Cervical facet joint kinematics during bilateral facet dislocation

Previous biomechanical models of cervical bilateral facet dislocation (BFD) are limited to quasi-static loading or manual ligament transection. The goal of the present study was to determine the facet joint kinematics during high-speed BFD. Dislocation was simulated using ten cervical functional spinal units with muscle force replication by frontal impact of the lower vertebra, tilted posteriorly by 42.5°. Average peak rotations and anterior sliding (displacement of upper articulating facet surface along the lower), separation and compression (displacement of upper facet away from and towards the lower), and lateral shear were determined at the anterior and posterior edges of the right and left facets and statistically compared (P < 0.05). First, peak facet separation occurred, and was significantly greater at the left posterior facet edge, as compared to the anterior edges. Next, peak flexion rotation and anterior facet sliding occurred, followed by peak facet compression. The highest average facet translation peaks were 22.0 mm for anterior sliding, 7.9 mm for separation, 9.9 mm for compression and 3.6 mm for lateral shear. The highest average rotation of 63° occurred in flexion, significantly greater than all other directions. These events occurred, on average, within 0.29 s following impact. During BFD, the main sagittal motions included facet separation, flexion rotation, anterior sliding, followed by compression, however, non-sagittal motions also existed. These motions indicated that unilateral dislocation may precede bilateral dislocation

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation network organisation and clinical outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic in greater paris, france. a multicentre cohort study

Background: In the Île-de-France region (henceforth termed Greater Paris), extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) was considered early in the COVID-19 pandemic. We report ECMO network organisation and outcomes during the first wave of the pandemic. Methods In this multicentre cohort study, we present an analysis of all adult patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe ARDS requiring ECMO who were admitted to 17 Greater Paris intensive care units between March 8 and June 3, 2020. Central regulation for ECMO indications and pooling of resources were organised for the Greater Paris intensive care units, with six mobile ECMO teams available for the region. Details of complications (including ECMO-related complications, renal replacement therapy, and pulmonary embolism), clinical outcomes, survival status at 90 days after ECMO initiation, and causes of death are reported. Multivariable analysis was used to identify pre-ECMO variables independently associated with 90-day survival after ECMO. Findings The 302 patients included who underwent ECMO had a median age of 52 years (IQR 45−58) and Simplified Acute Physiology Score-II of 40 (31−56), and 235 (78%) of whom were men. 165 (55%) were transferred after cannulation by a mobile ECMO team. Before ECMO, 285 (94%) patients were prone positioned, median driving pressure was 18 cm H2O (14−21), and median ratio of the partial pressure of arterial oxygen to the fraction of inspired oxygen was 61 mm Hg (IQR 54−70). During ECMO, 115 (43%) of 270 patients had a major bleeding event, 27 of whom had intracranial haemorrhage; 130 (43%) of 301 patients received renal replacement therapy; and 53 (18%) of 294 had a pulmonary embolism. 138 (46%) patients were alive 90 days after ECMO. The most common causes of death were multiorgan failure (53 [18%] patients) and septic shock (47 [16%] patients). Shorter time between intubation and ECMO (odds ratio 0·91 [95% CI 0·84−0·99] per day decrease), younger age (2·89 [1·41−5·93] for ≤48 years and 2·01 [1·01−3·99] for 49–56 years vs ≥57 years), lower pre-ECMO renal component of the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score (0·67, 0·55−0·83 per point increase), and treatment in centres managing at least 30 venovenous ECMO cases annually (2·98 [1·46–6·04]) were independently associated with improved 90-day survival. There was no significant difference in survival between patients who had mobile and on-site ECMO initiation. Interpretation Beyond associations with similar factors to those reported on ECMO for non-COVID-19 ARDS, 90-day survival among ECMO-assisted patients with COVID-19 was strongly associated with a centre's experience in venovenous ECMO during the previous year. Early ECMO management in centres with a high venovenous ECMO case volume should be advocated, by applying centralisation and regulation of ECMO indications, which should also help to prevent a shortage of resources

Overall survival in the OlympiA phase III trial of adjuvant olaparib in patients with germline pathogenic variants in BRCA1/2 and high-risk, early breast cancer

Background: The randomized, double-blind OlympiA trial compared 1 year of the oral poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, olaparib, to matching placebo as adjuvant therapy for patients with pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 (gBRCA1/2pv) and high-risk, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, early breast cancer (EBC). The first pre-specified interim analysis (IA) previously demonstrated statistically significant improvement in invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) and distant disease-free survival (DDFS). The olaparib group had fewer deaths than the placebo group, but the difference did not reach statistical significance for overall survival (OS). We now report the pre-specified second IA of OS with updates of IDFS, DDFS, and safety. Patients and methods: One thousand eight hundred and thirty-six patients were randomly assigned to olaparib or placebo following (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy, surgery, and radiation therapy if indicated. Endocrine therapy was given concurrently with study medication for hormone receptor-positive cancers. Statistical significance for OS at this IA required P < 0.015. Results: With a median follow-up of 3.5 years, the second IA of OS demonstrated significant improvement in the olaparib group relative to the placebo group [hazard ratio 0.68; 98.5% confidence interval (CI) 0.47-0.97; P = 0.009]. Four-year OS was 89.8% in the olaparib group and 86.4% in the placebo group (Δ 3.4%, 95% CI -0.1% to 6.8%). Four-year IDFS for the olaparib group versus placebo group was 82.7% versus 75.4% (Δ 7.3%, 95% CI 3.0% to 11.5%) and 4-year DDFS was 86.5% versus 79.1% (Δ 7.4%, 95% CI 3.6% to 11.3%), respectively. Subset analyses for OS, IDFS, and DDFS demonstrated benefit across major subgroups. No new safety signals were identified including no new cases of acute myeloid leukemia or myelodysplastic syndrome. Conclusion: With 3.5 years of median follow-up, OlympiA demonstrates statistically significant improvement in OS with adjuvant olaparib compared with placebo for gBRCA1/2pv-associated EBC and maintained improvements in the previously reported, statistically significant endpoints of IDFS and DDFS with no new safety signals