The role of hyperbaric oxygen therapy in ischaemic diabetic lower extremity ulcers: A double-blind randomised-controlled trial

AbstractObjective: ischaemic lower-extremity ulcers in the diabetic population are a source of major concern because of the associated high risk of limb-threatening complications. The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of hyperbaric oxygen in the management of these ulcers. Method: eighteen diabetic patients with ischaemic, non-healing lower-extremity ulcers were recruited in a double-blind study. Patients were randomly assigned either to receive 100% oxygen (treatment group) or air (control group), at 2.4 atmospheres of absolute pressure for 90 min daily (total of 30 treatments). Results: healing with complete epithelialisation was achieved in five out of eight ulcers in the treatment group compared to one out of eight ulcers in the control group. The median decrease of the wound areas in the treatment group was 100% and in the control group was 52% (p = 0.027). Cost-effectiveness analysis has shown that despite the extra cost involved in using hyperbaric oxygen, there was a potential saving in the total cost of treatment for each patient during the study. Conclusion: hyperbaric oxygen enhanced the healing of ischaemic, non-healing diabetic leg ulcers and may be used as a valuable adjunct to conventional therapy when reconstructive surgery is not possible.Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 25, 513-518 (2003

The Future of Origin of Life Research: Bridging Decades-Old Divisions.

Research on the origin of life is highly heterogeneous. After a peculiar historical development, it still includes strongly opposed views which potentially hinder progress. In the 1st Interdisciplinary Origin of Life Meeting, early-career researchers gathered to explore the commonalities between theories and approaches, critical divergence points, and expectations for the future. We find that even though classical approaches and theories-e.g. bottom-up and top-down, RNA world vs. metabolism-first-have been prevalent in origin of life research, they are ceasing to be mutually exclusive and they can and should feed integrating approaches. Here we focus on pressing questions and recent developments that bridge the classical disciplines and approaches, and highlight expectations for future endeavours in origin of life research

An evaluation of POSSUM and P-POSSUM scoring in predicting post-operative mortality in a level 1 critical care setting

Background POSSUM and P-POSSUM are used in the assessment of outcomes in surgical patients. Neither scoring systems’ accuracy has been established where a level 1 critical care facility (level 1 care ward) is available for perioperative care. We compared POSSUM and P-POSSUM predicted with observed mortality on a level 1 care ward. Methods A prospective, observational study was performed between May 2000 and June 2008. POSSUM and P-POSSUM scores were calculated for all postoperative patients who were admitted to the level 1 care ward. Data for post-operative mortality were obtained from hospital records for 2552 episodes of patient care. Observed vs expected mortality was compared using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and the goodness of fit assessed using the Hosmer-Lemeshow equation. Results ROC curves show good discriminative ability between survivors and non-survivors for POSSUM and P-POSSUM. Physiological score had far higher discrimination than operative score. Both models showed poor calibration and poor goodness of fit (Hosmer-Lemeshow). Observed to expected (O:E) mortality ratio for POSSUM and P-POSSUM indicated significantly fewer than expected deaths in all deciles of risk. Conclusions Our data suggest a 30-60% reduction in O:E mortality. We suggest that the use of POSSUM models to predict mortality in patients admitted to level 1 care ward is inappropriate or that a recalibration of POSSUM is required to make it useful in a level 1 care ward setting

Documenting the Recovery of Vascular Services in European Centres Following the Initial COVID-19 Pandemic Peak: Results from a Multicentre Collaborative Study

Objective: To document the recovery of vascular services in Europe following the first COVID-19 pandemic peak. Methods: An online structured vascular service survey with repeated data entry between 23 March and 9 August 2020 was carried out. Unit level data were collected using repeated questionnaires addressing modifications to vascular services during the first peak (March – May 2020, “period 1”), and then again between May and June (“period 2”) and June and July 2020 (“period 3”). The duration of each period was similar. From 2 June, as reductions in cases began to be reported, centres were first asked if they were in a region still affected by rising cases, or if they had passed the peak of the first wave. These centres were asked additional questions about adaptations made to their standard pathways to permit elective surgery to resume. Results: The impact of the pandemic continued to be felt well after countries’ first peak was thought to have passed in 2020. Aneurysm screening had not returned to normal in 21.7% of centres. Carotid surgery was still offered on a case by case basis in 33.8% of centres, and only 52.9% of centres had returned to their normal aneurysm threshold for surgery. Half of centres (49.4%) believed their management of lower limb ischaemia continued to be negatively affected by the pandemic. Reduced operating theatre capacity continued in 45.5% of centres. Twenty per cent of responding centres documented a backlog of at least 20 aortic repairs. At least one negative swab and 14 days of isolation were the most common strategies used for permitting safe elective surgery to recommence. Conclusion: Centres reported a broad return of services approaching pre-pandemic “normal” by July 2020. Many introduced protocols to manage peri-operative COVID-19 risk. Backlogs in cases were reported for all major vascular surgeries