overshadowed by other specialties, which may reflect greater BTX utilization in those specialties.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Lumbosacral transitional vertebrae (LSTV) are congenital anomalies of the L5-S1 segments characterized by either sacralization of the most caudal lumbar vertebra or lumbarization of the most cephalad sacral vertebra. This variation in anatomy exposes patients to additional surgical risks. METHODS: In order to shed light on surgical considerations reported for lumbar spine cases involving LSTV as described in the extant literature, we performed a systematic review in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. We also present a case example in which wrong level surgery was avoided due to anatomical understanding of LSTV. RESULTS: A 48-year-old female presented with severe back pain after sustaining a fall from ten feet. The patient exhibited full motor function in all extremities but had begun to experience urinary retention. On initial imaging read, the patient was suspected to have an L1 burst fracture. A review of the imaging demonstrated a transitional vertebra. Therefore, based on the last rib corresponding to T12, the fractured level was L2. This case illustrates the risk LSTV carries for wrong site surgery; appropriate levels were then decompressed and instrumented. On systematic review of the literature according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines, a three database literature search identified 39 studies describing 885 patients with LSTV and relevant surgical considerations. The primary indications for surgery were for disc herniation (37%), Bertolotti's syndrome (35%), and spinal stenosis (25%). This cohort displayed a mean follow-up time of 23 months. Reherniation occurred in 12 patients (5.5%). Medical management through steroid injection was 24, 72% (n = 80) for the sample. Wrong level surgery occurred in 1.4% (n = 12) of patients. CONCLUSIONS: LSTV represents a constellation of changes in anatomy beyond just a sacralized or lumbarized vertebra. These anatomical differences expose the patient to additional surgical risks. This case and review of the literature highlight avoidable complications and in particular wrong level surgery.
RESUMO
(1) Introduction: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a leading cause of injury and mortality worldwide, carrying an estimated cost of $38 billion in the United States alone. Neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) has been investigated as a standardized biomarker that can be used to predict outcomes of TBI. The aim of this review was to determine the prognostic utility of NLR among patients admitted for TBI. (2) Methods: A literature search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science in November 2022 to retrieve articles regarding the use of neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) as a prognostic measure in traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients. Inclusion criteria included studies reporting outcomes of TBI patients with associated NLR values. Exclusion criteria were studies reporting only non-primary data, those insufficiently disaggregated to extract NLR data, and non-English or cadaveric studies. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was utilized to assess for the presence of bias in included studies. (3) Results: Following the final study selection 19 articles were included for quantitative and qualitative analysis. The average age was 46.25 years. Of the 7750 patients, 73% were male. Average GCS at presentation was 10.51. There was no significant difference in the NLR between surgical vs. non-surgical cohorts (SMD 2.41 95% CI -1.82 to 6.63, p = 0.264). There was no significant difference in the NLR between bleeding vs. non-bleeding cohorts (SMD 4.84 95% CI -0.26 to 9.93, p = 0.0627). There was a significant increase in the NLR between favorable vs. non-favorable cohorts (SMD 1.31 95% CI 0.33 to 2.29, p = 0.0090). (4) Conclusions: Our study found that NLR was only significantly predictive for adverse outcomes in TBI patients and not surgical treatment or intracranial hemorrhage, making it nonetheless an affordable alternative for physicians to assess patient prognosis.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Anorexia nervosa and obesity are common appetite disorders, which may be life threatening if not treated and often coincide with psychiatric disorders. We sought to investigate whether deep brain stimulation (DBS) of specific regions within the brain could aid in the treatment of these disorders. This review aims to organize the literature regarding the feasibility of DBS via clinical outcomes and synthesize the data on patient demographics and electrode parameters for future optimization. METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were all queried on 7 June 2022 to identify studies reporting the effect of DBS in treatment of either anorexia nervosa or obesity. We included studies involving 1) DBS, 2) treatment of anorexia nervosa or obesity, and 3) body mass index (BMI) as the primary outcome variable. Case reports, retrospective cohort studies, and randomized controlled trials were all eligible for inclusion. Exclusion of articles was based on the following criteria: 1) meta-analyses or systematic reviews or 2) describes diseases other than only anorexia or obesity. Screening of the 999 articles returned by an initial search yielded 23 studies for inclusion and further data extraction. Qualitative assessment of included studies was subsequently conducted in accordance with Newcastle-Ottawa Scale criteria. RESULTS: We included 23 articles (17 anorexia, 5 obesity) that met our inclusion and exclusion criteria, which included 8 case reports, 13 case series, and 1 case-control study. Our primary variables of interest were location of DBS, change in BMI after intervention, electrode parameters, and psychiatric comorbidities. A total of 131 patients were included and analyzed, 118 of those belonging in the anorexia cohort. For patients with anorexia, we found that the most common place for DBS was the subcallosal cingulate followed by the nucleus accumbens, resulting in an overall increase in BMI by 24.82% over the span of a mean 17.1 months. Psychiatric comorbidities (major depressive disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and anxiety) were common in the anorexia cohort. For patients with obesity, DBS was most common in the lateral hypothalamus followed by the nucleus accumbens, resulting in a small decrease in BMI by 3.97% over a mean 17.2 months. Data were insufficient for this cohort to report on additional psychiatric comorbidities or calculate the duration from diagnosis to treatment. CONCLUSIONS: DBS seems to be a promising solution in addressing treatment-refractory anorexia, but additional prospective studies are still needed to confirm this same usefulness for the treatment of obesity. Primary limitations included the apparent lack of data on DBS for obesity as well as the dearth of cohort studies assessing efficacy of DBS compared with control treatments. Although these limitations could not be addressed in the current review, this study may incentivize future trials to assess DBS in patients with appetite disorders in a more controlled fashion.
