Combined cervicosternotomy and cervicotomy for true retrosternal goiters : a surgical cohort study

Objective Intrathoracic goiters are a heterogeneous group characterized by limited or extensive substernal extension. Whereas the former can be treated through cervicotomy, the latter sometimes requires a cervicosternotomy. Whether cervicosternotomy leads to more morbidity remains unclear. This study aimed to compare intra- and postoperative morbidity in patients treated by cervicotomy or cervicosternotomy for intrathoracic goiters and standard thyroidectomy. Methods In a prospectively gathered cohort undergoing thyroid surgery (2010-2019) intra- and postoperative morbidity of cervicotomy (N = 80) and cervicosternotomy (N = 15) for intrathoracic goiters was compared to each other and to a 'standard' thyroidectomy (N = 1500). Results An intrathoracic extension prior to surgery was found in 95 (6%) of all thyroidectomies. Eighty patients (84%) were operated by cervicotomy and 15 (16%) by cervicosternotomy. The risk of temporary recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy was much higher in the cervicosternotomy group (21%) compared to cervicotomy (4%) and standard thyroidectomy (3%). The risk of temporary hypocalcemia after cervicotomy (28%) was comparable to a standard thyroidectomy (32%) but higher after cervicosternotomy (20%). No cases of permanent hypocalcemia or laryngeal nerve palsy were observed in both groups with substernal extension. The need for surgical reintervention was significantly higher in the cervicotomy group (6%) compared to cervicosternotomy (0%) and standard thyroidectomy (3%). Conclusion In patients undergoing thyroid surgery for an intrathoracic goiter, cervicosternotomy was associated with more temporary laryngeal nerve palsy, but none of the interventions resulted in higher risks of permanent nerve damage, permanent hypocalcemia, or reintervention for bleeding. Reintervention was even more common after cervicotomy compared to cervicosternotomy

Clinical use of HIV integrase inhibitors : a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Optimal regimen choice of antiretroviral therapy is essential to achieve long-term clinical success. Integrase inhibitors have swiftly been adopted as part of current antiretroviral regimens. The purpose of this study was to review the evidence for integrase inhibitor use in clinical settings. Methods: MEDLINE and Web-of-Science were screened from April 2006 until November 2012, as were hand-searched scientific meeting proceedings. Multiple reviewers independently screened 1323 citations in duplicate to identify randomized controlled trials, nonrandomized controlled trials and cohort studies on integrase inhibitor use in clinical practice. Independent, duplicate data extraction and quality assessment were conducted. Results: 48 unique studies were included on the use of integrase inhibitors in antiretroviral therapy-naive patients and treatment-experienced patients with either virological failure or switching to integrase inhibitors while virologically suppressed. On the selected studies with comparable outcome measures and indication (n = 16), a meta-analysis was performed based on modified intention-to-treat (mITT), on-treatment (OT) and as-treated (AT) virological outcome data. In therapy-naive patients, favorable odds ratios (OR) for integrase inhibitor-based regimens were observed, (mITT OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.59-0.86). However, integrase inhibitors combined with protease inhibitors only did not result in a significant better virological outcome. Evidence further supported integrase inhibitor use following virological failure (mITT OR 0.27; 95% CI 0.11-0.66), but switching to integrase inhibitors from a high genetic barrier drug during successful treatment was not supported (mITT OR 1.43; 95% CI 0.89-2.31). Integrase inhibitor-based regimens result in similar immunological responses compared to other regimens. A low genetic barrier to drug-resistance development was observed for raltegravir and elvitegravir, but not for dolutegravir. Conclusion: In first-line therapy, integrase inhibitors are superior to other regimens. Integrase inhibitor use after virological failure is supported as well by the meta-analysis. Careful use is however warranted when replacing a high genetic barrier drug in treatment-experienced patients switching successful treatment

Application of Flexible Bronchoscopy in Inhalation Lung Injury

Background: As acute inhalational injury is an uncommon presentation to most institutions, a standard approach to its assessment and management, especially using flexible bronchoscopy, has not received significant attention. Methods: The objective of this study is to evaluate the value of using flexible bronchoscopy as part of the evaluation and management of patients with inhalational lung injury. Twenty-three cases of inhalational lung injury were treated in our three hospitals after a fire in a residential building. The twenty cases that underwent bronchoscopy as part of their management are included in this analysis. After admission, the first bronchoscopy was conducted within 18-72 hours post inhalational injury. G2-level patients were reexamined 24 hours after the first bronchoscopy, while G1-level patients were reexamined 72 hours later. Subsequently, all patients were re-examined every 2-3 days until recovered or until only tunica mucosa bronchi congestion was identified by bronchoscopy. Results: Twenty patients had airway injury diagnosed by bronchoscopy including burns to the larynx and glottis or large airways. Bronchoscopic classification of the inhalation injury was performed, identifying 12 cases of grade G1 changes and 8 cases of grade G2. The airway injury in the 12 cases of grade G1 patients demonstrated recovery in 2-8 days, in the airway injury of the 8 cases of grade G2 patients had a prolonged recovery with airway injury improving in 6-21 days averaged. The difference in recovery time between the two groups was significant (P Conclusions: The use of flexible bronchoscopy has great value in the diagnosis of inhalational injury without any complications. Its use should be incorporated into clinical practice

Rasch analysis of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) in burn scars

The Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) is a questionnaire that was developed to assess scar quality. It consists of two separate six-item scales (Observer Scale and Patient Scale), both of which are scored on a 10-point rating scale. After many years of experience with this scale in burn scar assessment, it is appropriate to examine its psychometric properties using Rasch analysis. Cross-sectional data collection from seven clinical trials resulted in a data set of 1,629 observer scores and 1,427 patient scores of burn scars. We examined the person-item map, item fit statistics, reliability, response category ordering, and dimensionality of the POSAS. The POSAS showed an adequate fit to the Rasch model, except for the item surface area. Person reliability of the Observer Scale and Patient Scale was 0.82 and 0.77, respectively. Dimensionality analysis revealed that the unexplained variance by the first contrast of both scales was 1.7 units. Spearman correlation between the Observer Scale Rasch measure and the overall opinion of the clinician was 0.75. The Rasch model demonstrated that the POSAS is a reliable and valid scale that measures the single-construct scar qualit

Year in review in Intensive Care Medicine 2010: I. Acute renal failure, outcome, risk assessment and ICU performance, sepsis, neuro intensive care and experimentals

SCOPUS: re.jinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe