The cost to perform splenic artery embolisation following blunt trauma: Analysis from a level 1 Australian trauma centre.

INTRODUCTION: Splenic artery embolisation (SAE) has been shown to be an effective treatment for haemodynamically stable patients with high-grade blunt splenic injury. However, there are no local estimates of how much treatment costs. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the cost of providing SAE to patients in the setting of blunt abdominal trauma at an Australian level 1 trauma centre. METHODS: This was a single-centre retrospective review of 10 patients who underwent splenic embolisation from December 2017 to December 2018 for the treatment of isolated blunt splenic injury, including cost of procedure and the entire admission. Costs included angiography costs including equipment, machine, staff, and post-procedural costs including pharmacy, general ward costs, orderlies, ward nursing, allied health, and further imaging. RESULTS: During the study period, patients remained an inpatient for a mean of 4.8 days and the rate of splenic salvage was 100%. The mean total cost of splenic embolisation at our centre was AUD$10,523 and median cost AUD$9959.6 (range of $4826-$16,836). The use of a plug as embolic material was associated with increased cost than for coils. Overall cost of patients requiring ICU was mean AUD$11,894 and median AUD$11,435.8. Overall cost for those not requiring ICU was mean AUD$7325 and median AUD$8309.8. CONCLUSION: Splenic embolisation is a low-cost procedure for management of blunt splenic injury. The cost to provide SAE at our centre was much lower than previously modelled data from overseas studies. From a cost perspective, the use of ICU for monitoring after the procedure significantly increased cost and necessity may be considered on a case-by-case basis. Further research is advised to directly compare the cost of SAE and splenectomy in an Australian setting.

A warning for warming catheters: interventional radiology's role.

Concerns have been raised in the literature, regarding the risk of venous thromboembolic events associated with the use of thermoregulatory catheters. Inferior vena cava (IVC) filters are commonly used to prevent venous thromboembolic events. We demonstrate the usefulness of IVC filter placement prior to the removal of thermoregulatory warming catheters. The management of thermoregulatory warming catheter associated venous thromboembolism is outlined through a retrospective case series of three patients. In one case IVC thrombus was incidentally detected at ultrasonography one-week post removal. The second case describes the occurrence of pulseless electrical activity arrest secondary to massive pulmonary embolism immediately post removal of the thermoregulatory catheter, and subsequent interventional radiology management including pulmonary thrombectomy and caval filter placement. The third case is of a patient in whom the removal of the warming catheter was performed in the angiography suite, with placement of IVC filter prior to removal. Venography displayed a large thrombus burden within the IVC filter. There is limited data in the literature regarding the use of IVC filters as prophylaxis in patients with thermoregulatory catheters, particularly warming catheters. We advocate the placement of an IVC filter prior to the removal of warming catheters. We raise awareness regarding the potential risks of venous thromboembolism in this population and the key role interventional radiology has in the management of these patients.

Accuracy of Intraocular Lens Power Formulas Modified for Patients with Keratoconus.

PURPOSE: To assess the accuracy of intraocular lens (IOL) power formulas modified specifically for patients with keratoconus (Holladay 2 with keratoconus adjustment and Kane keratoconus formula) compared with normal IOL power formulas (Barrett Universal 2, Haigis, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, Holladay 2, Kane, and SRK/T). DESIGN: Retrospective consecutive case series. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 147 eyes of 147 patients with keratoconus. METHODS: Data from patients with keratoconus who had preoperative IOLMaster biometry were included. A single eye per qualifying patient was randomly selected. The predicted refraction was calculated for each of the formulas and compared with the actual refractive outcome to give the prediction error. Subgroup analysis based on the steepest corneal power measured by biometry (stage 1: ≤48 diopters [D], stage 2: >48 D and ≤53 D, and stage 3: >53 D) was performed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Prediction error. RESULTS: On the basis of the mean absolute prediction error (MAE), the formulas were ranked as follows: Kane keratoconus formula (0.81 D), SRK/T (1.00 D), Barrett Universal 2 (1.03 D), unmodified Kane (1.05 D), Holladay 1 (1.18 D), unmodified Holladay 2 (1.19 D), Haigis (1.22 D), Hoffer Q (1.30 D), and Holladay 2 with keratoconus adjustment (1.32 D). The Kane keratoconus formula had a statistically significant lower MAE compared with all formulas (P < 0.01). In stage 3 keratoconus, all nonmodified formulas had a hyperopic mean prediction error ranging from 1.72 to 3.02 D. CONCLUSIONS: The Kane keratoconus formula was the most accurate formula in this series. The SRK/T was the most accurate of the traditional IOL formulas. All normal IOL formulas resulted in hyperopic refractive outcomes that worsened as the corneal power increased. Suggestions for target refractive aims in each stage of keratoconus are given.

Diagnostic error in an ophthalmic emergency department.

Background Diagnostic error is a major preventable cause of harm to patients. There is currently limited data in the literature on the rates of misdiagnosis of doctors working in an ophthalmic emergency department (ED). Misdiagnosis was defined as a presumed diagnosis being proven incorrect upon further investigation or review. Methods In this retrospective audit, data was collected and analysed from 1 week of presentations at the Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital (RVEEH) ED. Results There were 534 ophthalmic presentations during the study period. The misdiagnosis rates of referrers were: general practitioners (30%), optometrists (25.5%), external hospital EDs (18.8%), external hospital ophthalmology departments (25%) and private ophthalmologists (0%). Misdiagnosis rates of RVEEH doctors were: emergency registrars (7.1%), RVEEH residents (16.7%), first-year registrars (5.1%), second-year registrars (7.1%), third-year registrars (7.7%), fourth-year registrars (0%), senior registrars (6.9%), fellows (0%) and consultants (8.3%). Conclusions The misdiagnosis rates in our study were comparable to general medical diagnostic error rates of 10-15%. This study acts as a novel pilot; in the future, a larger-scale multi-centre audit of ophthalmic presentations to general emergency departments should be undertaken to further investigate diagnostic error.

Optical coherence tomography imaging in keratoconus.

Optical coherence tomography (OCT) is being increasingly used as a tool in the diagnosis and management of keratoconus. While elevation-based topography remains essential, there is an expanding role for cross-sectional OCT imaging in the diagnosis of the disease. Images and measurements of corneal thickness, and in particular, epithelial thickness, may be important in diagnosing early cases, and following procedures such as intrastromal corneal ring segments, corneal transplants and corneal collagen cross-linking.