Overview of Deep Dermal Fillers.

Dermal fillers have become an integral part of both medical and cosmetic dermatology. Our expanding knowledge of the aging face has allowed us to shift the focus from skin-reduction lifting procedures to soft tissue augmentation. Within the past 5 years alone, nine new dermal fillers have been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for soft tissue augmentation. The rise in both the use and number of dermal fillers in recent years is a testament to their safety and efficacy. Dermal fillers can be broken down to three major types: temporary, semipermanent, and permanent. The former, which include hyaluronic acid based fillers, provide safe and effective correction but only for a limited time, typically approximately 1 to 2 years at best. This review will cover the semipermanent (poly-L-lactic acid and calcium hydroxylapatite) and permanent (polymethylmethacrylate and liquid silicone) injectable fillers. These so-called deep dermal fillers are valuable, durable tools in correcting the aging face. Given their extended duration of effect, these fillers inherently carry their own risk for potential adverse events. Thus, it is essential that clinicians have a thorough understanding of these products to best counsel, recommend, and perform soft tissue augmentation using these fillers.

Direct Thrombin Inhibitor Resistance and Possible Mechanisms.

Objective: To report 3 cases in which doses of bivalirudin higher than commonly used in clinical practice were required in order to achieve therapeutic anticoagulation as monitored by the activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT). Case Summary: The medical records of 3 patients who required large doses of bivalirudin to remain therapeutic were thoroughly reviewed. In all 3 patients, bivalirudin was initiated at a rate appropriate for the patients' renal function and titrated using a nurse-driven protocol with recommended dose adjustments based on aPTT. Indications for bivalirudin were anticoagulation in intra-aortic balloon pump, treatment of deep vein thrombosis, and heparin-induced thrombocytopenia with thrombosis. Target aPTT was achieved between 25.5 and 134 hours after initiation despite appropriate titration intervals per protocol. Discussion: Bivalirudin is a direct thrombin inhibitor frequently used off-label for the medical management of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. It typically exhibits predictable, dose-dependent anticoagulation. Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia was suspected in 2 of the 3 cases and confirmed in 1. In all 3 patients, target aPTT was initially achieved with doses between 0.456 and 1.0 mg/kg/h after a median of 30.7 hours; up to 1.8 mg/kg/h was required to maintain therapeutic aPTT. In 2 of the cases, the international normalized ratio also increased unexpectedly upon achievement of therapeutic aPTT values. Conclusion: Direct thrombin inhibitors may be subject to resistance mechanisms similar to those previously described in patients receiving heparin. The anticoagulation status of these patients remains unknown.

Hybrid Single-Port Cholecystectomy Vs Four-Port Cholecystectomy in Children.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Evidence is increasing that single-port or single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy is a safe and feasible alternative for cholecystectomy in children. In this study, we sought to compare the single-port hybrid technique, which we originally reported in 2012, with the conventional 4-port approach, in regards of complications, outcome, operative time and cost. METHODS: A retrospective, single-center comparison of hybrid single-port versus conventional 4-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy was performed in 98 consecutive pediatric patients between January 2010 and October 2014. Patient characteristics, intra- and postoperative outcomes, operative costs, and total hospitalization costs were compared between the 2 approaches using univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: The single-port technique was utilized in 56 (57%) pediatric patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The operative time for single-port procedures was shorter than that of the conventional technique (median, 85 minutes vs 114 minutes; P = .003). Patients with single-port procedures were less likely to have a cholangiogram compared to patients who underwent 4-port cholecystectomy. (9% vs 40%; P < .001). No statistically significant differences between the 2 cohorts were observed for intra- or postoperative outcomes. Although the 2 groups shared nearly the same median duration of hospitalization (22 hours vs 21 hours; P = .70), the single-port group demonstrated a lower total cost of hospitalization (median cost, $7438 vs $8783; P = .030) and lower operative cost (median, $3918 vs $4647; P < .001). CONCLUSION: Hybrid single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy in children with uncomplicated gallbladder disease is feasible and equally safe, with similar intra- and postoperative outcomes compared with the conventional 4-port approach. It can contribute to global cost reduction because of lower operative and total hospitalization costs.