Importancia de algunos aspectos técnicos del procedimiento de estimulación percutánea del nervio tibial posterior en pacientes con incontinencia fecal

1. Download : Download high-res image (218KB)
2. Download : Download full-size image

     

Reproducibility (test–retest) of vestibular evoked myogenic potential

IntroductionThere is still no consensus in the literature as to the best acoustic stimulus for capturing vestibular evoked myogenic potential (VEMP). Low-frequency tone bursts are generally more effective than high-frequency, but recent studies still use clicks. Reproducibility is an important analytical parameter to observe the reliability of responses.ObjectiveTo determine the reproducibility of p13 and n23 latency and amplitude of the VEMP for stimuli with different tone-burst frequencies, and to define the best test frequency.MethodsCross-sectional cohort study. VEMP was captured in 156 ears, on the sternocleidomastoid muscle, using 100 tone-burst stimuli at frequencies of 250, 500, 1000, and 2000 Hz, and sound intensity of 95 dB nHL. Responses were replicated, that is, recorded three times on each side.ResultsNo significant difference was observed for p13 and n23 latencies of the VEMP, captured at three moments with tone-burst stimuli at 250, 500, and 1000 Hz. Only the frequency of 2000 Hz showed a difference between captures of this potential (p < 0.001). p13 and n23 amplitude analysis was also similar in the test–retest for all frequencies analyzed.Conclusionp13 and n23 latencies and amplitudes of VEMP for tone-burst stimuli at frequencies of 250, 500, and 1000 Hz are reproducible.     

经后颅窝乙状窦后入路三叉神经微血管减压术的快速康复外科护理

目的 探讨快速康复外科 （FTS）理念在经后颅窝乙状窦后入路三叉神经微血管减压术围术期患者护理中的应用效果。方法 选择2018年1月~2019年1月我院收治并行经后颅窝乙状窦后入路三叉神经微血管减压患者100例，随机分成观察组和对照组，每组50例。对照组应用常规方法进行围术期护理，观察组应用FTS理念进行围术期护理。比较两组焦虑情况、术后并发症发生率、平均住院日及平均住院费用。结果 观察组轻度焦虑多于对照组，中、重度焦虑少于对照组（P＜0.05）；观察组术后并发症发生率低于对照组[恶心呕吐（4.00% vs 16.00%）、尿路感染（4.00% vs 18.00%）、颅内感染（0 vs 8.00%）、颅内血肿（2.00% vs 14.00%）和术后应激性疼痛（16.00% vs 34.00%）]，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）；观察组平均住院日和平均住院费用均低于对照组[（9.13±1.14）d vs（12.44±0.89）d]；[（2.15±0.66）万元 vs （3.05±0.61）万元]，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。结论 应用FTS理念能缓解经后颅窝乙状窦后入路三叉神经微血管减压术患者术前紧张恐惧的心理，减少术后并发症，缩短患者住院日，降低住院费用，护理效果较好。     

Repeat resection in recurrent glioblastoma (3rGBM) Trial: A randomized care trial

BackgroundThe prognosis for patients with recurrent glioblastoma (GBM) is dismal, and the question of repeat surgery at time of recurrence is common. Re-operation in the management of these patients remains controversial, as there is no randomized evidence of benefit. An all-inclusive pragmatic care trial is needed to evaluate the role of repeat resection.Methods3rGBM is a multicenter, pragmatic, prospective, parallel-group randomized care trial, with 1:1 allocation to repeat resection or standard care with no repeat resection. To test the hypothesis that repeat resection can improve overall survival by at least 3 months (from 6 to 9 months), 250 adult patients with prior resection of pathology-proven glioblastoma for whom the attending surgeon believes repeat resection may improve quality survival will be enrolled. A surrogate measure of quality of life, the number of days outside of hospital/nursing/palliative care facility, will also be compared. Centers are invited to participate without financial compensation and without contracts. Clinicians may apply to local authorities to approve an investigator-led in-house trial, using a common protocol, web-based randomization platform, and simple standardized case report forms.DiscussionThe 3rGBM trial is a modern transparent care research framework with no additional risks, tests, or visits other than what patients would encounter in normal care. The burden of proof remains on repeat surgical management of recurrent GBM, because this management has yet to be shown beneficial. The trial is designed to help patients and surgeons manage the uncertainty regarding optimal care.Clinical Trial Registrationhttp://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT04838782.     

Case Study of Phrenic Nerve Paralysis: “I Can't Breathe!”

BackgroundThe anatomic course of the phrenic nerve runs in the fascia covering the anterior scalene muscle. Interscalene blocks are commonly performed by an anesthesiologist for shoulder surgery, such as a rotator cuff repair, total shoulder replacement, humeral fracture, or other arm surgery. Phrenic nerve palsy or paralysis is a known complication from interscalene block and is covered in multiple case reports and series in both Anesthesia and Neurosurgical literature, but only one case report in the Emergency Medicine literature.Case ReportThis case involves a 57-year-old man who had an uncomplicated arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with placement of interscalene block under care of anesthesia. He was discharged with a pain pump in place and then subsequently presented to the Emergency Department (ED) later that same day for evaluation of dyspnea. Using point-of-care ultrasound, his right diaphragm did not appear to be moving. Chest x-ray study revealed an elevated right hemidiaphragm. He was diagnosed with iatrogenic right phrenic nerve paralysis from interscalene block.Why Should an Emergency Physician Be Aware of This?Emergent diagnosis of phrenic nerve paralysis in the ED is complicated by a distressed patient and need for quick intervention. Most formal tests for this diagnosis are not immediately available to emergency physicians. Ultrasound is a rapid and reproducible, noninvasive resource with high sensitivity and specificity, making it an ideal imaging modality for the emergent evaluation of possible phrenic nerve palsy or paralysis.     

Anastomotic Recurrence of Colon Cancer—is it a Local Recurrence,a Second Primary,or a Metastatic Disease (Local Manifestation of Systemic Disease)?

The aim of this study is to review the literature to find out the exact etiology of anastomotic cancers of colon post resection and differentiate them between a recurrence, second primary, and metastatic disease (local manifestation of systemic disease). Web-based literature search was done, and datas collected. We searched PubMed for papers using the keywords colon cancer recurrence, anastomotic recurrence, and recurrent colon carcinoma. We also searched for systematic review in the same topic. In addition, we used our personal referrence archive. Anastomotic recurrences of colon are postulated to arise due to inadequate margins, tumor implantation by exfoliated cells, altered biological properties of bowel anastomosis, and missed synchronous lesions. Some tumors are unique with repeated recurrence after repeated resection. Duration after primary surgery plays a major role in differentiating recurrent and second primary lesions. Repeated recurrences after repeated resections have to be considered a manifestation of systemic disease or metastatic disease due to the virulence of the disease. A detailed analysis and study of patients with colonic anastomotic lesion are required to differentiate it between a recurrent, a second primary lesion, and a metastatic disease (local manifestation of a systemic disease). The nomenclature is significant to study the survival of these patients, as a second primary lesion will have different survival compared to that of recurrent lesions.