Elevated blood alcohol content (BAC) on admission is associated with poorer outcomes, larger burns and more inhalation injury. This study’s purpose was to examine the effects of alcohol through a matched case-controlled study, measuring early and extended markers of clinical outcomes. The hypothesis was that patients with an elevated admission BAC would require more resuscitation and have a longer hospital stay. Admissions 16 to 75 years of age with 15 to 75% TBSA and admission BACs were identified. Patients with BAC >30 mg/dl (BAC+, cases) were matched with patients with undetectable BAC (BAC−, controls), according to age, sex, TBSA, inhalation injury and mechanism. Screening identified 258 patients, 146 with admission BACs. Twenty-seven had a BAC ≥ 30 mg/dl. There were 24 matched pairs. At 24 hours, BAC+ group had larger acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II scores (23.33 vs 18.75, P < .05), fluid requirements (5.25 vs 3.82 L (cc/kg/ TBSA), P < .05), and base deficit (11.15 vs 7.15, P < .05). The duration of mechanical ventilation (14.85 vs 4.23 days, P < .05), intensive care unit length of stay (22.85 vs 9.38, P < .05), hospital length of stay (28.95 vs 15.68, P < .05), and mean hospital charges ($239,507 vs $144,598, P < .05) were increased in the BAC+ patients. Despite matched baseline injury characteristics, elevated BAC was associated with poorer short term and extended clinical outcomes, illustrating the impact of alcohol intoxication on physiologic derangement after burn injury.
ABSTRACT.Objective. Traditional population screening focuses on conditions for which early treatment prevents severe morbidity and mortality. The classic example in pediatrics is newborn screening for phenylketonuria, which began in the 1960s. In 1968, Wilson and Jungner delineated 10 criteria that would justify population screening. These criteria have been reaffirmed by many newborn screening task forces as the standard for adding conditions to newborn screening programs. Today, however, some newborn screening programs are expanding to include conditions that may not meet all of the traditional screening criteria. Little is known about pediatricians' attitudes toward expanding screening. We examine the attitudes of pediatricians and pediatric subspecialists toward screening for cystic fibrosis (CF), Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD), fragile X, and type 1 diabetes.Methods. A cross-sectional survey was conducted of 600 pediatricians, including those who are members of the section of genetics, endocrinology, pulmonology, and neurology of the American Academy of Pediatrics. For each condition, pediatricians were queried about (1) testing high-risk infants, (2) newborn screening, and (3) population screening or testing beyond the newborn period. Demographic data were also collected.Results. A total of 232 (43%) of 537 eligible pediatricians returned surveys. More than 75% support testing high-risk infants for all conditions except type 1 diabetes. CF was the only condition for which >50% supported newborn screening. Newborn screening was preferred over screening older infants for all conditions except fragile X. Subspecialty affiliation did not have a significant impact with respect to attitudes about testing highrisk children, newborn screening, or screening beyond infancy. We analyzed the data by the number of patients with the queried condition under the physician's care and by the number of affected family members. Neither aspect was significant. We also analyzed the data by gender, by year of residency graduation, and by geographic location. None of these factors revealed significant differences in responses. For each condition, 8% to 41% of physicians would personally choose to test their own infant. We found that physicians' opinion about what they would want for their own children correlated with their attitude about population newborn screening. Those who would personally choose testing of their own infants were highly likely to support newborn screening for CF (98%), DMD (94%), and fragile X (98%), but only 78% of those who would personally opt for newborn screening of type 1 diabetes would also endorse population-based screening. This was statistically significant for each condition. Those who would choose not to test their own infants were significantly less likely to support newborn screening of the general population. T raditional population screening focuses on conditions for which early treatment prevents severe morbidity and mortality. The classic example in pediatrics is newborn screening for phe...
Although patients with DFP did not exhibit any distinguishable characteristics when compared with patients without postoperative facial palsy, our analysis identified significant differences in patients with palsy presenting immediately postoperatively. Further study of patients with DFP should be undertaken to predict its incidence following VS resection.
This study assesses the efficacy of preoperative lumbar drain (LD) placement prior to elective open cranial and endoscopic anterior skull base (ASB) surgery in reducing postoperative cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak. A retrospective review of 93 patients who underwent LD placement at our institution between 2006 and 2011 was performed. Of these patients, 43 underwent elective LD placement prior to ASB surgery; 2 patients had evidence of CSF rhinorrhea prior to surgery, and 41 had no evidence of a preoperative CSF leak. Of those 41 patients, 2 developed CSF rhinorrhea (2/41= 4.9%) as a result of surgery—all in our endoscopic patient population (N = 21; 2/21= 9.5%). No postoperative CSF leaks were noted in our open ASB surgery cohort (N = 20). Other complications were rare, but we encountered two instances of delayed malignant cerebral edema in the open ASB cohort that are discussed in detail. Overall, preoperative LD placement was found to be an effective means of preventing postoperative CSF leaks after ASB approaches, but potential and significant intracranial complications may occur in select patients that merit careful consideration prior to LD placement.
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.