Surgical Helmets Used During Total Joint Arthroplasty Harbor Common Pathogens: A Cautionary Note

BackgroundThe use of personal-protection surgical helmet/hood systems is now a part of the standard surgical attire during arthroplasty in North America. There are no protocols for the disinfection of these helmets.MethodsThis is a prospective, single-center, observational study. Helmets worn by 44 members of the surgical team and foreheads of 44 corresponding surgical personnel were swabbed at three distinct time points. In addition, 16 helmets were treated with hypochlorite spray to determine if pathogens could be eliminated. Swabs obtained were processed for culture and next-generation sequencing (NGS).ResultsOf the 132 helmet samples, 97 (73%) yielded bacteria on culture and 94 (71%) had evidence of bacterial–deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) on NGS. Of the swabs sent for bacterial identification at the three time points, at least one from each helmet was positive for a pathogen(s). Of the 132 forehead samples, 124 (93%) yielded bacteria on culture and 103 (78%) had evidence of bacterial-DNA on NGS. The most commonly identified organism from helmets was Cutibacterium acnes (86/132) on NGS and Staphylococcus epidermidis (47/132) on culture. The most commonly identified organism from the foreheads of surgical personnel was Cutibacterium acnes (100/132) on NGS and Staphylococcus epidermidis (70/132) on culture. Sanitization of helmets was totally effective; no swabs taken the following morning for culture and NGS identified any bacteria.ConclusionThis study demonstrates that surgical helmets worn during orthopedic procedures are contaminated with common pathogens that can potentially cause surgical site infections. The findings of this study should at the minimum compel us to develop protocols for the disinfection of these helmets.     

A case of purulent pneumococcal pericarditis

Background

Purulent bacterial pericarditis is a rare and potentially fatal disease. The course may be fulminant, and the presentation may pose a diagnostic challenge.

Dexamethasone potentiates in vitro blood-brain barrier recovery after primary blast injury by glucocorticoid receptor-mediated upregulation of ZO-1 tight junction protein

Owing to the frequent incidence of blast-induced traumatic brain injury (bTBI) in recent military conflicts, there is an urgent need to develop effective therapies for bTBI-related pathologies. Blood-brain barrier (BBB) breakdown has been reported to occur after primary blast exposure, making restoration of BBB function and integrity a promising therapeutic target. We tested the hypothesis that treatment with dexamethasone (DEX) after primary blast injury potentiates recovery of an in vitro BBB model consisting of mouse brain endothelial cells (bEnd.3). DEX treatment resulted in complete recovery of transendothelial electrical resistance and hydraulic conductivity 1 day after injury, compared with 3 days for vehicle-treated injured cultures. Administration of RU486 (mifepristone) inhibited effects of DEX, confirming that barrier restoration was mediated by glucocorticoid receptor signaling. Potentiated recovery with DEX treatment was accompanied by stronger zonula occludens (ZO)-1 tight junction immunostaining and expression, suggesting that increased ZO-1 expression was a structural correlate to BBB recovery after blast. Interestingly, augmented ZO-1 protein expression was associated with specific upregulation of the α⁺ isoform but not the α⁻ isoform. This is the first study to provide a mechanistic basis for potentiated functional recovery of an in vitro BBB model because of glucocorticoid treatment after primary blast injury.     

分诊安全管理结合风险管理提高急诊科护理质量评分的作用分析

目的探讨分诊安全管理结合风险管理提高急诊科护理质量评分的作用。方法该院于2018年6月起加强对急诊科的分诊安全管理结合风险管理,以于2017年6月—2019年6月在该院急诊科就诊的患者为研究对象,评价管理策略实施前后护理风险发生率、护理质量评分以及患者满意度等评价指标变化情况。结果实施后基础护理、实践操作、消毒隔离、急救药品、护理文件方面的护理质量评分均较实施前显著提高(P<0.05);实施后护理差错、护理缺陷、护理投诉的发生率分别为0.26%、0.58%、0.19%,均较实施前显著降低(P<0.05);实施后护理总满意率为94.92%,较实施前显著提高(P<0.05)。结论分诊安全管理结合风险管理有效提高了急诊科护理质量,提升了患者满意度,减少了护理风险事件的发生。     

The Fate and Relevance of the Patella in Two-Stage Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty for Periprosthetic Joint Infection

BackgroundIt remains unclear whether reimplantation of a patellar component during a two-stage revision for periprosthetic total knee arthroplasty infection (PJI) affects patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) or implant survivorship. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether patellar resurfacing during reimplantation confers a functional benefit or increases implant survivorship after two-stage treatment for PJI.MethodsTwo-stage revisions for knee PJI performed by three surgeons at a single tertiary care center were reviewed retrospectively. All original patellar components and cement were removed during resection and the patella was resurfaced whenever feasible during reimplantation. PROMs, implant survivorship, and radiographic measurements (patellar tilt and displacement) were compared between knees reimplanted with a patellar component versus those without a patellar component.ResultsA total of 103 patients met the inclusion criteria. Forty-three patients (41.7%) underwent reimplantation with, and 60 patients (58.3%) without a patellar component. At a mean follow-up of 33.5 months, there were no significant differences in patient demographics or PROMs between groups (P ≥ .156). No significant differences were found in the estimated Kaplan-Meier all-cause, aseptic, or septic survivorship between groups (P ≥ .342) at a maximum of 75 months follow-up. There was no significant difference in the change (pre-resection to post-reimplant) of patellar tilt (P = .504) or displacement (P = .097) between the groups.ConclusionPatellar resurfacing during knee reimplantation does not appear to meaningfully impact postoperative PROMs or survivorship. Given the risk of potential extensor mechanism complications with patellar resurfacing, surgeons may choose to leave the patella without an implant during total knee reimplantation and expect similar clinical outcomes.Level of EvidenceLevel III.     

Emerging Viral Infections Causing Anterior Uveitis

Purpose: To review the systemic and ocular manifestations of specific emergent viral infectious diseases relevant to the ophthalmologist with particular emphasis on anterior uveitis

Methods: Review of literature.

Results: Arboviral diseases are among the most important emergent and resurgent human infections, occurring mostly in tropical and subtropical zones, but appearing in virtually all regions of the world as a result of climate change, travel, and globalization. Arboviral infections are transmitted to humans by the bite of hematophagous arthropods, mainly mosquitoes. Systemic disease may range from asymptomatic to life-threatening. A wide variety of ocular manifestations, including uveitis, has been reported in association with these emerging viral diseases. Numerous viruses other than arboviruses also have been recently recognized as a potential cause of uveitis.

Conclusions: Proper clinical diagnosis of any emerging infectious disease is based on epidemiological data, history, systemic symptoms and signs, and the pattern of ocular involvement. The diagnosis is usually confirmed by detection of virus-specific DNA or antivirus antibodies in serum.