Hand surgery for Multicentric Reticulohistiocytosis: A new avenue of treatment and review of the literature

AbstractINTRODUCTIONMulticentric Reticulohistiocytosis (MRH) is a rare non-Langerhans cell histiocytosis characterised by destructive polyarthritis and violaceous skin papules.PRESENTATION OF CASEIn 2010, a 70-year-old woman with Palindromic Rheumatism was diagnosed with MRH. Within a few months, she developed ankylosis of the small joints of both hands which resulted in severe fixed flexion deformities of the fingers and thumbs. The joint disease failed to respond to medical therapies and the palmar skin of her left hand was becoming increasingly macerated. Therefore, she elected to undergo arthrodesis of the metacarpophalangeal joints to allow hand hygiene.DISCUSSIONTo-date, this is the first report of a surgical intervention for this rare condition and represents a novel avenue of potential therapy. Medical therapies for MRH are usually ineffective in preventing the debilitating small joint disease which often develops and there is on-going research into newer agents and alternative surgical techniques.CONCLUSIONOnce medical therapies are exhausted, clinicians should consider the input of Hand Surgeons in managing the inevitable and mutilating joint disease of this rare condition

Mortality and pulmonary complications in patients undergoing surgery with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection: an international cohort study

Background: The impact of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) on postoperative recovery needs to be understood to inform clinical decision making during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. This study reports 30-day mortality and pulmonary complication rates in patients with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods: This international, multicentre, cohort study at 235 hospitals in 24 countries included all patients undergoing surgery who had SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed within 7 days before or 30 days after surgery. The primary outcome measure was 30-day postoperative mortality and was assessed in all enrolled patients. The main secondary outcome measure was pulmonary complications, defined as pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, or unexpected postoperative ventilation. Findings: This analysis includes 1128 patients who had surgery between Jan 1 and March 31, 2020, of whom 835 (74·0%) had emergency surgery and 280 (24·8%) had elective surgery. SARS-CoV-2 infection was confirmed preoperatively in 294 (26·1%) patients. 30-day mortality was 23·8% (268 of 1128). Pulmonary complications occurred in 577 (51·2%) of 1128 patients; 30-day mortality in these patients was 38·0% (219 of 577), accounting for 81·7% (219 of 268) of all deaths. In adjusted analyses, 30-day mortality was associated with male sex (odds ratio 1·75 [95% CI 1·28–2·40], p\textless0·0001), age 70 years or older versus younger than 70 years (2·30 [1·65–3·22], p\textless0·0001), American Society of Anesthesiologists grades 3–5 versus grades 1–2 (2·35 [1·57–3·53], p\textless0·0001), malignant versus benign or obstetric diagnosis (1·55 [1·01–2·39], p=0·046), emergency versus elective surgery (1·67 [1·06–2·63], p=0·026), and major versus minor surgery (1·52 [1·01–2·31], p=0·047). Interpretation: Postoperative pulmonary complications occur in half of patients with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection and are associated with high mortality. Thresholds for surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic should be higher than during normal practice, particularly in men aged 70 years and older. Consideration should be given for postponing non-urgent procedures and promoting non-operative treatment to delay or avoid the need for surgery. Funding: National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, NIHR Academy, Sarcoma UK, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research

Chlorhexidine versus povidone–iodine skin antisepsis before upper limb surgery (CIPHUR) : an international multicentre prospective cohort study

Introduction Surgical site infection (SSI) is the most common and costly complication of surgery. International guidelines recommend topical alcoholic chlorhexidine (CHX) before surgery. However, upper limb surgeons continue to use other antiseptics, citing a lack of applicable evidence, and concerns related to open wounds and tourniquets. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of different topical antiseptics before upper limb surgery. Methods This international multicentre prospective cohort study recruited consecutive adults and children who underwent surgery distal to the shoulder joint. The intervention was use of CHX or povidone–iodine (PVI) antiseptics in either aqueous or alcoholic form. The primary outcome was SSI within 90 days. Mixed-effects time-to-event models were used to estimate the risk (hazard ratio (HR)) of SSI for patients undergoing elective and emergency upper limb surgery. Results A total of 2454 patients were included. The overall risk of SSI was 3.5 per cent. For elective upper limb surgery (1018 patients), alcoholic CHX appeared to be the most effective antiseptic, reducing the risk of SSI by 70 per cent (adjusted HR 0.30, 95 per cent c.i. 0.11 to 0.84), when compared with aqueous PVI. Concerning emergency upper limb surgery (1436 patients), aqueous PVI appeared to be the least effective antiseptic for preventing SSI; however, there was uncertainty in the estimates. No adverse events were reported. Conclusion The findings align with the global evidence base and international guidance, suggesting that alcoholic CHX should be used for skin antisepsis before clean (elective upper limb) surgery. For emergency (contaminated or dirty) upper limb surgery, the findings of this study were unclear and contradict the available evidence, concluding that further research is necessary

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

The Comparative Efficacy of Chlorhexidine Gluconate and Povidone-iodine Antiseptics for the Prevention of Infection in Clean Surgery: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE There is uncertainty around preoperative skin antisepsis in clean surgery. Network meta-analysis provides more precise estimates than standard pairwise meta-analysis and can rank interventions by efficacy, to better inform clinical decisions. BACKGROUND Infection is the most common and costly complication of surgery. The relative efficacy of CHG and PVI based skin antiseptics in clean surgery remains unclear. METHODS We searched for randomized or nonrandomized studies comparing the effect of different preparations of CHG and PVI on the dichotomous outcome of surgical site infection. We included studies of adults undergoing clean surgery. We excluded studies concerning indwelling vascular catheters, blood sampling, combination antiseptics or sequential applications of different antiseptics. We performed a network meta-analysis to estimate the relative efficacy of interventions using relative risks (RR). RESULTS We included 17 studies comparing 5 antiseptics in 14,593 individuals. The overall rate of surgical site infection was 3%. Alcoholic CHG 4%-5% was ranked as the most effective antiseptic as it halved the risk of surgical site infection when compared to aqueous PVI [RR 0.49 (95% confidence interval 0.24, 1.02)] and also to alcoholic PVI, although uncertainty was larger [RR 0.51 (95% confidence interval 0.21, 1.27)]. Adverse events related to antiseptic application were only observed with patients exposed to PVI. CONCLUSIONS Alcoholic formulations of 4%-5% CHG seem to be safe and twice as effective as PVI (alcoholic or aqueous solutions) in preventing infection after clean surgery in adults. Our findings concur with the literature on contaminated and clean-contaminated surgery, and endorse guidelines worldwide which advocate the use of alcoholic CHG for preoperative skin antisepsis. REGISTRATION PROSPERO ID CRD42018113001

Intraoperative esophageal Doppler hemodynamic monitoring in free perforator flap surgery

Goal-directed fluid therapy optimizes cardiac output and flap perfusion during anesthesia. Intraoperative esophageal Doppler (ED) monitoring has been reported as more accurate and reliable, demonstrating improved surgical outcomes compared with central venous pressure and arterial catheter monitoring. A prospective study of patients undergoing free perforator (deep inferior epigastric artery perforator/anterolateral thigh) flap surgery with intraoperative ED monitoring (51 patients) or central venous pressure monitoring (53 patients) was undertaken. Fluid input included crystalloids, colloids, or blood products. Fluid output included urine, blood, or suctioned fluid. Postoperative fluid balance was calculated as fluid input - output. Fluid input between groups was not different. Fluid output was greater in the ED group (P = 0.008). The ED group showed less fluid balance (P = 0.023), less anesthetic time (P = 0.001), less hospital stay (mean 1.9 days; P = 0.147), less monitoring and flap complications (P = 0.062). ED monitoring demonstrated no monitoring complications, provides a favorable postoperative fluid balance, and may reduce flap complications and hospital stay

The increased risk of adverse outcomes in bilateral deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap breast reconstruction compared to unilateral reconstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background The rate of bilateral mastectomy and bilateral breast reconstruction is increasing. The DIEP flap is an ideal method of breast reconstruction. The difference in risk of adverse outcomes between unilateral and bilateral DIEP flap breast reconstruction is unclear. The aim of this review is to investigate this relationship. Methods Authors searched Ovid EMBASE and MEDLINE from database inception to March 2012, for reports of DIEP flap breast reconstruction studies. After screening, data were extracted on flap-related, donor-site and systemic adverse events. Descriptive statistics were generated for all pooled data. We performed meta-analysis of direct comparisons to generate relative risk (RR) ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using a random-effects model. Results Overall, 17 case-series of 2398 women were included. Compared with unilateral DIEP flap breast reconstruction, bilateral reconstruction was associated with a significantly higher risk of total flap failure (RR 3.31 [95% CI 1.50-7.28]; p = 0.003) and breast seroma (RR 7.15 [95% CI 1.21-42.36]; p = 0.03). Differences between other outcomes were non-significant, although descriptive analysis appeared to favour unilateral reconstruction. Conclusions The current literature related to DIEP flap breast reconstruction appears to be of low quality. However, this is the first systematic review confirming that bilateral DIEP flap breast reconstruction is associated with a significantly higher risk of total flap failure compared to unilateral DIEP flap breast reconstruction. This review will allow clinicians to better inform patients of the risks of adverse outcomes in DIEP flap breast reconstruction. It also highlights the need for higher quality research in this area.