Summary. Background:Patients diagnosed with pulmonary embolism should be considered for treatment on an outpatient basis; however, this practise is not accepted in many centers. Objectives: Review the safety and efficacy of ambulatory management of patients with pulmonary embolism at our institution. Patients/Methods: This was a retrospective single center cohort study of consecutive patients diagnosed with idiopathic or secondary pulmonary embolism between January 2003 and January 2008 at the London Health Sciences Centre in London, Ontario, Canada. Patients were eligible for outpatient management of pulmonary embolism if they were hemodynamically stable, did not require oxygen therapy, did not require parenteral narcotics for pain management, and were not felt to be high risk for a major hemorrhage. Patients were assessed at 3 months for thrombosis recurrence and major bleeding episodes. Results: Six hundred and thirty-nine patients were included in the study, of which 314 (49.1%; 95% CI 45.2, 53.1) were managed as outpatients; among these there were three (0.95%; 95% CI, 0.25, 3) thrombotic recurrences and three hemorrhagic events. There were nine deaths (2.9%; 95% CI, 1.4, 5.6), all due to underlying cancer and all occurring after the first 7 days of treatment. Conclusions: Outpatient management of uncomplicated pulmonary embolism seems safe and effective in the absence of other indications for hospital admission.

Recent literature has raised concerns regarding the risk of adverse psychiatric events among bariatric surgery patients. However, the relationship between weight loss therapy and psychiatric outcomes is confounded by baseline psychosocial characteristics in observational studies. To understand the impact of bariatric surgery on the risk of adverse mental health outcomes, we conducted a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials that compared surgical and non‐surgical treatments and assessed mental health quality of life (QoL). We evaluated the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science PsycINFO, http://clinicaltrials.gov and Cochrane databases through 7 March 2018. Pooled standardized mean differences (SMDs) for mental health QoL scores were estimated using random effects models. Eleven randomized trials with 731 participants were included in the final analyses. Surgery was not associated with an improvement in mental health QoL from baseline as compared to non‐surgical intervention (SMD: 0.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] −0.22 to 0.25). Final mental health QoL scores were similar for surgically and non‐surgically treated patients (SMD: 0.37, 95% CI −0.07 to 0.81). Subgroup analyses assessing the effect of specific surgical interventions, and varying lengths of follow‐up did not identify a beneficial effect of bariatric surgery on mental health QoL outcomes. These results, in conjunction with the fact that individuals who choose bariatric surgery tend to have high‐risk baseline characteristics, suggest that intensive mental health follow‐up following surgery should be routinely considered.

Retinal vein occlusion is a frequent cause of visual loss for which few effective therapies are available. Anticoagulation with low molecular weight heparin might be of value in its treatment. We conducted a systematic review and meta analysis of randomized trials evaluating the effect of low molecular weight heparin in patients with retinal vein occlusion. Data sources included MEDLINE, EMBASE, HealthSTAR, the Cochrane Library, Lilacs, the Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science database and gray literature. Main outcome was the mean difference between the visual acuity measured at baseline and at six months expressed in the logMAR scale. Secondary outcome was a composite of any adverse ocular outcome including: worsening of visual acuity, visual fields or fluorescein angiography, or development of iris neovascularization, any neovascularization or neovascular glaucoma. Subgroup analyses for branch versus central retinal vein occlusion were conducted. We identified 1,084 references of which 3 studies comparing low molecular weight heparin with aspirin (229 evaluable patients) were included. Overall, the pooled mean visual acuity difference was -0.23 logMAR (95% CI -0.38, -0.09; P=0.002) in favor of low molecular weight heparin. Low molecular weight heparin was associated with a 78% risk reduction for developing any adverse ocular outcome (pooled RR 0.22; 95% CI 0.10, 0.46; P<0.001). In subgroup analyses benefits seemed lower in branch retinal vein occlusion. No increased vitreous hemorrhages were observed. In patients with retinal vein occlusion treatment with low molecular weight heparin seems to be associated with improvement in the visual acuity and less adverse ocular outcomes. These benefits might differ in patients with central as opposed to branch retinal vein occlusion. Further studies are required to confirm these findings and clarify its benefits in specific subgroups of patients before definitive recommendations can be made. IntroductionRetinal vein occlusion (RVO) is a common and important cause of visual loss. In population-based studies its prevalence has been reported to be around 0.6% and up to 4.6% in patients 80 years old or older with a 10-15 year cumulative incidence ranging between 1.6 and 1.8%.1-4 Studies evaluating predictors of RVO have consistently shown an association with risk factors for atherosclerosis such as hypertension, dyslipidemia, and diabetes 4,5 as well as ocular comorbidities such as glaucoma; 5,6 conversely, it has been suggested that the presence of RVO in patients under 70 years of age might be associated with increased cardiovascular mortality.7 In contrast, the association between RVO and thrombophilic risk factors for venous thrombosis, such as factor V Leiden, prothrombin G20210A, and deficiencies of antithrombin, protein C and protein S seems to be weak at best. The exceptions are hyperhomocysteinemia and the presence of antiphospholipid antibodies which are associated with an odds ratio (OR) for developing RVO of 8.9 and 3.9, respectively. 8 Long-term...

BackgroundThe role of liver resection for non-colorectal, non-neuroendocrine, non-sarcoma (NCNNNS) metastases is ill-defined. This study aimed to examine the oncologic outcomes of liver resection in such patients.MethodsA retrospective analysis of liver resection for NCNNNS metastases was performed at two large centers. Liver resection was offered selectively in patients with stable disease. Oncologic outcomes were examined using the Kaplan-Meier method.ResultsFifty-two patients underwent liver resection for NCNNNS metastases. Overall 5-year survival was 58%. Five-year survival was 85% for breast metastases, 66% for ocular melanoma, 83% for other melanomas, 50% for gastro-esophageal metastases, and 0% for renal cell carcinoma metastases. A contemporary colorectal liver metastasis cohort had a survival of 63% (p=0.89).ConclusionsLiver resection is an effective option in the management of selected patients with NCNNNS metastases which have been deemed stable. Five-year survival rates were comparable to that of a contemporary cohort of patients with colorectal liver metastases in carefully selected patients. Further, larger studies are required to help identify potential prognostic variables and aid in decision-making in this heterogeneous population.

Cross-border healthcare is an international agreement for the provision of out of country healthcare for citizens of partnered countries. The European Union (EU) has established itself as a world leader in cross-border healthcare. During the Coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the EU used this system to maximize utilization of resources. Countries with capacity accepted critically ill patients from overwhelmed nations, borders remained open to healthcare workers and those seeking medical care in an effort to share the burden of this pandemic. Significant research into the challenges and successes of cross-border healthcare was completed prior to COVID-19, which demonstrated significant benefit for patients. In North America, the response to the COVID-19 crisis has been more isolationist. The Canada-United States border has been closed and bans placed on healthcare workers crossing the border for work. Prior to COVID-19, cross-border healthcare was rare in North America despite its need. We reviewed the literature surrounding cross-border healthcare in the EU, as well as the need for a similar system in North America. We found the EU cross-border healthcare agreements are generally mutually beneficial for participating countries. The North American literature suggested a cross-border healthcare system is feasible. A number of challenges could be identified based on the EU experience. A prior agreement may have been beneficial during the COVID-19 crisis as many Canadian healthcare institutions-maintained capacity to accept critically ill patients.

ObjectivesGallstone disease is a common reason for emergency department (ED) presentation. Surgeons often prefer radiology department ultrasound (RUS) over point of care ultrasound (POCUS) because of perceived of unreliability. Our study was designed to test the hypothesis that POCUS is sufficient to guide the management of surgeons treating select cases of biliary disease as compared to RUS.MethodsThis was a prospective cohort study. Patients who presented to the ED with abdominal pain and findings of biliary disease on POCUS were included. The surgeon was then presented the case with POCUS only and recorded their management decision. Patients then proceeded to RUS, were followed through their stay, and analysis was performed to analyze the proportion of patients where the introduction of the RUS changed the management plan.Results100 patients were included in this study, and all received both POCUS and RUS. Depending on the surgeons’ POCUS based management decisions, the patients were divided into three groups: (1) surgery, (2) duct clearance, (3) no surgery. Total bilirubin was 34±22 mmol/L in the duct clearance group vs 8.4±6.5 mmol/L and 16±12 mmol/L in the surgery and no surgery groups, respectively (p<0.05). POCUS results showed 68 patients would have been offered surgery, 21 offered duct clearance, and 11 no surgery. In 90% of cases, the introduction of RUS did not change management. The acute care surgeons elected to operate on patients more frequently than other surgical subspecialties (p<0.05).ConclusionsThis study showed that fewer than 10% of patients with biliary disease seen on POCUS had a change in surgical decision-making based on the addition of RUS imaging. In uncomplicated cases of biliary disease, relying on POCUS imaging for surgical decision-making has the potential to improve patient flow.Level of evidenceII Prospective Cohort Study.

Periampullary cancer (PC) is a term encompassing malignancies that originate near the ampulla of Vater. It includes cancers of the head and neck of the pancreas, distal common bile duct, second part of the duodenum, and the ampulla itself. Differentiating between these entities, even with biopsy, is often not possible. Therefore, PC is managed identically to pancreatic adenocarcinoma, the fourth leading cause of cancer death in the United States despite representing only 3.1% of new cancer diagnoses [1]. Surgical resection by pancreaticoduodenectomy is the only potentially curative measure [2]. Unfortunately, as PC frequently presents at an advanced stage (particularly pancreatic adenocarcinoma), it is often inoperable at the time of diagnosis [3]. The 2016 National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Guidelines for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma define criteria to determine resectability [2]. Nonetheless, a subset of patients undergo noncurative laparotomy (NCL) either because the resection is 1) margin positive (termed an R1 resection) [4,5] or 2) the disease is found to be unresectable due to local invasion or unexpected metastases [6,7]. Although it is not the preferred outcome, NCL can benefit patients via definitive staging in borderline resectable cases, surgical bypass of obstructed bowel or bile ducts, placement of fiducial markers for radiation therapy, and tumour debulking.

No abstract