Comparison Between two Surgical Techniques for Increasing Vocal Pitch by Endoscopic Shortening of the Vocal Folds

Objective: To compare two surgical techniques, the Wendler glottoplasty (GP) and its modification, the vocal fold shortening, and retrodisplacement of the anterior commissure (VFSRAC) associated with laser assisted voice adjustment (LAVA) cordotomy, used to feminize the voice of transgender women by increasing the fundamental frequency (F0). Methods: A retrospective study of 22 trans-women (20-62 years-old) was carried out. 12 of them were treated with GP and 10 with the VFSRAC+LAVA technique. They were evaluated before surgery and 6 months after surgery and the postoperative speech therapy. Laryngostroboscopy examination, F0 measurements, Transgender Woman Voice Questionnaire (TWVQ) assessment and the perceptual assessment using a visual analog scale (PA-VAS) were obtained from all patients. Results: Laryngostroboscopic findings showed normal vocal folds before surgery and a shortening of the vocal folds, due to the anterior glottic synechia, after surgery. Significant increases of F0 were found in both groups but they were higher in the VFSRAC+LAVA group (47.75Hz in GP group vs 69.70Hz in VFSRAC+LAVA group). TWVQ scores showed a significant decrease in both groups although the difference was greater in the VFSRAC+LAVA group. Similarly, PA-VAS scores lowered significantly in both groups but VFSRAC+LAVA group presented the biggest decreases. Conclusion: Both surgical techniques produce the shortening of the vocal folds through an endoscopic approach and result in voices with higher vocal pitch. Of the two techniques presented, the VFSRAC+LAVA produces better results although when compared with previous studies it seems that the LAVA technique may not significantly contribute to the postoperative results. So, the VFSRAC technique followed by postoperative speech therapy could be recommended for trans-women who wish to feminize their voice.Depto. de Inmunología, Oftalmología y ORLUnidad Docente de Inmunología, Oftalmología y ORLFac. de MedicinaFac. de Óptica y OptometríaTRUEinpres

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Abstract Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries

Contemporary use of cefazolin for MSSA infective endocarditis: analysis of a national prospective cohort

Objectives: This study aimed to assess the real use of cefazolin for methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) infective endocarditis (IE) in the Spanish National Endocarditis Database (GAMES) and to compare it with antistaphylococcal penicillin (ASP). Methods: Prospective cohort study with retrospective analysis of a cohort of MSSA IE treated with cloxacillin and/or cefazolin. Outcomes assessed were relapse; intra-hospital, overall, and endocarditis-related mortality; and adverse events. Risk of renal toxicity with each treatment was evaluated separately. Results: We included 631 IE episodes caused by MSSA treated with cloxacillin and/or cefazolin. Antibiotic treatment was cloxacillin, cefazolin, or both in 537 (85%), 57 (9%), and 37 (6%) episodes, respectively. Patients treated with cefazolin had significantly higher rates of comorbidities (median Charlson Index 7, P <0.01) and previous renal failure (57.9%, P <0.01). Patients treated with cloxacillin presented higher rates of septic shock (25%, P = 0.033) and new-onset or worsening renal failure (47.3%, P = 0.024) with significantly higher rates of in-hospital mortality (38.5%, P = 0.017). One-year IE-related mortality and rate of relapses were similar between treatment groups. None of the treatments were identified as risk or protective factors. Conclusion: Our results suggest that cefazolin is a valuable option for the treatment of MSSA IE, without differences in 1-year mortality or relapses compared with cloxacillin, and might be considered equally effective