Twenty-four adrenocortical tumors were surgically removed from 21 dogs. Histopathological examination confirmed 18 carcinomas and six adenomas. Four dogs died in the perioperative period. Fifteen of the 17 dogs that survived the perioperative period had long-term resolution of their clinical signs. Two dogs with incompletely resected tumors were treated with mitotane to control their clinical signs. Overall median Kaplan-Meier life-table survival for dogs with carcinomas was 778 days (range, one to 1,593 days). Median survival for dogs with adenomas was not reached (range, 11 to 730 days). Histopathological diagnosis, histopathological cellular features, age of the dog, and tumor size were not prognostic of outcome.

No abstract

ObjectiveTo review the management of temporal bone fractures at a major trauma centre and introduce an evidence-based protocol.MethodsA review of reports of head computed tomography performed for trauma from January 2012 to July 2018 was conducted. Recorded data fields included: mode of trauma, patient age, associated intracranial injury, mortality, temporal bone fracture pattern, symptoms and intervention.ResultsOf 815 temporal bone fracture cases, records for 165 patients met the inclusion criteria; detailed analysis was performed on the records of these patients.ConclusionTemporal bone fractures represent high-energy trauma. Initial management focuses on stabilisation of the patient and treatment of associated intracranial injury. Acute ENT intervention is directed towards the management of facial palsy and cerebrospinal fluid leak, and often requires multidisciplinary team input. The role of nerve conduction assessment for immediate facial palsy is variable across the UK. The administration of high-dose steroids in patients with temporal bone fracture and intracranial injury is not advised. A robust evidence-based approach is introduced for the management of significant ENT complications associated with temporal bone fractures.

We aimed to assess effectiveness of simulation for teaching medical students critical care medicine and to assess which simulation methods were most useful. We searched AMED, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Education Resources Information Centre, British Education Index, Australian Education Index, and bibliographies and citations, in July 2013. Randomized controlled trials comparing effectiveness of simulation with another educational intervention, or no teaching, for teaching medical students critical care medicine were included. Assessments for inclusion, quality, and data extraction were duplicated and results were synthesized using meta-analysis.We included 22 randomized control trials (n = 1325). Fifteen studies comparing simulation with other teaching found simulation to be more effective [standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.84; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.43 to 1.24; P < 0.001; I = 89%]. High-fidelity simulation was more effective than low-fidelity simulation, and subgrouping supported high-fidelity simulation being more effective than other methods. Simulation improved skill acquisition (SMD = 1.01; 95% CI = 0.49 to 1.53) but was no better than other teaching in knowledge acquisition (SMD = 0.41; 95% CI = -0.09 to 0.91).