Among cohort studies nerve sparing was not associated with worse cancer outcomes. Nerve sparing is associated with better urinary and erectile function. These results should be interpreted with caution given the potential for selection bias and unadjusted confounding factors.
There is variability in dorsiflexion strength following nerve transfer in peroneal nerve palsy, whereby there appear to be responders and non-responders. Further studies are needed to better define appropriate patient selection and the role of nerve transfers in the management of peroneal nerve palsy.
Summary: Supercharge end-to-side anterior interosseous–to–ulnar motor nerve transfer is commonly performed in the authors’ institution to augment intrinsic hand function. Following observations of recovery patterns, the authors hypothesized that despite its more distal innervation, the first dorsal interosseous muscle recovers to a greater extent than the abductor digiti minimi muscle. The objective of this work was to evaluate the clinical and electrodiagnostic pattern of reinnervation of intrinsic hand musculature following supercharge end-to-side anterior interosseous–to–ulnar motor nerve transfer. A retrospective cohort of prospectively collected data included all patients who underwent a supercharge end-to-side anterior interosseous–to–ulnar motor nerve transfer. Two independent reviewers performed data collection. Reinnervation was assessed with two primary outcome measures: (1) clinically, with serial Medical Research Council strength assessments; and (2) electrodiagnostically, with serial motor amplitude measurements. Statistical analysis was performed using nonparametric statistics. Seventeen patients (65 percent male; mean age, 56.9 ± 13.3 years) were included with a mean follow-up of 16.7 ± 8.5 months. Preoperatively, all patients demonstrated clinically significant weakness and electrodiagnostic evidence of denervation. Postoperatively, strength and motor amplitude increased significantly for both the first dorsal interosseous muscle (p = 0.002 and p = 0.016) and the abductor digiti minimi muscle (p = 0.044 and p = 0.015). Despite comparable preoperative strength (p = 0.098), postoperatively, the first dorsal interosseous muscle achieved significantly greater strength when compared to the abductor digiti minimi muscle (p = 0.023). Following supercharge end-to-side anterior interosseous–to–ulnar motor nerve transfer, recovery of intrinsic muscle function differs between the abductor digiti minimi and the first dorsal interosseous muscles, with better recovery observed in the more distally innervated first dorsal interosseous muscle. Further work to elucidate the underlying physiologic and anatomical basis for this discrepancy is indicated. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.
BackgroundThere is significant variability in undergraduate Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery (OTOHNS) curricula across Canadian medical schools. As part of an extracurricular program delivered jointly with other surgical specialties, the Surgical Exploration and Discovery (SEAD) program presents an opportunity for medical students to experience OTOHNS. The purpose of this study is to review the participation and outcome of OTOHNS in the SEAD program.MethodsThe SEAD program is a two-week, 80-hour, structured curriculum that exposes first-year medical students to nine surgical specialties across three domains: (1) operating room observerships, (2) career discussions with surgeons, and (3) simulation workshops. During observerships students watched or assisted in surgical cases over a 4-hour period. The one-hour career discussion provided a specialty overview and time for students’ questions. The simulation included four stations, each run by a surgeon or resident; students rotated in small groups to each station: epistaxis, peritonsillar abscess, tracheostomy, and ear examination. Participants completed questionnaires before and after the program to evaluate changes in career interests; self-assessment of knowledge and skills was also completed following each simulation. Baseline and final evaluations were compared using the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test.ResultsSEAD participants showed significant improvement in knowledge and confidence in surgical skills specific to OTOHNS. The greatest knowledge gain was in ear examination, and greatest gain in confidence was in draining peritonsillar abscesses. The OTOHNS session received a mean rating of 4.8 on a 5-point scale and was the most popular surgical specialty participating in the program. Eight of the 18 participants were interested in OTOHNS as a career at baseline; over the course of the program, two students gained interest and two lost interest in OTOHNS as a potential career path, demonstrating the potential for helping students refine their career choice.ConclusionsParticipants were able to develop OTOHNS knowledge and surgical skills as well as refine their perspective on OTOHNS as a potential career option. These findings demonstrate the potential benefits of OTOHNS departments/divisions implementing observerships, simulations, and career information sessions in pre-clerkship medical education, either in the context of SEAD or as an independent initiative.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s40463-015-0059-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Compared with a hand-sewn venous anastomosis, an MACD produces savings with each case and quickly recoups the device's capital expenditure. Despite its limitations and simplicity, this study provides a practical economic analysis that can help inform purchasing decisions, particularly for smaller volume centers where the economic rationale may be less clear.
Background: The objective of this study was to compare the economic impact of complete decongestive therapy and lymphovenous bypass in the management of upper extremity lymphedema. Methods: Economics were modeled for a patient with breast cancer–related lymphedema undergoing three different clinical pathways: (1) complete decongestive therapy alone; (2) lymphovenous bypass no longer requiring ongoing complete decongestive therapy; or (3) lymphovenous bypass requiring ongoing complete decongestive therapy. Activity-based cost analysis identified costs incurred with complete decongestive therapy and lymphovenous bypass. Costs were retrieved from supplier price lists, physician fee schedules, lymphedema therapists, and literature reviews. The net present value of all costs incurred for each clinical pathway were calculated. Results: The estimated net present value of all costs for a patient with breast cancer–related lymphedema undergoing treatment were as follows: (1) complete decongestive therapy alone ($30,400); (2) lymphovenous bypass no longer requiring ongoing complete decongestive therapy ($15,000); or (3) lymphovenous bypass requiring ongoing complete decongestive therapy ($42,100). The expected net present value of all costs for lymphovenous bypass was $26,800, which was comparable to that of complete decongestive therapy alone. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the expected net present value of lymphovenous bypass was dependent on the patient’s life expectancy, number of bypass anastomoses, and likelihood of discontinuing complete decongestive therapy. Conclusions: Lymphedema has substantial ongoing costs irrespective of the treatment modality. The cost of lymphovenous bypass appears comparable to that of complete decongestive therapy alone—the surgical costs of lymphovenous bypass are offset by the savings from discontinued ongoing therapy. Despite its limitations as a theoretical economic model, this study provides insight into the potential economic impact of lymphovenous bypass.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.