Surgical release of the chest wall skin and fascia for sclerodermatous graft versus host disease causing restrictive lung disease: A case report.

INTRODUCTION: Graft versus host disease (GVHD) remains a significant source of morbidity and mortality in the setting of allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Skin involvement is reported to be as high as 70-95 % in this group with GVHD and the severity of the involvement varies widely. Surgical management of complications of severe cutaneous GVHD is uncommon and is rarely mentioned as a treatment option. CASE PRESENTATION: We present a case of severe sclerodermatous skin changes restricting chest expansion and exercise tolerance to the point of limiting basic activities of daily life. A 54-year-old male presents with severe restrictive lung disease from sclerodermatous graft versus host disease (GVHD) after stem cell transplant for Chronic Myeloid Leukaemia (CML). He experienced limited symptomatic relief from maximal medical therapy and photochemotherapy, and subsequently underwent a skin release and split skin grafting of his chest and abdomen in an effort to improve exercise tolerance and quality of life. CLINICAL DISCUSSION: Despite an initial improvement in functioning, the patient's spirometry and lung function continued to decline with time, possibly suggesting that he did not gain a sustained benefit from surgical release of his cutaneous GVHD. CONCLUSION: While delineating between disease progression and surgical outcome is difficult in this case, the patient would argue that by delaying or reducing further decline in function, the surgical release procedures led to improved quality of life in subsequent years. However further research is required to establish a clear role for surgery in the treatment of refractory cutaneous GVHD.

Clinical characteristics and mortality rates for suprachoroidal hemorrhage: seven-year experience at a tertiary eye center.

PURPOSE: To investigate comorbidities and medications associated with acute (ASCH) and delayed (DSCH) suprachoroidal hemorrhage (SCH), and to explore visual outcomes and mortality following SCH. METHODS: Retrospective review of SCH cases diagnosed at a tertiary center between 2013 and 2019. Demographics, history, surgery type, visual acuity, intraocular pressure (IOP), and mortality data were reviewed. RESULTS: Fifty eyes of 50 patients experienced SCH related to surgery: 15 (30%) ASCH and 35 (70%) DSCH. Glaucoma surgery was the most common preceding surgery, and SCH was more likely to be delayed in glaucoma surgery relative to other surgeries (p = 0.001). The proportions of patients on anticoagulant, antiplatelet, or NSAID medications were 30% (n = 15), 52% (n = 26), and 12% (n = 6), respectively. The mean preoperative IOP was 25.0 ± 10.2 mmHg. The mean final best corrected visual acuity did not significantly differ between DSCH and ASCH (logMAR 1.92 vs. 2.36; p = 0.39). After controlling for pre-drainage visual acuity, final visual acuity was not statistically significantly different between eyes that were drained versus those that were not drained (p = 0.06). Of all 50 patients, the mortality rate was 12% with a mean time to mortality after SCH of 754 ± 564 days for those who died. CONCLUSION: DSCH was more common than ASCH, with glaucoma surgery being the most common procedure to result in SCH. Visual outcomes and mortality rate were comparable between ASCH and DSCH. Further research is needed regarding the role of surgical drainage on improving visual outcomes in eyes with SCH.

Biobrane™ versus acticoat™ for the treatment of mid-dermal pediatric burns: a prospective randomized controlled pilot study.

OBJECTIVES: The management of pediatric mid-dermal burns is challenging. Anecdotal evidence suggests Biobrane™ (UDL Laboratories, Inc., Sugar Land, TX) may expedite epithelization, reducing the requirement for skin grafting. Our standard management for burns of this depth is Acticoat™ (Smith and Nephew, St. Petersburg, Fl, USA). No publications are known to compare Biobrane™ to Acticoat™ for treatment of mid-dermal burns. METHODS: A prospective, randomised controlled pilot study was conducted, comparing Biobrane™ to Acticoat™ for mid-dermal burns affecting ≥ 1% Total Body Surface Area (TBSA) in children. Mid-dermal burns were confirmed using Laser Doppler Imaging within 48 hours of injury. Participants were randomized to Biobrane™ with an Acticoat™ overlay or Acticoat™ alone. RESULTS: 10 participants were in each group. Median age and TBSA were similar; 2.0 (Biobrane™) and 1.5 years (Acticoat™), 8% (Biobrane™) and 8.5% TBSA (Acticoat™). Use of Biobrane™ had higher infection rates (6 children versus 1) (P = 0.057) and more positive wound swabs, although not significant (7 children versus 4) (P = 0.37). Healing time was shorter in the Biobrane™ group, this was not significant (19 days versus 26.5 days, P = 0.18). Median dressing changes were similar (5 versus 5.5) (P = 0.56). Skin grafting requirement was greater in the Acticoat™ group (7 versus 4 children, P = 0.37) and similar in % TBSA (1.75% TBSA). CONCLUSION: This pilot study suggests that the use of Biobrane™ for mid-dermal burns in children may be associated with increased risk of infection but appears to decrease the time to healing and therefore the need for skin grafting compared to Acticoat™ alone.

An unexpected digital papillary adenocarcinoma of the thumb.

Digital papillary adenocarcinoma (DPAca) is an aggressive lesion with high metastatic potential, which is easily misdiagnosed. We present a 55-year-old male with a cystic lesion on his right thumb. Above all else, lesions of the digits should be sent for histopathology routinely, regardless of their history or appearance.

The Role of Routine Biopsy of the Lacrimal Sac During Dacryocystorhinostomy Surgery.

PURPOSE: To assess the role of routine histopathological evaluation of the lacrimal sac wall when performing dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR) surgery. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of the histology findings in lacrimal sac biopsies, taken routinely, in an external-approach DCR series. This is a single surgeon (RB), single pathologist (AG) consecutive series. The histopathology reports were reviewed and collated. Each patient's medical history and risk factors for malignancy were recorded. The surgeon documented any abnormal lacrimal sac appearance at the time of surgery. RESULTS: No patient in this series of 245, in whom 254 histology specimens were taken, recorded a significant pathological result that was not anticipated from pre-operative assessment, or from the appearance of the lacrimal sac intra-operatively. CONCLUSION: The reported recommendation for routine histopathological evaluation of the lacrimal sac wall when performing DCR surgery is not supported by this consecutive series. The authors recommend histopathological evaluation only in the setting of pre-existing clinical suspicion of malignancy, or an abnormal intra-operative appearance of the lacrimal sac.