Outpatient Hysterectomy versus Inpatient Hysterectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

ObjectiveThe aim was to investigate whether outpatient hysterectomy (OH) has benefits when compared with inpatient hysterectomy (IH) regarding postoperative complications, readmissions, operative outcomes, cost, and patient quality of life.Data SourcesA systematic search for studies comparing OH with IH was conducted through PubMed, SAGE, and Scopus from January 2010 to March 2020, without limitations regarding language and study design.Methods of Study SelectionStudies reporting on the differences between same-day discharge and overnight stay after hysterectomy were included. The study outcomes were overall complication rate, type of complication, readmission after discharge, surgery duration, estimated blood loss, payer savings, hospital savings, and health-related quality of life (HrQoL). Median and range are used to describe non-normal data, while mean ± SD and confidence interval are used to descibe data with normal distribution. A meta-analysis with sensitivity analysis and subgroup analyses was performed.Tabulation, Integration, and ResultsEight studies published between 2011 and 2019 with 104,466 patients who underwent hysterectomy were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. All included studies except 1 were found to have a high risk of bias. OH in comparison with IH had a lower overall complication rate (odds ratio [OR] 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60–0.82) and lower rates of wound infection (OR 0.60; 95% CI, 0.43–0.84), urinary tract infection (OR 0.64; 95% CI, 0.52–0.78), need for transfusion (OR 0.36; 95% CI, 0.22–0.59), sepsis (OR 0.33; 95% CI, 0.17–0.64), uncontrolled pain (OR 0.79; 95% CI, 0.66–0.95), and bleeding requiring medical attention (OR 0.82; 95% CI, 0.73–0.94). In addition, patients who underwent OH had a lower readmission rate (OR 0.81; 95% CI, 0.75–0.87), surgery duration (standardized mean difference –0.35; 95% CI, –0.61 to –0.08), and estimated blood loss (standardized mean difference –0.63; 95% CI, –0.93 to –0.33) than those who underwent IH. A qualitative analysis found that OH had a poorer patient HrQoL and a lower cost for the hospital as well as the payer.ConclusionOHs present fewer complications and have a lower readmission rate and estimated blood loss as well as a shorter surgery duration than IHs. OHs also have a cost benefit in comparison with IHs. But patients seem to have a worse HrQoL in the first postoperative week after OH. The high risk of bias of the included studies indicates that well-designed clinical trials and standardization of surgical complication reporting are essential to better address this issue.     

不同手术方法治疗复杂胫骨平台骨折临床疗效观察

目的探讨不同手术方法治疗复杂胫骨平台骨折临床疗效。方法选择2016年1月—2018年12月84例复杂胫骨平台骨折患者,随机分组。单侧锁定钢板内固定组选择单侧锁定钢板内固定手术,双侧切口双侧解剖钢板内固定组选择双侧切口双侧解剖钢板内固定。分析手术操作时间、手术失血、平均住院天数以及复杂胫骨平台骨折愈合时间;治疗前后患者视觉模拟评分和Rasmussen膝关节功能评分;膝关节僵硬发生率。结果双侧切口双侧解剖钢板内固定组视觉模拟评分和Rasmussen膝关节功能评分、手术操作时间、手术失血、平均住院天数以及复杂胫骨平台骨折愈合时间、膝关节僵硬发生率和单侧锁定钢板内固定组比较有优势,P<0.05。结论复杂胫骨平台骨折患者实施双侧切口双侧解剖钢板内固定可获得较好效果。     

Successful Use of Surgically Placed Impella 5.0 and Central Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Circuit in a Patient with Postcardiotomy Shock

The Impella 5.0, a percutaneously inserted left ventricular assist device, has been used to support patients who have severe heart failure or who are undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention. We report our surgical placement of the Impella 5.0, through a graft sewn to the aorta, to unload the left ventricle of a 59-year-old man who was undergoing venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for postcardiotomy shock. The patient underwent successful placement of a long-term left ventricular assist device before his discharge from the hospital. The versatility of the Impella 5.0 is exemplified in this patient who was successfully bridged to long-term support.     

Demonstration of a modelling-based multi-criteria decision analysis procedure for prioritisation of occupational risks from manufactured nanomaterials

Several tools to facilitate the risk assessment and management of manufactured nanomaterials (MN) have been developed. Most of them require input data on physicochemical properties, toxicity and scenario-specific exposure information. However, such data are yet not readily available, and tools that can handle data gaps in a structured way to ensure transparent risk analysis for industrial and regulatory decision making are needed. This paper proposes such a quantitative risk prioritisation tool, based on a multi-criteria decision analysis algorithm, which combines advanced exposure and dose-response modelling to calculate margins of exposure (MoE) for a number of MN in order to rank their occupational risks. We demonstrated the tool in a number of workplace exposure scenarios (ES) involving the production and handling of nanoscale titanium dioxide, zinc oxide (ZnO), silver and multi-walled carbon nanotubes. The results of this application demonstrated that bag/bin filling, manual un/loading and dumping of large amounts of dry powders led to high emissions, which resulted in high risk associated with these ES. The ZnO MN revealed considerable hazard potential in vivo, which significantly influenced the risk prioritisation results. In order to study how variations in the input data affect our results, we performed probabilistic Monte Carlo sensitivity/uncertainty analysis, which demonstrated that the performance of the proposed model is stable against changes in the exposure and hazard input variables.