Prognostic tools for hypertrophic scar formation based on fundamental differences in systemic immunity

Unpredictable hypertrophic scarring (HS) occurs after approximately 35% of all surgical procedures and causes significant physical and psychological complaints. Parallel to the need to understanding the mechanisms underlying HS formation, a prognostic tool is needed. The objective was to determine whether (systemic) immunological differences exist between patients who develop HS and those who develop normotrophic scars (NS) and to assess whether those differences can be used to identify patients prone to developing HS. A prospective cohort study with NS and HS groups in which (a) cytokine release by peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) and (b) the irritation threshold (IT) after an irritant (sodium lauryl sulphate) patch test was evaluated. Univariate regression analysis of PBMC cytokine secretion showed that low MCP‐1, IL‐8, IL‐18 and IL‐23 levels have a strong correlation with HS (P < .010‐0.004; AUC = 0.790‐0.883). Notably, combinations of two or three cytokines (TNF‐a, MCP‐1 and IL‐23; AUC: 0.942, Nagelkerke R²: 0.727) showed an improved AUC indicating a better correlation with HS than single cytokine analysis. These combination models produce good prognostic results over a broad probability range (sensitivity: 93.8%, specificity 86.7%, accuracy 90,25% between probability 0.3 and 0.7). Furthermore, the HS group had a lower IT than the NS group and an accuracy of 68%. In conclusion, very fundamental immunological differences exist between individuals who develop HS and those who do not, whereas the cytokine assay forms the basis of a predictive prognostic test for HS formation, the less invasive, easily performed irritant skin patch test is more accessible for daily practice.     

Epilepsy and pregnancy: What should the neurologists do?

Epilepsy is one of the most common chronic disorders affecting women of childbearing age. Unfortunately, many women with epilepsy (WWE) still report not receiving key information about pregnancy. They obviously need information about epilepsy and pregnancy prior to conception with a particular emphasis on effective birth control (i.e. contraception), necessity to plan pregnancy, antiepileptic drugs optimization, and folate supplementation. The risks associated with use of antiepileptic drugs during pregnancy have to be balanced against fetal and maternal risks associated with uncontrolled seizures. This report reviews evidence-based counseling and management strategies concerning maternal and fetal risks associated with seizures, teratogenic risks associated with antiepileptic drug exposure with a special emphasis on developmental and behavioural outcomes of children exposed to intra utero antiepileptic drugs.     

Conserving resources in the diagnosis of intraoral fibroepithelial polyps

Fibroepithelial polyps (FEPs) are common, benign intraoral lesions that tend to develop slowly at predictable sites, often in response to local irritation or trauma. Historical precedent often results in referral to oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMFS) departments for biopsy, often irrespective of symptoms, and histological assessment. OMFS and pathology services are struggling to cope with an increasing workload that will potentially lead to widespread delays to diagnosis and treatment. Over the past 20 years, clinical pathways and guidance have been developed to ensure that healthcare interventions, such as the removal of third molars, tonsils, skin tags, and benign moles, are evidence-based, have a net patient benefit, and ensure the best use of finite NHS resources. However, no such guidance exists for intraoral lesions and we regard this as an oversight. We analysed the removal of 682 FEPs over a seven-year period and report sensitivities of 92.4% for a “confirmed clinical suspicion of an FEP” and 99.7% for a “confirmed clinical suspicion of a benign diagnosis”. The incidence of non-benign disease was 0.3%. Primary care dentists should be able to diagnose and monitor FEPs and refer only if symptoms are serious or in high-risk patients or sites. Adopting this practice across the UK could free up to 1825 four-hour OMFS clinics, 405 hours of consultant histopathologists’ time, and recurring savings to the NHS estimated to be in the region of £620 000/annum. We believe that the removal of FEPs should be reclassified as an “intervention not normally funded”, and the time and resources put to better use treating patients with lesions of questionable pathology.     

Patients’ narratives of orthognathic treatment for facial asymmetry: a qualitative study

To explore patients’ experiences of orthognathic treatment for facial asymmetry and their adaptation to facial changes after surgery, we did a qualitative, cross-sectional study of patients after treatment for non-cleft asymmetry at two UK sites. A total of 15 patients aged 19-40 years were approached after being identified using patient databases and clinical notes. Individual and photo-elicitation interviews were conducted covering experiences prior to treatment, during treatment, and after surgery. Interviews were transcribed and thematic narrative analysis undertaken. Participants were largely positive about their orthognathic treatment. The following themes were identified: preoperative (becoming aware, negative impacts of asymmetry, committing to treatment, establishing expectations), pre-surgery orthodontics and inpatient experiences (challenges and coping strategies, preparedness, support, and shared experiences); and postoperative (surgery as ‘worth it’, positive impacts of treatment, adapting to facial change). Undergoing orthognathic surgery was portrayed as a journey involving recognisable narratives (treatment unfinished, threat of liminality, treatment as resolution, and treatment as transformation). Patients’ experiences of facial asymmetry are associated with feeling ‘abnormal’, and negative impacts, and orthognathic treatment for facial asymmetry is worthwhile. Having the feeling that something is ‘wrong’ legitimised by clinicians allows patients access to a recognisable treatment narrative (resolution). Orthognathic treatment is also described as transformation from ‘normal abnormality’ to being ‘normal’. Nevertheless, the associated challenges can be frustrating, particularly if resolution is hard to envisage. Further psychological input could help patients cope with these challenges and the complex process of adapting to facial change.     

Antibiotics in orthognathic surgery: a retrospective analysis and identification of risk factors for postoperative infection

This study was undertaken to evaluate the infection rate following orthognathic surgery and to identify possible risk factors. A retrospective study was conducted. Patients undergoing orthognathic surgery from August 1, 2017 to July 31, 2018 were included. The outcome variable was surgical site infection (SSI). All data were analysed with respect to demographics and procedure specifications. A total of 137 patients (mean age 28.5 ± 12.69 years) were included in this study, of whom 20 (14.6%) developed a SSI. The only risk factor identified was the type of surgery: those undergoing mandibular osteotomies (in bilateral sagittal split osteotomy (BSSO) or bimaxillary osteotomies) were far more likely to develop infections. Third molar teeth were removed during orthognathic surgery in 28.5% of the procedures, and a genioplasty was performed in 10.9%. Removal of osteosynthesis material because of infectious reasons was necessary in 10.2% of patients, with a strong association to previous SSI. In conclusion, this study showed an infection rate of 14.6% with no link to any demographic risk factor. Neither the simultaneous removal of third molar teeth nor genioplasty was found to be a risk factor for SSI. For literature comparison purposes, there is a clear need for the international guidelines defining SSI to be used.     

Are hand biomechanics affected following radial forearm flap harvest? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Donor site morbidity following radial forearm flap (RFF) harvest remains a controversial issue. The aim of this meta-analysis was to answer the question “Are the range of wrist movements (range of motion, ROM) and hand strength affected after RFF harvesting?” The PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library electronic databases were systematically searched (to December 2019). Self-controlled studies evaluating hand biomechanics after RFF harvest were included. Weighted mean differences with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using the random-effects model. The outcome variables were ROM, forearm movements, grip, and pinch strengths. Thirteen studies involving a total of 335 patients were included. With the exception of grip strength and supination, which showed statistically significant reductions of about 2.40 kg and 2.86° (P < 0.05), all other ROM, forearm movements, and pinch strengths showed an insignificant difference when the operated hand was compared to the non-operated hand (P > 0.05). Regression analysis showed that the method of donor site closure and size of the donor site defect had an insignificant impact on hand biomechanics. This study confirms the lack of discernible biomechanical morbidity after RFF transfer. The minimal reduction in hand biomechanics after RFF is considered to be clinically negligible.     

Social support is linked to mental health,quality of life,and motor function in multiple sclerosis

Journal of Neurology - To investigate associations of social support to psychological well-being, cognition, and motor functioning in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). Secondarily, we were...