Search

Background: The present study describes the treatment of patients at a tertiary institution who experienced device failure after Cochlear Implantation (CI), as well as identifying prodromic symptoms that could assist in the timely identification and management of device failure. Study design: Retrospective database review (January 2000–May 2017). Setting: Single tertiary hospital. Methods: Factors recorded included the etiology of hearing loss; age at first and revision CI surgeries; surgical information, including operation time and approach; electrical outcomes after implantation; device implanted; symptoms of device failure; history of head trauma; and audiologic outcomes as determined by categories of auditory performance (CAP). Results: From January 2000 to May 2017, 1431 CIs were performed, with 27 (1.9%) undergoing revision surgeries due to device failure. The most common etiology of hearing loss was idiopathic (12/27), followed by cochlear hypoplasia (5/27). Mean age at initial CI was 11.8 (1–72) years, with 21 being pre-lingual and 6 being post-lingual. Of the total devices initially implanted, 80.5% were from Cochlear, 15.9% from MED-EL, and 3.5% from Advanced Bionics. The failure rates of these devices were 1.3%, 3.1%, and 10.0%, respectively. The most suggestive symptom of device failure was intermittent loss of signal. Mean CAP scores were 5.17 before reimplantation and 5.54 and 5.81 at 1- and 3-years, respectively, after reimplantation. Conclusion: The most suggestive symptom preceding device failure was intermittent loss of signal. Patients who present with this symptom should undergo electrical examination for suspected device failure. Audiologic outcomes showed continuous development despite revision surgeries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• HI did not impact short-term mortality rates within 1 year after hip fracture, the overall mortality rate was significantly higher in the hearing impairment group than in the control group. • Furthermore, hearing impairment was identified as a risk factor for subsequent hip fractures after the index hip fracture. • To reduce the risk of second hip fractures, attention should be focused on providing fall prevention education and adopting a more proactive approach, especially for patients with hearing impairment. Despite the ongoing rise in hip fractures and the adverse effects of hearing impairment (HI) on increased mortality and morbidity, research addressing the influence of HI on mortality risk or complications in patients with hip fractures remains absent. This study aimed to analyze the effects of HI on mortality and treatment outcomes among patients with hip fracture. We retrospectively collected data from consecutive patients diagnosed with hip fractures between January 2007 and March 2022 who had auditory examination records. From the initially enrolled 265 patients, data for 58 with HI and 58 without HI (control group) were extracted using a 1:1 propensity score matching. The primary outcome included comparison of mortality rates, and the secondary outcome encompassed the comparison of postoperative medical and surgical complications. The 1-year cumulative mortality rate was not significantly different between the HI and control groups, but the overall cumulative mortality rate was significantly higher in the HI than in the control group (63.0 % and 48.6, respectively; P = 0.046) in a follow-up period of up to 16 years. The HI group had a significantly higher incidence of "second hip fractures due to falls" than the control group (P = 0.016), although no differences in other medical and surgical complications were revealed. Awareness of the long-term risk of higher mortality when managing patients with hip fracture and HI is important. To reduce the risk of second hip fractures, paying more attention to fall prevention education and taking a more proactive approach, especially for those with HI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is one of undesirable situations. We tried to identify and characterize a potentially avoidable CPR in cancer patients who were hospitalized in hematology and oncology wards. Methods: A potentially avoidable CPR was determined based on chemotherapy setting, disease status and clinical situation at the time when a cardiopulmonary arrest occurred, by using a consensus-driven medical records review of two physicians. Results: One hundred thirty-seven patients among 12,437 patients hospitalized at hematology and oncology wards between March 2003 and June 2015 (1.1%) underwent a CPR. Eighty-eight patients (64.2%) were men. The majority of patients with a CPR had lung cancer (41, 29.9%), hematologic malignancy (24, 17.5%), stomach cancer (23, 16.8%) or lymphoma (20, 14.6%). A potentially avoidable CPR was identified in 51 patients (37.2%). In a multivariate analysis, advanced diseases and certain tumor types (e.g., lung cancer, lymphoma) were significant risk factors for a potentially avoidable CPR. Of patients who received a potentially avoidable CPR, 29 patients (56.9%) did not have a do-not-resuscitate documentation. A first return of spontaneous circulation rate (ROSC) and in-hospital survival rate (IHSR) were much lower in patients with a potentially avoidable CPR than those with a CPR that was not avoidable (ROSC: 39.2% vs 53.5%, P = 0.106; IHSR: 2.0% vs 12.8%, P = 0.032, respectively). Conclusions: A potentially avoidable CPR was common at hematology and oncology wards. A potentially avoidable CPR frequently occurred in advanced diseases and certain tumor types. Furthermore, cancer patients who received a potentially avoidable CPR showed the worse prognosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]