Off pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) in critical left mainstem stenosis—Our experience

Background Beating heart surgery has now become the commonest technique of doing Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery (CABG) in our country. It is being used even in such high risk situations like diffuse coronary disease and Critical Left Main stem Stenosis (LMCS) with good results. The aim of this study is to retrospectively review our results in Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery (OPCAB) in patients with critical left main stem stenosis. Methods This study is a retrospective analysis of the data of patients who underwent primary coronary artery bypass surgery. During the period from April 2003 to September 2005 a total of 64 patients underwent OPCAB procedure for critical LMCS. During the same period 10 patients underwent CABG on Cardio Pulmonary Bypass (CPB). The age range was 36–77yrs. The sex distribution was M: F 53∶10. Ten patients were done as emergency. 2 of them were on Intra Aortic Balloon Pump (IABP) support preoperatively. 10 patients were high risk with a Euro score of ≥5. Results Left Internal Mammary Artery (LIMA) was used in 78% of cases. Average grafts per patient was 2.96. The median ventilation time was 5.91 hrs. New IABP insertion in postoperative period was required in 1 patient. One patient was reexplored for bleeding. There was one perioperative myocardial infarction. 57% of patients did not need any blood transfusion. There was no conversion to CPB. There was no operative mortality. Inotropes were used in ten cases. Conclusions OPCAB is a safe method of revascularization in patients with critical LMCS. Preoperative IABP is useful in patients with cardiogenic shock. However, there is a place for CPB in patients needing additional procedures like Mitral Valve repair (MV repair) or Dor's procedure or when the vessels are very diffusely diseased. Those patients who are unstable despite IABP support may be managed by Beating heart On Pump (BHOP) technique.     

Uptake of iodine-123 MIBG by pheochromocytomas, paragangliomas, and neuroblastomas: a histopathological comparison

The percentage uptake of [123I]metaiodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) by tumors of the paraganglion system is compared with the number of neurosecretory granules (assessed by both light and electron microscopy) in the subsequently resected tumors in six patients. Iodine-123 MIBG was injected intravenously; the tumor uptake of [123I]MIBG varied between 0.001% and 0.14% of the injected dose per gram of tumor tissue at 22 hr. The number of neurosecretory granules in tissue sections was scored on a scale of I-III. A direct proportional correlation was found between the percentage uptake of [123I]MIBG by the tumor and the number of neurosecretory granules in the tissue sections but not with plasma or urinary catecholamines. This technique for imaging reflects the storage status of the tumor better than plasma and urinary catecholamine measurements.     

Management of the injured colon: evolving practice at an urban trauma center

The records of 239 patients surviving more than 24 hours with full-thickness intraperitoneal colonic injuries over a 7-year period were reviewed. During the first 3 years, 29% (31/106) of the patients were managed by primary repair without colostomy. In the next 4 years, almost twice as many patients, 56% (75/133), with similar colonic trauma were treated without fecal diversion (p less than 0.05). Although there was no difference in the mean Trauma Score in the patients with primary repair in the two time periods, the Injury Severity Score (mean +/- sd) in the patients without colostomy in the later periods was significantly higher (17.8 +/- 2.1 vs. 20.2 +/- 5.1) (p less than 0.001). No patient suffered because of the increased incidence of primary repairs. These patients had five abdominal abscesses and only one leak, whereas the patients with colostomy had 15 intraperitoneal abscesses. Because of the safety when primary repair is performed, more liberal use of primary colonic repair following penetrating trauma is warranted.     

Challenges in accessing multidisciplinary pain treatment facilities in Canada

PURPOSE: The objective of this survey was to examine the services offered by multidisciplinary pain treatment facilities (MPTFs) across Canada and to compare access to care at these MPTFs. METHODS: A MPTF was defined as a clinic that advertised specialized multidisciplinary services for the diagnosis and management of patients with chronic pain, having a minimum of three different health care disciplines (including at least one medical speciality) available and integrated within the facility. The search method included approaching all hospital and rehabilitation centre administrators in Canada, the Insurance Bureau of Canada, the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board or similar body in each province. Designated investigators were responsible for confirming and supplementing MPTFs from the preliminary list for each province. Administrative leads at each eligible MPTF were asked to complete a detailed questionnaire regarding their MPTF infrastructure, clinical, research, teaching and administrative activities. RESULTS: Completed survey forms were received from 102 MPTFs (response rate 85%) with 80% concentrated in major cities, and none in Prince Edward Island and the Territories. The MPTFs offer a wide variety of treatments including non-pharmacological modalities such as interventional, physical and psychological therapy. The median wait time for a first appointment in public MPTFs is six months, which is approximately 12 times longer than non-public MPTFs. Eighteen pain fellowship programs exist in Canadian MPTFs and 64% engage in some form of research activities CONCLUSION: Canadian MPTFs are unable to meet clinical demands of patients suffering from chronic pain, both in terms of regional accessibility and reasonable wait time for patients' first appointment.