Search

Background: In surgery for Dupuytren disease (DD), palmar fascia specimens are routinely submitted for pathological evaluation. The purpose of this study was to determine the rate of discordant diagnosis and the value of, and costs associated with, routine pathological analysis of palmar fascia tissue extracted in surgery for clinically diagnosed DD. Methods: All pathology reports for in-house palmar fascia specimens obtained in surgery for clinically diagnosed DD (time period: January 2001 to December 2020) were retrieved from one academic institution. All specimens were classified by a hierarchical free-text string matching algorithm (HFTSMA) and searched for evidence of malignancy. The primary outcome was percentage of concordant, discrepant, and discordant diagnoses. Secondary outcomes included anatomical location and costs. The HFTSMA was used to capture the anatomical location. Costs included professional, laboratory processing, and ancillary fees based on the Ontario Schedule of Benefits. Results: The search retrieved 1323 pathology reports, with 1480 palmar fascia specimens, from 1078 individual patients. By diagnosis, 96.1% of specimens (1422/1480) were concordant (fibromatosis), 3.9% (58/1480) were discrepant (scarring/fibrosis, benign fascia/connective tissue, or other benign findings), and 0% (0/1480) were discordant. The most common location was ring finger (n = 381, 48.7%). Ancillary testing was minimal. The cost per palmar fascia specimen was estimated to be CAD $34.57. The institutional costs were approximately CAD $2558.18/year. Conclusions: Routine pathological examination of specimens in cases of clinically diagnosed DD does not yield additional clinically important findings and may not warrant their costs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The COVID-19 virus has strained the capacities of health care systems around the world. According to the World Health Organization, as of July 27, 2021, almost 195 million COVID-19 cases [...]

Objective: Review literature on facial feminization surgery (FFS) for the transgender population and identify whether heterogeneity in reported outcomes and outcome measures exists across studies, as measured by a lack of consensus, and number of outcomes and outcome measures used. Evidence Review: A search of MEDLINE and EMBASE (database inception to January 20, 2021) was performed to retrieve FFS studies. Primary outcomes included number of reported outcomes and outcome measures; secondary outcomes included clinimetric properties of outcome measures and study characteristics. Findings: In total, 15 articles were included. Sixty-nine outcomes and 12 outcome measures were identified. Of those outcome measures, zero were found to be valid, reliable, and responsive in patients who had undergone FFS. A variety of FFS interventions were studied, with the three most common interventions being: rhinoplasty ( n  = 7, 46.7%), mandibuloplasty ( n  = 7, 46.7%), and chondrolaryngoplasty ( n  = 6, 40%). Conclusion and Relevance: Heterogeneity was evident in reported outcomes and outcome measures in FFS literature and there is currently no outcome measure commonly used for this patient population.

Purpose : There is a lack of scientific consensus on the best arthroplasty implant option for proximal interphalangeal joint (PIPJ) arthritis, due to diversity in outcome reporting and measurement methods. The development of a standardized core outcome set (COS) and standard outcome measures could mitigate this issue. This study catalogs the reported outcomes and outcome measures found in PIPJ arthroplasty studies, which can be used in the first step of developing a COS. Methods : A database search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science (January 1, 2010, to March 10, 2021) was performed to retrieve studies that reported outcomes of the 3 most common primary PIPJ arthroplasty implants: silicone, pyrocarbon, and metal-polyethylene. The primary objectives of this study include reported outcomes and outcome measures. Secondary objectives include clinimetric properties of outcome measures, study design, and implant types. Results : Fifty articles met inclusion criteria. Of the included studies, 41 (82%) were case series, 8 (16%) were cohort studies, and 1 (2%) was a randomized control trial. Thirty-three unique outcomes were identified. Fifteen (46%) outcomes were clinician-reported and 26 (79%) were patient-reported. Eighteen unique outcome measures were identified. Of the outcome measures, 15 (83%) were patient-reported, 1 (6%) was clinician-reported, and 2 (11%) were reported by both patients and clinicians. Conclusions : Substantial heterogeneity was found in reported outcomes and outcome measures across studies evaluating PIPJ arthroplasty, impeding knowledge translation. The development of a COS for PIPJ arthroplasty is necessary to help compare and pool data across studies, and advance scientific knowledge., Competing Interests: The authors declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Dr Thoma may receive royalty payments for any sales of his book “Evidence-Based Medicine: A Guide to Understanding and Interpreting the Surgical Literature” published by Springer Nature., (© 2021 The Author(s).)