Standardisierte Kontrastmittelsonographie (CEUS) in der klinischen Akut- und Notfallmedizin sowie Intensivmedizin (CEUS-Akut)

Die Anaesthesiologie -     

Higher Preimplantation Opioid Doses Associated With Long‐Term Spinal Cord Stimulation Failure in 211 Patients With Failed Back Surgery Syndrome

ObjectiveSpinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an effective treatment in failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS). We studied the effect of preimplantation opioid use on SCS outcome and the effect of SCS on opioid use during a two-year follow-up period.Materials and methodsThe study cohort included 211 consecutive FBSS patients who underwent an SCS trial from January 1997 to March 2014. Participants were divided into groups, which were as follows: 1) SCS trial only (n = 47), 2) successful SCS (implanted and in use throughout the two-year follow-up period, n = 131), and 3) unsuccessful SCS (implanted but later explanted or revised due to inadequate pain relief, n = 29). Patients who underwent explantation for other reasons (n = 4) were excluded. Opioid purchase data from January 1995 to March 2016 were retrieved from national registries.ResultsHigher preimplantation opioid doses associated with unsuccessful SCS (ROC: AUC = 0.66, p = 0.009), with 35 morphine milligram equivalents (MME)/day as the optimal cutoff value. All opioids were discontinued in 23% of patients with successful SCS, but in none of the patients with unsuccessful SCS (p = 0.004). Strong opioids were discontinued in 39% of patients with successful SCS, but in none of the patients with unsuccessful SCS (p = 0.04). Mean opioid dose escalated from 18 ± 4 MME/day to 36 ± 6 MME/day with successful SCS and from 22 ± 8 MME/day to 82 ± 21 MME/day with unsuccessful SCS (p < 0.001).ConclusionsHigher preimplantation opioid doses were associated with SCS failure, suggesting the need for opioid tapering before implantation. With continuous SCS therapy and no explantation or revision due to inadequate pain relief, 39% of FBSS patients discontinued strong opioids, and 23% discontinued all opioids. This indicates that SCS should be considered before detrimental dose escalation.     

Überregionale Public-Health-Akteure in Deutschland – eine Bestandsaufnahme und Kategorisierung

Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz - Akteure der öffentlichen Gesundheit (Public Health) tragen wesentlich zu Gesundheitsschutz, -förderung und...     

Typische Veränderungen bei der „frozen shoulder“ in der bildgebenden MRT-Untersuchung

Die Unfallchirurgie - Zur Diagnostik von Schultergelenkerkrankungen wird routinemäßig die Magnetresonanztomographie (MRT) durchgeführt. Diese kann entsprechend der klinischen...     

Anatomical structures at risk using different approaches for sacrospinous ligament fixation

For 50 years now, sacrospinous ligament fixation (SSLF) has been used to treat pelvic organ prolapse consequent on altered integrity of the pelvic myofascial structures. It is usually performed vaginally, but it has recently been performed laparoscopically through either an anterior or a posterior approach, with the broad ligament as a landmark to differentiate the two. In the present study, these two laparoscopic approaches were assessed using Thiel-embalmed cadavers. The anterior and posterior approaches were compared in terms of the closest distance to anatomical structures at risk, including pelvic viscera, the obturator nerve, and vascular structures. The posterior approach was more often closer to the investigated vessels and the rectum. The obturator nerve and the ureter were close to both the anterior and posterior approaches. The urinary bladder was closer using the anterior approach. From an anatomical standpoint, therefore, the anterior laparoscopic approach for SSLF is more likely to cause injury to the urinary bladder, whereas the posterior approach is more prone to causing rectal and vessel injuries. This study illustrates, from a basic science perspective, the importance of combining fascia research, novel endoscopic or minimally invasive surgical exposures informed by anatomy, and contemporary trends in gynecology in order to improve patient outcomes. Clin. Anat. 33:522–529, 2020. © 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.