Multi-Techniques for Iodine Determination and Dose Uniformity Assays in Iodized Mineral Dietary Supplements

The determination of iodine in iodized mineral dietary supplements is considered a challenge, especially in view of the variety in the sample composition and the analyte concentration. Thus, in this work, microwave-induced combustion (MIC) was combined with ion chromatography (IC) and ion-selective electrode potentiometry (ISE) for iodine determination and dose uniformity assays in mineral dietary supplements. Sample masses up to 800 mg were efficiently digested and only a diluted alkaline solution (200 mmol L-1 NH4OH) was necessary to absorb the analyte for further determination step. The final digest was fully compatible with multi-technique detection usually available in routine analysis laboratories. Recoveries ranging from 94% to 106% was achieved and relative standard deviations for repeatability and intermediate precision were always lower than 8%. Limits of quantification were 4 µg g-1 and 10 µg g-1, respectively, by using IC and ISE. The analytical method was applied for iodine determination in mineral dietary supplements from four brands with different iodine dosages (from 100 to 1250 μg g-1, according to the manufacturers) and for uniformity assay evaluation using individual tablets/capsules of mineral dietary supplements. Non-compliance regarding label information for some samples was reported, drawing the attention of supervisory institutions. The analytical strategies presented in the present study can be successfully used in routine analysis of the quality control of mineral dietary supplements.</jats:p

Preoperative cut-off values for body mass index deny patients clinically significant improvements in patient-reported outcomes after total hip arthroplasty

Aims Thresholds for operative eligibility based on body mass index (BMI) alone may restrict patient access to the benefits of arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relationship between BMI and improvements in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and to determine how many patients would have been denied improvements in PROMs if BMI cut-offs were to be implemented. Methods A prospective cohort of 3,449 primary total hip arthroplasties (THAs) performed between 2015 and 2018 were analyzed. The following one-year PROMs were evaluated: hip injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (HOOS) pain, HOOS Physical Function Shortform (PS), University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) activity, Veterans Rand-12 Physical Component Score (VR-12 PCS), and VR-12 Mental Component Score (VR-12 MCS). Positive predictive values for failure to improve and the number of patients denied surgery in order to avoid a failed improvement were calculated for each PROM at different BMI cut-offs. Results There was a trend to improved outcomes in terms of pain and function improvements with higher BMI. Patients with BMI ≥ 40 kg/m2 had median (Q1, Q3) HOOS pain improvements of 58 points (interquartile range (IQR) 41 to 70) and those with BMI 35 to 40 kg/m2 had median improvements of 55 (IQR 40 to 68). With a BMI cut-off of 30 kg/m2, 21 patients would have been denied a meaningful improvement in HOOS pain score in order to avoid one failed improvement. At a 35 kg/m2 cut-off, 18 patients would be denied improvement, at a 40 kg/m2 cut-off 21 patients would be denied improvement, and at a 45 kg/m2 cut-off 21 patients would be denied improvement. Similar findings were observed for HOOS-PS, UCLA, and VR-12 scores. Conclusion Patients with higher BMIs show greater improvements in PROMs. Using BMI alone to determine eligibility criteria did not improve the rate of clinically meaningful improvements. BMI thresholds prevent patients who may benefit the most from surgery from undergoing THA. Surgeons should consider PROMs improvements in determining eligibility for THA while balancing traditional metrics of preoperative risk stratification. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(6):683–692. </jats:sec

Do patient-reported outcome measures improve after aseptic revision total hip arthroplasty?

Background: The purpose of this study was to determine patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) changes in: (1) pain, function and global health; and (2) predictors of PROMs in patients undergoing aseptic revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) using a multilevel model with patients nested within surgeon. Methods: A prospective cohort of 216 patients with baseline and 1-year PROMs who underwent aseptic rTHA between January 2016 and December 2017 were analysed. The most common indication for rTHA was aseptic loosening, instability, and implant failure. The PROMs included in this study were HOOS Pain and HOOS Physical Function Short-form (PS), Veterans RAND-12 Physical Component Score (VR-12 PCS), and VR-12 Mental Component Score (MCS). Multivariable linear regression models were constructed for predicting 1-year PROMs. Results: Mean 1-year PROMs improvement for aseptic revisions were 30.4 points for HOOS Pain and 22.1 points for HOOS PS. Predictors of better pain relief were patients with higher baseline pain scores. Predictors of better 1-year function were patients with higher baseline function and patients with a posterolateral hip surgical approach during revision. Although VR-12 PCS scores had an overall improvement, nearly 50% of patients saw no improvement or had worse physical component scores. Only 30.7% of patients reported improvements in VR-12 MCS. Conclusions: Overall, patients undergoing aseptic rTHA improved in pain and function PROMs at 1 year. Although global health assessment improved overall, nearly half of aseptic rTHA patients reported no change in physical/mental health status. The associations highlighted in this study can help guide the shared decision-making process by setting expectations before aseptic revision THA. </jats:sec

No clinically meaningful difference in 1-year patient-reported outcomes among major approaches for primary total hip arthroplasty

Background: Debate continues around the most effective surgical approach for primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). This study’s purpose was to compare 1-year patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of patients who underwent direct anterior (DA), transgluteal anterolateral (AL)/direct lateral (DL), and posterolateral (PL) approaches. Methods: A prospective consecutive series of primary THA for osteoarthritis ( n = 2390) were performed at 5 sites within a single institution with standardised care pathways (20 surgeons). Patients were categorised by approach: DA ( n = 913; 38%), AL/DL ( n = 505; 21%), or PL ( n = 972; 41%). Primary outcomes were pain, function, and activity assessed by 1-year postoperative PROMs. Multivariable regression modeling was used to control for differences among the groups. Wald tests were performed to test the significance of select patient factors and simultaneous 95% confidence intervals were constructed. Results: At 1-year postoperative, PROMs were successfully collected from 1842 (77.1%) patients. Approach was a statistically significant factor for 1-year HOOS pain ( p = 0.002). Approach was not a significant factor for 1-year HOOS-PS ( p = 0.16) or 1-year UCLA activity ( p = 0.382). Pairwise comparisons showed no significant difference in 1-year HOOS pain scores between DA and PL approach ( p  &gt; 0.05). AL/DL approach had lower (worse) pain scores than DA or PL approaches with differences in adjusted median score of 3.47 and 2.43, respectively ( p  &lt; 0.05). Conclusions: Patients receiving the AL/DL approach had a small statistical difference in pain scores at 1 year, but no clinically meaningful differences in pain, activity, or function exist at 1-year postoperative. </jats:sec