Citations

BACKGROUND: Small, randomized trials of patients with cervical artery dissection showed conflicting results regarding optimal stroke prevention strategies. We aimed to compare outcomes in patients with cervical artery dissection treated with antiplatelets versus anticoagulation. METHODS: This is a multicenter observational retrospective international study (16 countries, 63 sites) that included patients with cervical artery dissection without major trauma. The exposure was antithrombotic treatment type (anticoagulation versus antiplatelets), and outcomes were subsequent ischemic stroke and major hemorrhage (intracranial or extracranial hemorrhage). We used adjusted Cox regression with inverse probability of treatment weighting to determine associations between anticoagulation and study outcomes within 30 and 180 days. The main analysis used an as-treated crossover approach and only included outcomes occurring with the above treatments. RESULTS: The study included 3636 patients (402 [11.1%] received exclusively anticoagulation and 2453 [67.5%] received exclusively antiplatelets). By day 180, there were 162 new ischemic strokes (4.4%) and 28 major hemorrhages (0.8%); 87.0% of ischemic strokes occurred by day 30. In adjusted Cox regression with inverse probability of treatment weighting, compared with antiplatelet therapy, anticoagulation was associated with a nonsignificantly lower risk of subsequent ischemic stroke by day 30 (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.71 [95% CI, 0.45–1.12]; P =0.145) and by day 180 (adjusted HR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.28–2.24]; P =0.670). Anticoagulation therapy was not associated with a higher risk of major hemorrhage by day 30 (adjusted HR, 1.39 [95% CI, 0.35–5.45]; P =0.637) but was by day 180 (adjusted HR, 5.56 [95% CI, 1.53–20.13]; P =0.009). In interaction analyses, patients with occlusive dissection had significantly lower ischemic stroke risk with anticoagulation (adjusted HR, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.18–0.88]; P interaction =0.009). CONCLUSIONS: Our study does not rule out the benefit of anticoagulation in reducing ischemic stroke risk, particularly in patients with occlusive dissection. If anticoagulation is chosen, it seems reasonable to switch to antiplatelet therapy before 180 days to lower the risk of major bleeding. Large prospective studies are needed to validate our findings.

Abstract This study aimed to investigate the association between objective and subjective olfactory assessments in patients with recent severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection undergoing endoscopic endonasal skull base surgery (EESBS). Retrospective cohort study. Academic medical center. Adult patients with and without recent SARS-CoV-2 infection who underwent EESBS for sellar and parasellar lesion resection between 2020 and 2024 at the Mayo Clinic in Florida, Jacksonville, FL. Pre- and postoperative self-reported olfactory dysfunction and University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) scores were collected. Patients with recent SARS-CoV-2 infection had a similar rate of discrepant preoperative objective olfactory assessments (38.2%, 26/68) compared with SARS-CoV-2-negative patients (39.9%, 127/318). SARS-CoV-2-positive patients were twice as likely to report postoperative subjective olfactory dysfunction (46.2%, 12/26) compared with SARS-CoV-2-negative patients (18.1%, 23/127, p = 0.002). There was no statistically significant difference in the mean preoperative (p = 0.162) or postoperative (p = 0.724) UPSIT scores between both groups. Patients with recent SARS-CoV-2 infection and discrepant preoperative objective olfactory assessments were twice as likely to self-report olfactory dysfunction following EESBS compared with SARS-CoV-2-negative controls. This increase in self-reported olfactory dysfunction was not accompanied by changes in objective psychophysical testing. These findings suggest that SARS-CoV-2 infection may impact subjective olfactory recovery following EESBS.

Objective: To establish benchmark cutoffs for robotic liver resection (R-LR), encompassing both major and minor resections, and to determine the impact of patient selection on outcomes. Background: R-LR is a key advancement in minimally invasive liver surgery but lacks standardized benchmarks, especially for minor resections. While guidelines endorse R-LR, its role in optimizing outcomes remains unclear. This study establishes the first benchmarks for R-LR, enabling comparisons across surgical modalities and refining patient selection. Methods: This retrospective, multicenter study analyzed consecutive adult patients undergoing R-LR at 30 international centers (2020–2023). Benchmark centers had an annual case volume of ≥15 R-LR. Benchmark criteria included ASA ≤2, no major comorbidities, no prior liver resections, and Child-Pugh A status. Benchmark cutoffs for 14 key outcomes were set at the 50th and 75th percentiles of median values across benchmark centers. Multivariable logistic regression identified predictors of textbook outcomes. Results: Eighteen high-volume centers contributed 4028 cases with 2632 (65.3%) meeting benchmark criteria. Malignancy was the indication in 29.6%, most commonly hepatocellular carcinoma followed by colorectal liver metastases. Major liver resection was performed in 42.6%. The distribution of Iwate difficulty scores was low (25.4%), intermediate (53.9%), advanced (15.9%), and expert (4.9%). Benchmark cutoffs were established for minor and major resection, and stratified by Iwate low (0-3), intermediate (4-6) and high (7-12): Open conversion (≤6.5% minor, ≤10.5% major), major complications within 90 days (≤5.2% minor, ≤16.7% major), R1 resection (≤9.2% minor, ≤6.7% major). Benchmark cases performed at low-volume centers were able to achieve outcomes within the corresponding benchmark cutoffs. In fact, patient selection reflected by the proportion of benchmark patients, rather than case volume, was associated with textbook outcomes. Conclusions: This study defines R-LR benchmarks, emphasizing patient selection over center volume for optimal outcomes. Benchmark cutoffs guide training and support the expansion of R-LR.

Background: Nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is a rare head and neck cancer arising from the mucosal lining of the nasopharynx, for which systemic therapeutic options remain scarce, reflecting the limited characterization of its genomic profile. This study utilized a large patient-level genomic repository to characterize genetic alterations, identify potential therapeutic targets, and improve disease modeling in NPC. Methods: A retrospective analysis of NPC samples was conducted using the AACR Project GENIE database. Targeted sequencing data were analyzed for recurrent somatic mutations, tumor mutational burden, and chromosomal copy number variations, with significance set at p < 0.05. Results: Frequent mutations were identified in KMT2D (20%), TP53 (16%), CYLD (9.6%), NFKBIA (6.4%), and PIK3CA (5.6%), implicating the p53, NF-κB, and PI3K pathways in NPC development. Notably, significantly distinct mutational profiles were observed based on both sex and race, with female patients exhibiting higher frequencies of PIK3C2G, ETV6, and CDKN1B mutations and non-Asian patients showing enrichment in KDM5A, CCND2, and TP53 mutations. Conclusions: This study presents a detailed genomic profile of NPC, identifying key mutations within established cancer-associated pathways. The identification of frequently mutated pathways (p53, NF-κB, and PI3K) suggests potential targets for novel therapies. Furthermore, distinct mutational landscapes in female and Asian NPC patients offer possibilities for precision therapeutic interventions.

The role of second-look endoscopy and debridement (SLED) remains uncertain in children due to the perceived need for additional general anesthesia following their initial functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) while mitigating risks and healthcare costs. This comprehensive review synthesizes current evidence on SLED in children, focusing on its practice pattern and treatment outcomes. This review was designed and performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews Protocol. Independent queries of the PubMed Central, MEDLINE, and Bookshelf databases were performed. A total of 53 relevant, unique articles were initially identified; 12 articles were ultimately deemed appropriate for inclusion in final analysis. The most common indication for FESS was chronic rhinosinusitis or recurrent sinus infections while that for SLED under general anesthesia varied from institutional practice patterns to surgeon preference. No meaningful comparison of outcomes was possible as the “success rates” of FESS with or without SLED were largely based on unvalidated questionnaires and equally subjective surgeon assessments. Even when looking at outcomes based on revision rates, FESS with SLED was considered successful between 60.5% and 95.6% of the time, with a mean of 84.2%, while FESS without SLED was successful between 71.0% to 96.4% of the time, with a mean of 86.3%. However, no randomized, controlled studies were available in the pediatric literature pertaining to FESS with or without SLED. Moreover, it became apparent that previous conclusions on the utility of SLED were based on the outcomes of FESS following one single SLED under general anesthesia vs. no SLED. As such, there is an unmet need to examine the utility of serial, office-based SLED in children to better elucidate its utility in pediatric FESS.

BACKGROUND: Patients presenting with cervical artery dissection (CAD) are at risk for subsequent ischemic events. We aimed to identify characteristics that are associated with increased risk of ischemic stroke after initial presentation of CAD and to evaluate the differential impact of anticoagulant versus antiplatelet therapy in these high-risk individuals. METHODS: This was a preplanned secondary analysis of the STOP-CAD study (Antithrombotic Treatment for Stroke Prevention in Cervical Artery Dissection), a multicenter international retrospective observational study (63 sites from 16 countries in North America, South America, Europe, Asia, and Africa) that included patients with CAD predominantly between January 2015 and June 2022. The primary outcome was subsequent ischemic stroke by day 180 after diagnosis. Clinical and imaging variables were compared between those with versus without subsequent ischemic stroke. Significant factors associated with subsequent stroke risk were identified using stepwise Cox regression. Associations between subsequent ischemic stroke risk and antithrombotic therapy type (anticoagulation versus antiplatelets) among patients with identified risk factors were explored using adjusted Cox regression. RESULTS: In all, 4023 patients (mean age was 47.4 years; 44.5% were women) were included. By day 180, subsequent ischemic stroke occurred in 5.3% of the cohort. In adjusted Cox regression, factors associated with increased risk of subsequent ischemic stroke were prior history of ischemic stroke (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 7.31 [95% CI, 1.61–33.13]; P =0.010), presentation within 7 days from first symptoms (aHR, 3.04 [95% CI, 1.04–8.91]; P =0.043), infarct on baseline imaging (aHR, 9.85 [95% CI, 3.65–26.58]; P <0.001), and occlusive dissection (aHR, 2.34 [95% CI, 1.03–5.34]; P =0.043). Only patients with occlusive dissection demonstrated a reduced risk of subsequent ischemic stroke when treated with anticoagulation versus antiplatelets (aHR, 0.36 [95% CI, 0.16–0.80]; P =0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In this post hoc analysis of the STOP-CAD study, several factors associated with subsequent ischemic stroke were identified among patients with CAD. Furthermore, we identified a potential benefit of anticoagulation in patients with CAD with occlusive dissection. These findings require validation by meta-analyses of prior studies to formulate optimal treatment strategies for specific high-risk CAD subgroups.