Search

Background: The main objectives of this paper are to outline the essential tools, instruments, and equipment needed to set up a functional microsurgery laboratory that is affordable for low-income hospitals and to identify cost-effective alternatives for acquiring microsurgical equipment, such as refurbished or donated instruments, collaborating with medical device manufacturers for discounted rates, or exploring local suppliers., Methods: Step-by-step instructions were provided on setting up the microsurgery laboratory, including recommendations for the layout, ergonomic considerations, lighting, and sterilization processes while ensuring cost-effectiveness, as well as comprehensive training protocols and a curriculum specifically tailored to enhance microsurgical skills in neurosurgery residents., Results: We explored cost-effective options for obtaining microsurgery simulators and utilizing open-source or low-cost virtual training platforms. We also included guidelines for regular equipment maintenance, instrument sterilization, and establishing protocols for infection control to ensure a safe and hygienic learning environment. To foster collaboration between low-income hospitals and external organizations or institutions that can provide support, resources, or mentorship, this paper shows strategies for networking, knowledge exchange, and establishing partnerships to enhance microsurgical training opportunities further. We evaluated the impact and effectiveness of the low-cost microsurgery laboratory by assessing the impact and effectiveness of the established microsurgery laboratory in improving the microsurgical skills of neurosurgery residents. About microsutures and microanastomosis, after three weeks of training, residents showed improvement in "surgical time" for ten separate simple stitches (30.06 vs. 8.65 min) and ten continuous single stitches (19.84 vs. 6.51 min). Similarly, there was an increase in the "good quality" of the stitches and the suture pattern from 36.36% to 63.63%., Conclusion: By achieving these objectives, this guide aims to empower low-income hospitals and neurosurgery residents with the necessary resources and knowledge to establish and operate an affordable microsurgery laboratory, ultimately enhancing the quality of microsurgical training and patient care in low-income countries., Competing Interests: There are no conflicts of interest., (Copyright: © 2023 Surgical Neurology International.)

Objectives: We evaluated demographic, clinical, and angiographic factors influencing the selection of coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in diabetic patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) in the BARI 2D (Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation in Type 2 Diabetes) trial., Background: Factors guiding selection of mode of revascularization for patients with diabetes mellitus and multivessel CAD are not clearly defined., Methods: In the BARI 2D trial, the selected revascularization strategy, CABG or PCI, was based on physician discretion, declared independent of randomization to either immediate or deferred revascularization if clinically warranted. We analyzed factors favoring selection of CABG versus PCI in 1,593 diabetic patients with multivessel CAD enrolled between 2001 and 2005., Results: Selection of CABG over PCI was declared in 44% of patients and was driven by angiographic factors including triple vessel disease (odds ratio [OR]: 4.43), left anterior descending stenosis >or=70% (OR: 2.86), proximal left anterior descending stenosis >or=50% (OR: 1.78), total occlusion (OR: 2.35), and multiple class C lesions (OR: 2.06) (all p < 0.005). Nonangiographic predictors of CABG included age >or=65 years (OR: 1.43, p = 0.011) and non-U.S. region (OR: 2.89, p = 0.017). Absence of prior PCI (OR: 0.45, p < 0.001) and the availability of drug-eluting stents conferred a lower probability of choosing CABG (OR: 0.60, p = 0.003)., Conclusions: The majority of diabetic patients with multivessel disease were selected for PCI rather than CABG. Preference for CABG over PCI was largely based on angiographic features related to the extent, location, and nature of CAD, as well as geographic, demographic, and clinical factors. (Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation in Type 2 Diabetes [BARI 2D]; NCT00006305).