Search

Purpose: Data on the epidemiology, treatment, and outcome of burn patients treated at non-burn centre hospitals are not available. The primary aim was to compare the burn characteristics of patients admitted to a hospital with or without a specialized burn centre. Methods: This multicentre, prospective, cohort study enrolled patients with burns admitted to a hospital without a burn centre and patients with < 10% total body surface area (TBSA) burned admitted to the burn centre. Primary outcome measure was the burn-related injury characteristics. Secondary outcome measures were adherence to the Emergency Management of Severe Burns (EMSB) referral criteria, treatment (costs), quality of life, and scar quality. Results: During the 2-year study period, 48 patients were admitted to a non-burn centre and 148 patients to the burn centre. In the non-burn centre group, age [44 (P25–P75 26–61) versus 30 (P25–P75 8–52) years; P = 0.007] and Injury Severity Score [2 (P25–P75 1–4) versus 1 (P25–P75 1–1); P < 0.001] were higher. In the burn centre group, the TBSA burned was significantly higher [4% (P25–P75 2–6) versus 2% (P25–P75 1–4); P = 0.001], and more surgical procedures were performed (in 54 versus 7 patients; P = 0.004). At 12 months, > 85% of the non-burn centre group and > 75% of the burn centre group reported no problems in quality of life. Scar quality score was < 1.5 in both groups, with significantly poorer scores in the burn centre group (P ≤ 0.007). Conclusion: Both groups differed in patient, burn, and treatment characteristics. At 12 months, quality of life and scar quality were good in both groups. Significantly poorer scar quality scores were found in the burn centre group. This might be related to their larger burns and more frequent surgery. The organization of burn care in the Netherlands seems to work adequately. Patients are treated locally when possible and are transferred when necessary. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction The Emergency Management of Severe Burns (EMSB) referral criteria have been implemented for optimal triaging of burn patients. Admission to a burn centre is indicated for patients with severe burns or with specific characteristics like older age or comorbidities. Patients not meeting these criteria can also be treated in a hospital without burn centre. Limited information is available about the organisation of care and referral of these patients. The aims of this study are to determine the burn injury characteristics, treatment (costs), quality of life and scar quality of burn patients admitted to a hospital without dedicated burn centre. These data will subsequently be compared with data from patients with<10% total body surface area (TBSA) burned who are admitted (or secondarily referred) to a burn centre. If admissions were in agreement with the EMSB, referral criteria will also be determined. Methods and analysis In this multicentre, prospective, observational study (cohort study), the following two groups of patients will be followed: 1) all patients (no age limit) admitted with burn-related injuries to a hospital without a dedicated burn centre in the Southwest Netherlands or Brabant Trauma Region and 2) all patients (no age limit) with <10% TBSA burned who are primarily admitted (or secondarily referred) to the burn centre of Maasstad Hospital. Data on the burn injury characteristics (primary outcome), EMSB compliance, treatment, treatment costs and outcome will be collected from the patients' medical files. At 3 weeks and at 3, 6 and 12 months after trauma, patients will be asked to complete the quality of life questionnaire (EuroQoL-5D), and the patient-reported part of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS). At those time visits, the coordinating investigator or research assistant will complete the observer-reported part of the POSAS. Ethics and dissemination This study has been exempted by the medical research ethics committee Erasmus MC (Rotterdam, The Netherlands). Each participant will provide written consent to participate and remain encoded during the study. The results of the study are planned to be published in an international, peer-reviewed journal. Trial registration number NTR6565. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Intraoperative specimen radiography is a routinely used procedure to ensure adequate resection of non-palpable breast tumors. Intraoperative digital specimen mammography (IDSM) is an alternative to conventional specimen radiography (CSR) which provides immediate specimen evaluation and can potentially decrease operation time. IDSM may also result in lower positive margin and re-excision rates. IDSM was implemented in our hospital in 2018. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of using IDSM versus CSR on operation time, margin status and re-excision rates in breast conserving surgery., Methods: The present study is a single-center retrospective cohort study with 2 patient cohorts: one which underwent CSR (n = 532) and one which underwent IDSM (n = 475). The primary outcome was the operation time. Secondary outcomes were the margin status of the primary surgery, the cavity shaving rate, and the re-excision rate. Differences between cohorts were compared using univariate statistics and multiple regression analyses to adjust for variables that were significantly different between the groups., Results: IDSM use was associated with an 8-minute reduction in surgery time (B = -8.034, 95% CI [-11.6, -4.5]; P < .001). Treatment variables independently associated with the operation time included use of IDSM, type of surgery, and performance of cavity shaving. Cavity shaves were more often performed when IDSM was used (24% for IDSM vs. 14% for CSR, P < .001), while the proportion of negative margin rates (93% for IDSM vs. 96% for CSR, P = .070) was comparable., Conclusion: IDSM was associated with a modest reduction in operation time. Surgeons performed more cavity shaves since the introduction of IDSM, but this increase was not reflected by difference in negative margin rates., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors have stated that they have no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The Nottingham Hip Fracture Score (NHFS) was developed to predict 30-day mortality for patients with hip fracture. This study aimed to validate the NHFS in a cohort with sufficient statistical power., Methods: Data were extracted from a prospective hip-fracture database (FAMMI). Patients were included between January 1, 2018 and January 11, 2021. All consecutively admitted patients ≥18 years of age with a hip fracture (ie, femoral neck fracture, intertrochanteric fracture, and subtrochanteric fracture) were included. Mann-Whitney's U values were calculated to find potential miscalibration of the NHFS formula. Discrimination evaluation was performed using the concordance statistic as an equivalent to area under the receiver-operating curve., Results: In total, 2,458 patients were included. Mean age was 80±12 years, and 66% were women (n=1,631). Median NHFS was 5 (4-6) and overall 30-day mortality 7.9% (n=195). Overall goodness of fit was tested with Pearson's ? 2 (11.8, df 10; P =0.297). No statistically significant signs of miscalibration were found (Mann-Whitney U , P =0.08). Discrimination was tested with area under the receiver- operating curve, which was 72.1% (95% CI 68.7%-75.4%). However, observed 30-day mortality in our population of hip-fracture patients was slightly higher than the NHFS prediction., Conclusion: The NHFS seemed to predict 30-day mortality with reasonable accuracy for patients with a hip fracture in a population within the Netherlands., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work., (© 2021 van Rijckevorsel et al.)

Background: The aim was to evaluate the cost-utility of four common surgical treatment pathways for breast cancer: mastectomy, breast-conserving therapy (BCT), implant breast reconstruction (BR) and autologous-BR., Methods: Patient-level healthcare consumption data and results of a large quality of life (QoL) study from five Dutch hospitals were combined. The cost-effectiveness was assessed in terms of incremental costs and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) over a 10-year follow-up period. Costs were assessed from a healthcare provider perspective., Results: BCT resulted in comparable QoL with lower costs compared to implant-BR and autologous-BR and showed better QoL with higher costs than mastectomy (€17,246/QALY). QoL outcomes and costs of especially autologous-BR were affected by the relatively high occurrence of complications. If reconstruction following mastectomy was performed, implant-BR was more cost-effective than autologous-BR., Conclusion: The occurrence of complications had a substantial effect on costs and QoL outcomes of different surgical pathways for breast cancer. When this was taken into account, BCT was most the cost-effective treatment. Even with higher costs and a higher risk of complications, implant-BR and autologous-BR remained cost-effective over mastectomy. This pleas for adapting surgical pathways to individual patient preferences in the trade-off between the risks of complications and expected outcomes., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Prof. Dr. Busschbach is a member of the non-profit EuroQoL Group and receives financial compensation for managerial activities for the group. For the remaining authors, none were declared., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Objective: Better cosmetic outcome after vacuum assisted excision (VAE) compared to surgical excision of benign breast lesions is suggested in previous studies but has never been evaluated with validated outcome measures. In this study, patient reported cosmetic outcome after VAE was evaluated., Methods: Patients who underwent VAE between July 2017 and December 2018 were invited to complete the cosmetic subscale of the Dutch Breast Cancer Treatment Outcome Scale, comparing the treated with the untreated breast. Response mode ranged from 1 (no difference) to 4 (large difference) and cosmetic outcome was calculated as the unweighted mean. Clinical outcomes included: tumor size, number of cores, complications, residual lesions and recurrences., Results: Response rate was 73.4% (47 of 64 patients). Median tumor size was 15 mm (range 5-51 mm) and median number of cores 6.5 (range 1-85), complete excision was confirmed in all but two patients. Mean cosmetic outcome was good (mean score ≤1.75) in 74% of patients and no patients reported a poor cosmetic outcome (mean score >3.25). A hematoma occurred in five patients (one needed aspiration) and a skin rash in one patient, no patients developed an infection or seroma., Conclusion: In this study VAE is safe and effective for tumors up to 5 cm and patient reported cosmetic outcome was good. Patients with benign lesions could benefit from VAE as an alternative for surgical excision., Advances in Knowledge: A formal quantitative measurement of cosmetic outcome after vacuum assisted excision for benign breast lesions was still lacking. This study shows that this cosmetic outcome is overall good in benign lesions up to 5 cm.

Background: The primary aim of the present study was to verify the potential risk factors for developing a delirium after hip fracture surgery. The secondary aim of this study was to examine the related clinical outcomes after a delirium developed post-hip fracture surgery., Patients and Methods: Data were extracted from a prospective hip fracture database and completed by retrospective review of the hospital records. A total of 463 patients undergoing hip fracture (hip hemiarthroplasty) surgery in a level II trauma teaching hospital between January 2011 and May 2016 were included. Delirium was measured using the Delirium Observation Screening Scale, the confusion assessment method, and an observatory judgment by geriatric medicine specialists., Results: The results showed that 26% of the patients (n=121) developed a delirium during hospital stay with a median duration during admission of 5 days (IQR 3-7). The multivariable model showed that the development of delirium was significantly explained by dementia (OR 2.75, P =0.001), age (OR 1.06, P =0.005), and an infection during admission (pneumonia, deep surgical site infection, or urinary tract infection) (OR 1.23, P =0.046). After 1 year of follow-up, patients who developed delirium after hip fracture surgery were significantly more discharged to (semi-independent) nursing homes ( P <0.001) and had a significantly higher mortality rate ( P <0.001) compared to patients without delirium after hip fracture surgery., Conclusions: The results showed that 26% of the patients undergoing hip fracture surgery developed a delirium. The risk factors including age, dementia, and infection during admission significantly predicted the development of the delirium. No association was confirmed between delirium and time of admission or time to surgery. The development of delirium after hip fracture surgery was subsequently found to be a significant predictor of admission to a nursing home and mortality after 1 year., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.

Objective: This multicenter randomized clinical trial compared cryo stripping of the great saphenous vein (GSV) with conventional stripping., Methods: The study randomized 494 patients with symptomatic (CEAP) clinical severity class 2 to 4 to cryo stripping (n = 249) or conventional stripping (n = 245). The primary outcome was residual GSV 6 months after surgery measured by venous duplex ultrasound imaging. Secondary outcomes were quality of life, operation time, and postoperative neural damage. Duration of follow-up was 6 months. Quality of life was measured at 6 and 26 weeks postoperatively with the Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire (AVVQ) and Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey., Results: The two groups were well matched at baseline. The percentage of patients with residual GSV at 6 months (primary outcome) was 44% (102 of 230) in the cryo group and 15% (33 of 215) in the conventional group (difference 29%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 21%-37%, P < .001). Median operation time was significantly shorter in the cryo group (30 minutes) compared with the conventional group (39 minutes). Neural damage was 12% in both groups, and thus not significantly different. Scores on the subdomains of the SF-36 showed no significant change between the groups. The AVVQ after conventional stripping was 8.0, which was a better result than the 11.7 result after cryo stripping (difference 2.6 points; 95% CI, 1.0-4.2; P = .001, repeated measurements analysis of variance with adjustment for baseline scores)., Conclusions: Cryo stripping accounts for numerous procedural failures and hence residual GSV in patients. The AVVQ showed small but significantly better results for patients after a conventional stripping. Cryo stripping has no benefits over conventional stripping.