Search

Purpose: We sought to assess clinical, radiological, and functional outcomes following treatment of extra-articular malunions of the distal radius using a multiplanar z-corrective osteotomy., Methods: Fifteen patients with extra-articular distal radius malunions (13 dorsal and 2 volar) underwent z-corrective osteotomy and volar plate fixation without bone grafting. Correction and maintenance of each deformity was evaluated in terms of various radiographic indices (radial height; volar and radial tilt); osteotomy union; pain (visual analog scale); grip strength; range of motion; Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scores; and Mayo wrist scores., Results: The mean follow-up was 16.4 months. The mean radial height was corrected from -1.3 mm to 4.9 mm. The mean ulnar variance improved from 4.3 mm to -0.4 mm. The sagittal radial tilt and radial inclination were restored from a mean of -17.9° (dorsal) to 3.3° (volar) and from 12.0° to 17.2°, respectively. The Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand and Mayo wrist scores improved from means of 36 and 56 preoperatively to 24.8 and 73.3, respectively, at 6 months and further to 20.6 and 77.6, respectively, at the last follow-up. There were no nonunions or tendon-related problems. The mean pain score decreased from 4.1 preoperatively to 1.0 at 6 months and 0.8 at the last follow-up. The mean grip strength improved from 5.6 kg preoperatively to 15.6 kg at 6 months and 19.7 kg at the last follow-up. There was a statistically significant improvement in range of motion at the wrist., Conclusions: The z-osteotomy provides correction of deformity in all 3 planes, along with restoration of radial height. It also maintains a broad area of bone contact between the 2 osteotomized bone fragments, facilitating bony union and eliminating the need for bone grafting., Type of Study/level of Evidence: Therapeutic IV., (Copyright © 2022 American Society for Surgery of the Hand. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Heavy cannabis use is known to have an adverse impact on cardiovascular and cerebrovascular outcomes in the general population and in patients presenting for surgery. However, there have been no studies that have focused on patients undergoing vascular surgical procedures. The objective of this study was to determine the perioperative risk of cannabis use disorder (CUD), primarily cardiovascular risk, in perioperative vascular surgery patients., Methods: Using the National Inpatient Sample from 2006 to 2015, we conducted a retrospective cohort study involving those undergoing one of six elective and emergent vascular surgical procedures (carotid endarterectomy [CEA], infrainguinal bypasses, open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, aortobifemoral bypass, endovascular aortic aneurysm repair, or peripheral arterial endovascular procedures). Patients with CUD identified by the International Classification of Diseases, 9th edition, were matched with patients without CUD in a 1:1 ratio using propensity scores. The primary outcome was perioperative myocardial infarction (MI). Secondary outcomes include stroke, sepsis, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolus, acute kidney injury requiring dialysis, respiratory failure, in-hospital mortality, total cost, and length of stay., Results: We identified a total cohort of 510,007 patients. Over the study period, the recorded prevalence of CUD increased from 1.3/1000 to 10.3/1000 admissions (P < .001). After propensity score matching the cohort consisted of 4684 patients. Those with CUD had a higher incidence of perioperative MI (3.3% vs 2.1%; odds ratio [OR], 1.56; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09-2.24; P = .016) and perioperative stroke (5.5% vs 3.5%; OR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.20-2.12; P = .0013) than patients without CUD. In a sensitivity analysis, where the risk was evaluated separately by type of procedure, the higher incidence of perioperative stroke was primarily seen among those undergoing CEA. Patients with CUD had a lower incidence of sepsis (3.3% vs 5.1%; OR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.47-0.85; P = .0024). We obtained similar results in a sensitivity analysis that included all patients in the complete unmatched cohort and adjusted for confounding using logistic regression models accounting for the survey design, although the findings of sepsis and stroke failed to reach statistical significance after correcting for multiple testing (MI P = .001; stroke P = .031; sepsis P = .009)., Conclusions: CUD was associated with a significantly higher incidence of perioperative MI in vascular surgery patients. Those with CUD had a greater incidence of diagnosis of acute perioperative stroke when undergoing CEA. Owing to limitations in administrative data, it is unclear if this represents a true effect or selection bias. These findings warrant further investigation in a prospective cohort., (Copyright © 2020 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

In many countries, liberalisation of the legislation regulating the use of cannabis has outpaced rigorous scientific studies, and a growing number of patients presenting for surgery consume cannabis regularly. Research to date suggests that cannabis can impact perioperative outcomes. We present recommendations obtained using a modified Delphi method for the perioperative care of cannabis-using patients. A steering committee was formed and a review of medical literature with respect to perioperative cannabis use was conducted. This was followed by the recruitment of a panel of 17 experts on the care of cannabis-consuming patients. Panellists were blinded to each other's participation and were provided with rater forms exploring the appropriateness of specific perioperative care elements. The completed rater forms were analysed for consensus. The expert panel was then unblinded and met to discuss the rater form analyses. Draft recommendations were then created and returned to the expert panel for further comment. The draft recommendations were also sent to four independent reviewers (a surgeon, a nurse practitioner, and two patients). The collected feedback was used to finalise the recommendations. The major recommendations obtained included emphasising the importance of eliciting a history of cannabis use, quantifying it, and ensuring contact with a cannabis authoriser (if one exists). Recommendations also included the consideration of perioperative cannabis weaning, additional postoperative nausea and vomiting prophylaxis, and additional attention to monitoring and maintaining anaesthetic depth. Postoperative recommendations included anticipating increased postoperative analgesic requirements and maintaining vigilance for cannabis withdrawal syndrome., (Copyright © 2020 British Journal of Anaesthesia. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Until recently, the belief that adequate pain management was not achievable while patients remained on buprenorphine was the impetus for the perioperative discontinuation of buprenorphine. We aimed to use an expert consensus Delphi-based survey technique to 1) specify the need for perioperative guidelines in this context and 2) offer a set of recommendations for the perioperative management of these patients. The major recommendation of this practice advisory is to continue buprenorphine therapy in the perioperative period. It is rarely appropriate to reduce the buprenorphine dose irrespective of indication or formulation. If analgesia is inadequate after optimisation of adjunct analgesic therapies, we recommend initiating a full mu agonist while continuing buprenorphine at some dose. The panel believes that before operation, physicians must distinguish between buprenorphine use for chronic pain (weaning/conversion from long-term high-dose opioids) and opioid use disorder (OUD) as the primary indication for buprenorphine therapy. Patients should ideally be discharged on buprenorphine, although not necessarily at their preoperative dose. Depending on analgesic requirements, they may be discharged on a full mu agonist. Overall, long-term buprenorphine treatment retention and harm reduction must be considered during the perioperative period when OUD is a primary diagnosis. The authors recognise that inter-patient variability will require some individualisation of clinical practice advisories. Clinical practice advisories are largely based on lower classes of evidence (level 4, level 5). Further research is required in order to implement meaningful changes in practitioner behaviour for this patient group., (Copyright © 2019 British Journal of Anaesthesia. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Study Objective: To explore how pushing during labor and body mass index affect the development of postdural puncture headache in parturients who experienced dural puncture with Tuohy needles., Design: Retrospective cohort., Setting: Obstetric ward and operating rooms at a university-affiliated hospital., Patients: One hundred ninety parturients who had witnessed dural puncture with 17 or 18 gauge Tuohy needles from 1999-2014., Interventions: Patients were categorized by pushing status and body mass index (kg/m 2 ): nonobese <30, obese 30-39.99, morbidly obese 40-49.99, and super obese ≥50., Measurements: Headache, number of days of headache, maximum headache score, and epidural blood patch placement., Main Results: Compared with women who did not push, women who pushed during labor had increased risk of postdural puncture headache (odds ratio [OR], 2.1 [1.1-4.0]; P=.02), more days of headache (P=.02), and increased epidural blood patch placement (P=.02). Super obese patients were less likely to develop headache compared with nonobese (OR, 0.33 [0.13-0.85]; P=.02), obese (OR, 0.37 [0.14-0.98]; P=.045], and morbidly obese patients (OR, 0.20 [0.05-0.68]; P<.01). In a multivariate logistic regression model, lack of pushing (OR, 0.57 [0.29-1.10]; P=.096) and super obesity (OR, 0.41 [0.16-1.02]; P=.056] were no longer significantly associated with reduced risk of postdural puncture headache., Conclusions: Parturients who did not push before delivery and parturients with body mass index ≥50kg/m 2 were less likely to develop postdural puncture headache in a univariate analysis. Similar trends were demonstrated in a multivariate model, but were no longer statistically significant., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)