Comparing bone resorption after anatomical shoulder arthroplasty between various surgical procedures using a single-stem model

BackgroundIn shoulder arthroplasty, bone resorption around the stem can lead to stem loosening and makes surgery difficult at the time of revision. Proximal bone resorption after reverse shoulder arthroplasty can cause instability because of a decrease of deltoid wrapping effect. As factors of the stem itself, such as stem coating, shape, length, and use of bone cement, may also affect bone resorption, a single-stem model should be used to compare bone resorptions between different pathologies and surgical procedures. However, to date, a few reports have compared these differences in detail using a single-stem model. Therefore, we investigated the prevalence and location of humeral bone resorption in a single-stem model.MethodsThe study included 100 shoulders that underwent anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) or humeral head replacement (HHR) with a single uncemented humeral stem from 2008 to 2018. The patients were 31 men and 69 women. The mean age at surgery was 72.9 years (range, 41-86 years). The patients were divided into three groups: especially, 25, 61, and 14 shoulders received TSA for primary osteoarthritis without rotator cuff tears (TSA group), HHR using an anatomical head with rotator cuff repair for cuff tear arthropathy (CTA) (HHR group), and HHR using a CTA head without rotator cuff repair (CTA group), respectively. Patients were monitored for a mean of 56 months (range, 12-98 months). The location of bone resorption was divided into seven zones as follows: zone 1, greater tuberosity; zone 2, lateral diaphysis; zone 3, lateral diaphysis beyond the deltoid tuberosity; zone 4, tip of the stem; zone 5, medial diaphysis beyond the deltoid tuberosity; zone 6, medial diaphysis; and zone 7, calcar region. The degree of bone resorption was classified from grade 0 to 4.ResultsBone resorption of grade 3 or higher was significantly more frequent at the greater tuberosity in the HHR and CTA groups (P < .001 and P < .001, respectively) than that in the TSA group. Grade 4 bone resorption was significantly more frequent in the CTA than that in the TSA and HHR groups in zone 1 (P = .016 and P = .041, respectively).ConclusionThe state of attachment of the rotator cuff to the greater tuberosity might affect bone resorption at the greater tuberosity, such as the greater tuberosity after shoulder arthroplasty. In cases of shoulder arthroplasty for arthropathy with rotator cuff tear, performing rotator cuff repair might prevent bone resorption.Level of evidenceLevel IV; Prognosis Study     

Redefining “low risk”: Outcomes of surgical aortic valve replacement in low-risk patients in the transcatheter aortic valve replacement era

ObjectivesGuidelines suggest aortic valve replacement (AVR) for low-risk asymptomatic patients. Indications for transcatheter AVR now include low-risk patients, making it imperative to understand state-of-the-art surgical AVR (SAVR) in this population. Therefore, we compared SAVR outcomes in low-risk patients with those expected from Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) models and assessed their intermediate-term survival.MethodsFrom January 2005 to January 2017, 3493 isolated SAVRs were performed in 3474 patients with STS predicted risk of mortality <4%. Observed operative mortality and composite major morbidity or mortality were compared with STS-expected outcomes according to calendar year of surgery. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify risk factors for these outcomes. Patients were followed for time-related mortality.ResultsWith 15 observed operative deaths (0.43%) compared with 55 expected (1.6%), the observed:expected ratio was 0.27 for mortality (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.14-0.42), stroke 0.65 (95% CI, 0.41-0.89), and reoperation 0.50 (95% CI, 0.42-0.60). Major morbidity or mortality steadily declined, with probabilities of 8.6%, 6.7%, and 5.2% in 2006, 2011, and 2016, respectively, while STS-expected risk remained at approximately 12%. Mitral valve regurgitation, ventricular hypertrophy, pulmonary, renal, and hepatic failure, coronary artery disease, and earlier surgery date were residual risk factors. Survival was 98%, 91%, and 82% at 1, 5, and 9 years, respectively, superior to that predicted for the US age-race-sex–matched population.ConclusionsSTS risk models overestimate contemporary SAVR risk at a high-volume center, supporting efforts to create a more agile quality assessment program. SAVR in low-risk patients provides durable survival benefit, supporting early surgery and providing a benchmark for transcatheter AVR.     

A Review of Aerosol Generation Mitigation in International Dental Guidance

IntroductionThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) led to the worldwide closure of dental practices or reduction of dental services. By the end of April 2020, governments and professional organisations were publishing recommendations or guidance for the reopening/restructuring of dental services. The aim of this study was to assess how dental aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs) were defined in international dental guidelines, what mitigation processes were advised, and whether they were linked to COVID-19 epidemiology.MethodsElectronic searches of a broad range of databases, along with grey literature searches, without language restriction were conducted up to 13 July 2020. Recommendations for the use of face masks and fallow times with patients without COVID-19 were assessed against the deaths per 1 million population in the included countries and country income level using Pearson Chi-squared statistics.ResultsSixty-three guidance documents were included. Most (98%) indicated that AGPs can be performed with patients without COVID-19 with caveats, including advice to restrict AGPs where possible, with 21% only recommending AGPs for dental emergencies. Face masks were recommended by most documents (94%), with 91% also specifying the use of goggles or face shields. Fallow periods for patients without COVID-19 were mentioned in 48% of documents, ranging from 2 to 180 minutes. There were no significant differences in recommendations for face masks or fallow time in patients without COVID-19 by country death rate (P = .463 and P = .901) or World Bank status (P = .504 and P = .835). Most documents recommended procedural or environmental mitigations such as preprocedural mouthwash (82%) and general ventilation (52%). Few documents provided underpinning evidence for their recommendations.ConclusionsWhile the amount of high-quality direct evidence related to dentistry and COVID-19 remains limited, it is important to be explicit about the considered judgements for recommendations as well as generate new evidence to face this challenge.     

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.     

Evaluation of validity of the STOP-BANG questionnaire in major elective noncardiac surgery

Background

The STOP-BANG questionnaire screens for obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) in surgical patients. In prior research, the association of STOP-BANG scores with comorbidities and outcomes was inconsistent. The objective of this study was to evaluate the validity of the STOP-BANG score.

不同手术方式治疗慢性肛裂疗效评价的网状Meta分析

目的评价不同手术方式治疗慢性肛裂的效果。 方法通过计算机检索传统肛裂切除术、纵切横缝法、改良纵切横缝术、肛裂切除术+外括约肌切开术、肛裂切除术+内括约肌切开术5种手术治疗慢性肛裂的国内外临床研究，采用Stata13及GeMTC软件对其治愈率和并发症发生率进行传统Meta分析和网状Meta分析。 结果共纳入21项临床研究2 430例患者。网状Meta分析显示肛裂切除术+内括约肌切开术和肛裂切除术+外括约肌切开术的治愈率均高于传统肛裂切除术，OR值分别为2.27（95%CI=1.14~4.36）、3.26（95%CI=1.67~6.75）。在并发症的发生率方面，纵切横缝术、传统肛裂切除术排前两位，肛裂切除术+内括约肌切开术最低。 结论在5种常见的慢性肛裂手术方式中，肛裂切除术+内括约肌切开术的疗效和并发症发生均优于传统肛裂切除术、纵切横缝法、改良纵切横缝术、肛裂切除术+外括约肌切开术。