Citations

Importance Currently, there are no standardized outcome domains or measures in clinical trials for facial aging. Heterogeneity in outcome domains and measurement instruments across clinical trials creates difficulty in directly comparing interventions, determining superior therapies, and developing high-quality meta-analyses. Objective To develop a core outcome set (COS) of essential domains to be reported in clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of interventions for facial aging. Evidence Review PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and CINAHL were searched from September 2005 to September 2015. An updated search of the same databases was performed from September 2015 to February 2026. Studies were included if (1) they were randomized clinical trial or controlled clinical trial in design, (2) they assessed the efficacy or safety of an intervention for facial aging, (3) they were published in English, and (4) they involved human participants. Complementary sources, including patient interviews, were used to capture further relevant outcomes. Two rounds of Delphi surveys, followed by consensus meetings, were used to identify outcome domains considered most important by both patient and physician stakeholders. Findings The final COS consists of 6 outcome domains: (1) overall convenience of treatment; (2) time to return to normal work and social activity; (3) overall assessment of focused area of treatment (at the point in time when treatment is expected to provide peak benefit); (4) duration of treatment effect; (5) severity of persistent local or systemic adverse events, including pigmentary change, skin texture change, delayed healing, scarring, and serious adverse events; and (6) patient satisfaction with treatment. Conclusions and Relevance The 6 outcome domains identified through a Delphi consensus are recommended for reporting in future facial aging trials to ensure that outcomes that matter most to patients and clinicians are measured and that results are comparable across interventions.

OBJECTIVE Craniopharyngiomas are benign intracranial tumors that can be difficult to manage operatively and often result in postoperative complications and prolonged recovery. Understanding the factors that influence length of stay (LOS), discharge disposition, and readmission can guide perioperative planning and patient counseling. The authors examined the clinical, radiographic, and surgical predictors of extended LOS (eLOS), nonhome discharge, 90-day readmission, and hospitalization ratio (HR) after craniopharyngioma resection using a large, multicenter cohort. METHODS A retrospective analysis was conducted using the Registry of Adenomas of the Pituitary and Related Disorders database, encompassing 469 patients who underwent craniopharyngioma resection at 14 US academic centers from 2011 to 2025. Patients were stratified by 4 outcomes: eLOS (> 75th percentile), discharge to home versus skilled nursing facility/rehabilitation, 90-day hospital readmission, and hospitalization ratio (i.e., integration of initial and readmission LOS). Multivariable logistic regression models identified independent predictors for each outcome among patient and surgical variables. RESULTS An eLOS (> 10 days) was independently associated with preoperative memory loss (OR 3.75, 95% CI 1.95–7.21), gait imbalance (OR 5.90, 95% CI 1.53–22.70), and postoperative complications (OR 4.07, 95% CI 2.34–7.06). The use of a nasoseptal flap was protective against an eLOS (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.28–0.93). Discharge to home was predicted by an endoscopic approach (OR 3.87, 95% CI 1.78–8.44) and postoperative intact thirst (OR 2.22, 95% CI 1.05–4.66) and negatively predicted by preoperative diabetes mellitus (OR 0.21, 95% CI 0.09–0.50), LOS (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.84–0.91), and postoperative cognitive dysfunction (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.13–0.72). Among 385 patients with follow-up data, a 90-day readmission was independently associated with postoperative complications (OR 5.62, 95% CI 3.12–10.13), preexisting coronary artery disease (OR 4.30, 95% CI 1.46–12.69), and postoperative cognitive dysfunction (OR 3.33, 95% CI 1.76–6.44). A higher HR was associated with diabetes mellitus (unstandardized B 0.059, 95% CI 0.010–0.108, p = 0.02), postoperative complications (unstandardized B 0.054, 95% CI 0.021–0.086, p = 0.001), and postoperative cognitive dysfunction (unstandardized B 0.049, 95% CI 0.006–0.092, p = 0.02). Tumor pathologic subtype and size, prior treatment, extent of resection, and surgeon experience were not directly predictive of outcomes. CONCLUSIONS Cognitive and functional status, systemic comorbidities, and postoperative complications, in addition to surgical approach, are important predictors of the early clinical course after craniopharyngioma surgery. Early identification of high-risk patients may help to guide treatment decisions, improve discharge planning, and reduce healthcare utilization.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Craniopharyngiomas are complex intracranial tumors that pose significant challenges in surgical management. We aimed to develop risk-stratified surgical outcome benchmarks for adult patients undergoing endoscopic craniopharyngioma resection by using the Registry of Adenomas of the Pituitary and Related Disorders database to facilitate comparisons across institutions and guide clinical decision-making. METHODS: A retrospective cohort of adult patients (18 years and older) with craniopharyngioma undergoing a first-time endoscopic transnasal surgery across 14 academic centers in the United States was analyzed using data collected from 2011 to 2024. Patients were stratified into low-risk and high-risk cohorts based on criteria including age, body mass index, selected tumor characteristics (size, infundibular relationship, intraventricular extension), and previous radiation. Surgical outcomes were analyzed, and benchmarking ranges were defined using the established methodology. RESULTS: The overall cohort included 318 patients with a mean age of 50 years. Upon benchmarking analysis (50th-75th percentile performance), low-risk patients (n = 136) had a median length of stay of 4.0 to 6.0 days, 90-day readmission rates of 15.5% to 22.2%, skilled nursing facility discharge rates of <1.0%, postoperative cerebrospinal fluid leak incidence of <1.0% to 14.3%, gross total resection rates of 50.0% to 60.8%, new postoperative arginine vasopressin deficiency rates of 33.3% to 50.0%, and tumor progression/recurrence rates of <1.0% to 18.3% over a median follow-up period of 27.0 (IQR 10.5-56.5) months. Benchmarking ranges were proposed for each outcome to facilitate cross-institutional comparisons. CONCLUSION: Establishing surgical outcome benchmarks for adult patients undergoing craniopharyngioma resection using data from the Registry of Adenomas of the Pituitary and Related Disorders provides a framework for assessing surgical performance and guiding clinical decision-making. Benchmark ranges can inform institutional quality improvement efforts, perioperative risk stratification, and patient counseling regarding expected postoperative outcomes.

Abstract Purpose: This multicenter, multi-surgeon retrospective study aimed to identify risk factors for postoperative cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak following endonasal resection of craniopharyngioma, while evaluating the "perception gap" through a surgeon survey. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted on 416 patients who underwent endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery (ETS) for craniopharyngioma from 20 institutions. Factors were compared between patients with and without postoperative CSF leak, and between Early (2007-2015) and Late (2016-2025) Epochs. Complementing the clinical data, a survey of 19 neurosurgeons captured expert perspectives on risk stratification and management strategies. Results: Overall postoperative CSF leak rate was 13.5% (56/416 patients). Univariate analysis identified predominantly cystic tumors (34% vs. 21%, p = 0.034)and intraoperative lumbar drain (LD) use ( p < 0.028) as associated with postoperative CSF leak. BMI ( p = 0.587), prior surgery ( p = 0.576), and tumor size ( p = 0.363) were not significant. In the multivariable analysis, LD use was associated with a higher postoperative CSF leak rate (OR 1.91, 95% CI 1.06–3.46; p = 0.030). Between Epochs, nasoseptal flap (NSF) utilization increased from 70.7% to 87.6% ( p <0.001). NSF was protective (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.07–0.92; p = 0.037) in the Early Epoch; no factors were significant in the Late Epoch. The surgeons’ survey identified prior surgery and intraoperative high flow leaks as primary risks; however, their LD protocols diverged from clinical data. Conclusion: Despite increased use of NSF, CSF leak persists. The study highlights a significant divergence between expert perception and clinical data regarding lumbar drains.

Importance The choice of induction agent during rapid sequence intubation (RSI) of critically ill adults may affect clinical outcomes. Although ketamine and etomidate are frequently used for RSI, their comparative effectiveness remains controversial. Objective To compare the safety of etomidate vs ketamine for emergency RSI in critically ill adults. Design, Setting, and Participants This cohort study used a target trial emulation with observational data collected between March 1, 2022, and April 30, 2024, from 18 emergency departments across Brazil, with data from the Brazilian Airway Registry Cooperation. Adults who underwent RSI and received either etomidate or ketamine as a sole hypnotic agent were included; those with preintubation cardiac arrest or immediate postintubation transfer were excluded. Exposure Administration of etomidate or ketamine as the induction agent for RSI. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was 28-day in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included 7-day in-hospital mortality, first-attempt intubation success, and major adverse events (new hemodynamic instability, severe hypoxemia, and cardiac arrest) within 30 minutes after intubation. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to adjust for confounding. Risk ratios (RRs) and risk differences (RDs) with 95% CIs were used to compare outcomes between groups. Results Among 1810 patients (median age, 64 years [IQR, 50-74 years]; 1048 men [57.9%]), 514 received ketamine and 1296 received etomidate. The median shock index was higher in the ketamine group than the etomidate group (0.81 [IQR, 0.65-1.01] vs 0.76 [IQR, 0.59-0.99]), and preintubation vasopressor use was more common in the ketamine group than the etomidate group (191 of 514 [37.2%] vs 391 of 1296 [30.2%]). Weighted 28-day mortality was higher with etomidate than ketamine (60.5% [95% CI, 57.2%-63.8%] vs 54.4% [95% CI, 45.0%-63.9%]; RR, 1.14 [95% CI, 1.03-1.27]; RD, 7.6% [95% CI, 2.0%-13.3%]). Seven-day mortality was also higher with etomidate than ketamine (35.2% [95% CI, 32.0%-38.3%] vs 30.1% [95% CI, 23.5%-36.7%]; RR, 1.19 [95% CI, 1.04-1.35]). New hemodynamic instability within 30 minutes after intubation was more frequent with ketamine (24.2% [95% CI, 20.4%-28.0%] vs 18.9% [95% CI, 16.7%-21.0%]; RR, 0.78 [0.64-0.95]). There were no statistically significant differences in the other secondary outcomes. Conclusions and Relevance In this cohort study of critically ill adults undergoing RSI, etomidate use was associated with higher in-hospital mortality at 7 and 28 days compared with ketamine. These findings highlight the need for definitive randomized clinical trials to compare both agents.

Distinguishing noncirrhotic portal hypertension from cirrhosis is important because of differences in outcomes and management strategies, and imaging features such as liver morphology and the pattern of portal hypertension can aid in differentiation and should be carefully assessed.