Modified Low-Flow Arthroscopic Sandwich Technique for Complex Osteochondral Lesions of the Talus.

Treatment of osteochondral lesions of the talus proves to be challenging given the unique anatomy of the intra-articular surface and associated complexity of larger lesions. Simple bone marrow-stimulating procedures for large complex lesions often lead to poor results with increased risk of lesion progression, refractory pain, and associated functional limitations. Other methods of osteochondral autografts or allografts often require osteotomies, bone windows, or fibrin glue, which are associated with donor pain and nonunion. Thus, for larger and cystic lesions, we report our experience using a modified low-flow arthroscopic sandwich technique consisting of autologous cancellous bone graft, followed by a viable cryopreserved cartilage fiber, cartilage allograft matrix putty.

Association of Vibrotactile Biofeedback With Reduced Ergonomic Risk for Surgeons During Tonsillectomy.

Importance: Work-related musculoskeletal disorders are common among otolaryngologists and can be associated with decreased productivity, missed workdays, and reduced quality of life. Ergonomic risk for surgeons is elevated during common otolaryngology procedures; current ergonomic interventions lack the ability to provide real-time feedback. The ability to quantify and mitigate ergonomic risk during surgery may reduce work-related musculoskeletal disorders. Objective: To quantify the association of vibrotactile biofeedback with intraoperative ergonomic risk to surgeons during tonsillectomy. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study was conducted between June 2021 and October 2021 at a freestanding tertiary care children's hospital and included 11 attending pediatric otolaryngologists. Data analysis was conducted from August to October 2021. Interventions: Real-time quantification of ergonomic risk during tonsillectomy and the use of a vibrotactile biofeedback posture monitor. Main Outcomes and Measures: Association of vibrotactile biofeedback with objective measures of ergonomic risk. Assessment tools included the Rapid Upper Limb Assessment, craniovertebral angle, and time spent in an at-risk posture. Results: Eleven surgeons (mean [SD] age 42 [7] years; 2 women [18%]) performed 126 procedures with continuous posture monitoring in the presence (80 [63%]) and absence (46 [37%]) of vibrotactile biofeedback. No complications or delays associated with the device were reported. Intraoperative vibrotactile biofeedback was associated with improved Rapid Upper Limit Assessment neck, trunk, and leg scores by 0.15 (95% CI, 0.05-0.25), improved craniovertebral angle by 1.9 (95% CI, 0.32-3.40), and decreased overall time spent in an at-risk posture by 30% (95% CI, 22%-39%). Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this cross-sectional study suggest that use of a vibrotactile biofeedback device to quantify and mitigate ergonomic risk for surgeons is feasible and safe while performing surgery. Vibrotactile biofeedback was associated with reduced ergonomic risk during tonsillectomy and may have a role in improving surgical ergonomics and preventing work-related musculoskeletal disorders.

Neurosurgery Research and Education Foundation funding conversion to National Institutes of Health funding.

OBJECTIVE: The Neurosurgery Research and Education Foundation (NREF) provides research support for in-training and early career neurosurgeon-scientists. To define the impact of this funding, the authors assessed the success of NREF awardees in obtaining subsequent National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding. METHODS: NREF in-training (Research Fellowship [RF] for residents) and early career awards/awardees (Van Wagenen Fellowship [VW] and Young Clinician Investigator [YCI] award for neurosurgery faculty) were analyzed. NIH funding was defined by individual awardees using the NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting tool (1985-2014). RESULTS: Between 1985 and 2014, 207 unique awardees were supported by 218 NREF awards ($9.84 million [M] in funding), including 117 RF ($6.02 M), 32 VW ($1.68 M), and 69 YCI ($2.65 M) awards. Subspecialty funding included neuro-oncology (79 awards; 36% of RF, VW, and YCI awards), functional (53 awards; 24%), vascular (37 awards; 17%), spine (22 awards; 10%), pediatrics (18 awards; 8%), trauma/critical care (5 awards; 2%), and peripheral nerve (4 awards; 2%). These awardees went on to receive $353.90 M in NIH funding that resulted in an overall NREF/NIH funding ratio of 36.0:1 (in dollars). YCI awardees most frequently obtained later NIH funding (65%; $287.27 M), followed by VW (56%; $41.10 M) and RF (31%; $106.59 M) awardees. YCI awardees had the highest NREF/NIH funding ratio (108.6:1), followed by VW (24.4:1) and RF (17.7:1) awardees. Subspecialty awardees who went on to obtain NIH funding included vascular (19 awardees; 51% of vascular NREF awards), neuro-oncology (40 awardees; 51%), pediatrics (9 awardees; 50%), functional (25 awardees; 47%), peripheral nerve (1 awardees; 25%), trauma/critical care (2 awardees; 20%), and spine (2 awardees; 9%) awardees. Subspecialty NREF/NIH funding ratios were 56.2:1 for vascular, 53.0:1 for neuro-oncology, 47.6:1 for pediatrics, 34.1:1 for functional, 22.2:1 for trauma/critical care, 9.5:1 for peripheral nerve, and 0.4:1 for spine. Individuals with 2 NREF awards achieved a higher NREF/NIH funding ratio (83.3:1) compared to those with 1 award (29.1:1). CONCLUSIONS: In-training and early career NREF grant awardees are an excellent investment, as a significant portion of these awardees go on to obtain NIH funding. Moreover, there is a potent multiplicative impact of NREF funding converted to NIH funding that is related to award type and subspecialty.