Citations

Obesity is increasingly prevalent among living kidney donor candidates, presenting complex clinical, ethical, and logistical challenges. Although obesity is linked to increased post-donation hypertension, diabetes, proteinuria, and chronic kidney disease, the overall absolute risks are modest and may differ depending on metabolic health and patterns of fat distribution. Current reliance on body mass index alone fails to capture the full spectrum of obesity-related risks, leading to inconsistent donor selection practices and potential inequities. This review examines the pathophysiological mechanisms of obesity-related kidney injury and available evidence on comorbidities and postdonation outcomes related to obesity. We discuss tools for better risk stratification, such as imaging-based adiposity assessment and personalized weight management strategies, and note that some risks may remain after weight loss. Barriers such as rigid body mass index cutoffs, limited access to treatment, and lack of long-term follow-up exacerbate disparities in access to donation. We argue for a shift toward individualized, risk-based evaluation supported by multidisciplinary care. We underscore the importance of donor counseling and advocate for a comprehensive, rather than paternalistic approach to living kidney donor selection. Advancing safe and equitable living donation in the context of rising obesity rates will necessitate revised guidelines, improved access to treatment, and an ongoing commitment to donor well-being.

ABSTRACT This international, multidisciplinary consensus report represents the first effort to systematically define and characterize fatty pancreas. A key outcome of this endeavor was the recommendation to adopt “fatty pancreas” as the standardized and inclusive term to describe all forms of fat accumulation in the pancreas. This terminological consensus provides a critical foundation for unified reporting and clinical communication. Another major contribution of the report is the consensus on diagnostic imaging findings, which was based on radiological and endoscopic modalities. The proposed criteria aim to enhance consistency in clinical assessment and support the development of standardized research protocols. In addition to establishing terminology and diagnostic frameworks, the report also synthesizes current knowledge across a wide range of relevant domains. These include the etiology and epidemiology of fatty pancreas, as well as its associations with alcohol consumption, smoking, acute and chronic pancreatitis, pancreatic exocrine insufficiency, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and surgical outcomes. The potential links between fatty pancreas and neoplastic conditions such as intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms and pancreatic cancer are also addressed, alongside the current understanding of its metabolic implications (beta‐cell function and glucose homeostasis) and treatment strategies. Throughout the consensus process, a consistent theme emerged: the limited availability of high‐quality, prospective clinical data. Therefore, many of the recommendations in this report are based on expert consensus rather than strong empirical evidence. As such, the statements require rigorous prospective validation before they can be adopted into routine clinical practice. This underscores a critical need for further research, particularly studies aimed at clarifying causal relationships, validating diagnostic tools, and determining the clinical relevance of fatty pancreas across diverse patient populations. This report serves as both a summary of our current understanding and a roadmap for future investigations, aiming to close existing knowledge gaps and guide evidence‐based clinical practice in this emerging field.

Purpose: To determine current dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR) practice patterns of American Society of Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery members and identify surgeon and case-related factors impacting preference for endoscopic versus external DCR and the use of preoperative imaging. Methods: A cross-sectional web-based anonymous 16-question survey was distributed to 277 American Society of Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery members enrolled in survey-based research. The survey assessed surgeons’ demographics, practice settings, surgical preferences, and imaging practices. Responses were summarized and compared using statistical tests for frequency distribution. Results: A total of 111 surgeons (40.0%) responded to the survey. Utilization of endoscopic DCR (endoDCR) was highly variable, with 57% of junior surgeons (<5 years in practice) using it for >66% of their cases, compared with only 18.3% of surgeons with >15 years postfellowship experience. High utilization of endoDCR (>66% of cases) was more common in academic surgeons compared with private practice (48.4% vs. 19.6%, p < 0.01). The most cited reasons for endoDCR were scar avoidance and revision surgery. For external DCR, anatomical barriers and concern for mass/need for biopsy were common indications. Most surgeons only order imaging for certain indications, such as prior sinonasal surgery, facial trauma, suspected tumor, or atypical presentation. Conclusion: Utilization of endoDCR was correlated with years in practice, with younger surgeons preferring the endoscopic technique. A large majority felt that the relevance of imaging is low in most patients. Future research is needed to standardize case-based indications for endoscopic versus external approaches and preoperative imaging.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of joint preparation and patient factors on outcomes and complications in patients treated acutely with hindfoot fusion nails for ankle and pilon fractures. METHODS: Design: Retrospective chart review. Setting: Thirteen US trauma centers and 2 UK trauma centers. Patient Selection Criteria: Ankle and pilon fractures (AO-OTA types A-C) from 2010 to 2020 acutely treated definitively with hindfoot fusion nail were reviewed. Patients at least 18 years old and with minimum 6 months follow-up or earlier diagnosis of complication were included. Exclusion criteria included nonambulatory at baseline, prior internal fixation that failed and underwent revision, and prior tibiotalar or subtalar arthrodesis. Outcome Measurements and Comparisons: The primary outcome was final postoperative ambulatory status. Secondary outcomes were infectious and fracture-related complications. RESULTS: One hundred forty-nine patients (75 men; 74 women; age 20–99; median 63 years) were treated for ankle (104) or pilon (45; 8A, 13B, 24C) fractures. Eighty-five patients (44%) had open fractures and 55 (37%) had diabetes. Thirty-six patients (24%) had joint preparation at the time of surgery. Forty-five (30%) were made weight bearing as tolerated postoperatively; the median time to mobilize was 1.5 days (0–210) and to full weight bearing was 35 days (0–1462). Fifty-seven patients (85%) returned to their preinjury ambulatory status, which was not affected by joint preparation (50% vs. 59%, P = 0.327). Joint preparation led to higher articular fusion rates (94% vs. 24%; P = 0.001) and fewer hardware removals (19% vs. 42%, P = 0.013), but trended toward a higher fracture nonunion rate (19% vs. 8%, P = 0.053). Forty-five patients (30%) had infectious complications, 60 (40%) had a fracture-related complication, and 67 (45%) had additional procedures. Open fractures did not lead to any differences in superficial or deep infection. Insulin-dependent diabetes was associated with higher rates of infectious complications (31% vs. 15%, P = 0.028) and amputation (17% vs. 4%, P = 0.029). CONCLUSIONS: Hindfoot fusion nails for acute ankle and pilon injuries had high complication rates. More complications occurred in patients with insulin-dependent diabetes. While 95% regained ambulation, only 57% returned to preoperative status. Joint preparation led to higher rates of articular fusion (94% vs. 24%, P < 0.001) but not fracture union (81% vs. 66%, P = 0.106). LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Importance Patients with recurrent prostate cancer after previous radiotherapy typically have poor survival. Those with recurrences prostate confined might be suitable for salvage focal therapy (sFT) or salvage radical prostatectomy (sRP). sFT may offer good cancer control with comparatively less toxic effects, but outcomes beyond 5 years have not been reported, and no study has compared sFT to sRP. Objective To compare cancer control and perioperative complications among patients after sFT vs sRP. Design, Setting, and Participants In this international, multicenter cohort study of matched comparison data, patients undergoing sFT were derived from the prospective UK HIFU (high-intensity focused ultrasound) Evaluation and Treatment and International Cryotherapy Evaluation registries (9 centers; 2006-2024) and the prospective UK Focal Recurrent Assessment and Salvage Treatment cohort study (6 centers; 2014-2018). Patients undergoing sRP were derived from an international retrospective registry (12 centers in 8 countries; 2000-2021). Patients with biopsy-confirmed, localized recurrent prostate cancer postradiotherapy, either external beam radiotherapy, brachytherapy, or both, were included. Data were analyzed from March to July 2025. Exposures sFT using HIFU or cryotherapy vs sRP. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was cancer-specific survival up to 10 years. Secondary outcomes were overall survival, any perioperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grades 1-5), and major perioperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grades 3-5). Comparisons were made on matched patients following 1:1 cardinality matching within individual multiply-imputed datasets. Matching variables used were radiotherapeutic treatment, years between primary and salvage treatments, European Association of Urology recurrence risk group, and presalvage age, prostate-specific antigen, prostate volume, grade group, T stage, and androgen-deprivation therapy use. Results A total of 923 patients were eligible for matching (419 undergoing sFT and 504 undergoing sRP). Of the patients undergoing sFT, 325 (77.6%) underwent HIFU and the remainder cryotherapy, with 241 (57.5%) treated with quadrant ablation. Of patients treated with sRP, 376 (74.6%) underwent open surgery and the remainder robot-assisted surgery. For sFT vs sRP, 10-year cancer-specific survival was 92% (95% CI, 86%-98%) vs 99% (95% CI, 97%-100%), with no statistically significant difference (restricted mean time lost, −0.09 years; 95% CI, −0.22 to 0.03 years; P = .15; subdistribution hazard ratio, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.05-4.00; P = .47). There was no statistically significant difference in 10-year overall survival (restricted mean survival time, −0.13 years; 95% CI, −0.86 to 0.60 years; P = .72). Undergoing sRP was associated with statistically significant higher odds of any complication (adjusted odds ratio, 24.20; 95% CI, 12.94-45.27; P &amp;lt; .001) and major complication (adjusted odds ratio, 9.31; 95% CI, 3.42-25.36; P &amp;lt; .001). Conclusions and Relevance In this cohort study, sFT and sRP were effective for treating localized radiorecurrent prostate cancer, while sFT was associated with fewer perioperative complications. sFT may provide a favorable therapeutic ratio for many patients with localized radiorecurrent prostate cancer.

Objective Age of symptom onset is highly variable in familial frontotemporal lobar degeneration (f‐FTLD). Accurate prediction of onset would inform clinical management and trial enrollment. Prior studies indicate that individualized maps of brain atrophy can predict conversion to dementia in f‐FTLD. We used a Bayesian linear mixed‐effect (BLME) prediction method for identifying accelerated brain volume loss to predict conversion to dementia. Methods Participants included 234 asymptomatic or prodromal carriers of C9orf72 , GRN , or MAPT mutations (including 21 dementia converters) with ≥3 longitudinal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) T1‐weighted scans. The BLME models established individual voxel‐wise gray matter trajectories using the first 2 scans. Person‐specific clusters of accelerated volume loss were estimated in subsequent scans and tested as predictors of dementia conversion compared with other approaches in time‐varying Cox proportional hazard models covarying for age. Receiver‐operating characteristic (ROC) curves estimated utility of cluster volume in discriminating which participants converted to dementia within 24 months. Results The BLME cluster volume predicted conversion to dementia in f‐FTLD mutation carriers overall and separately in C9orf72 , GRN , and MAPT , with comparable hazard ratios observed for atrophy W‐maps and regional volumes. Within a 24‐month timeframe, BLME cluster volume discriminated dementia converters from non‐converters with larger areas under the curve (AUCs) than other approaches. Interpretation Bayesian‐modeled individualized atrophy scores predict dementia progression among asymptomatic f‐FTLD mutation carriers and may have increased utility compared with other structural imaging methods when studying individuals over shorter timeframes that align with clinical trial design. ANN NEUROL 20269999:n/a–n/a

In 1995, Medicare reduced payments by 50% for anesthesiologists teaching two residents concurrently. By 2004, anesthesiology residency programs were losing, on average, $400,000 per year, causing many institutions to close their anesthesiology training programs. American Society of Anesthesiologists leaders tried unsuccessfully for several years to address this situation through appeals to Medicare. They then organized an advocacy effort to pass the Medicare Anesthesiology Teaching Funding Restoration Act of 2007, which in 2010 restored full payments for teaching anesthetics. From 2010 through 2024, anesthesiologists received $1.262 billion from Medicare for 2.8 million cases involving residents, which is between $442 million and $568 million more than if the legislation had not been enacted. Anesthesiology residency programs increased from 131 to 167 after the enactment. This historic legislation taught anesthesiologists that changing Medicare policies may require congressional action and that persistent and broad-based advocacy can make a legislative campaign successful.

OBJECTIVE Early discharge following uncomplicated endonasal resection of pituitary adenoma has been described as safe and feasible. Discharge on postoperative day (POD) 1 is not a widely implemented practice in the United States. This study aimed to evaluate the safety of routine POD1 discharges by assessing postoperative unplanned medical care rates compared with those of patients discharged on POD 2 or later (POD2+). The secondary endpoint was to identify predictors of delayed discharge in the POD2+ cohort. METHODS A retrospective database review of the medical records of 534 patients who underwent endonasal resection of pituitary adenoma at the Mayo Clinic was performed. Relevant demographics, tumor characteristics, and perioperative metrics were abstracted from the medical record, including intraoperative CSF leakage, postoperative complications, emergency department visits, or inpatient readmissions within 30 days. Descriptive, univariate, and multivariate analyses were performed. RESULTS In comparison to 422 (79%) patients discharged on POD1, 112 (21%) patients discharged on POD2+ had a higher unplanned medical care rate (13% vs 5.5%, p = 0.019). There were significantly more men in the POD1 group (48%) than in the POD2+ group (37%) (p < 0.04). The most common reasons for POD1 unplanned care were endocrine dysfunction (2.4%), split evenly between syndrome of inappropriate antidiuretic hormone and adrenal insufficiency, whereas the most frequent reason in the POD2+ cohort was medical (0.06%). Univariate analyses indicated that female sex, higher BMI, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, obstructive sleep apnea, continuous positive airway pressure dependence, intraoperative CSF leakage, and diabetes insipidus (DI) increased the likelihood of POD2+ discharge. The reduced logistic regression model demonstrated a higher likelihood of POD2+ discharge with older age, ICU admission, intraoperative CSF leakage, and DI (p < 0.001). Common factors contributing to discharge after POD1 included endocrine (n = 66, 35%) and/or medical (n = 65, 34%) reasons. CONCLUSIONS Routine patient discharge on POD1 following uncomplicated endonasal resection of pituitary adenoma is a safe practice, as evidenced by the significantly lower rates of unplanned medical care and complications compared with those of patients discharged on POD2 or later. Delayed discharge was associated with older age, ICU admission, intraoperative CSF leakage, and DI. The most frequent reasons for POD1 readmission were endocrine versus medical reasons for POD2+. Preoperative identification of risk factors for delayed discharge and preemptive management of endocrine and medical complications may reduce the length of stay and return to medical care.

Abstract Background We aimed to describe the real-world durability of clinical and endoscopic outcomes of upadacitinib (UPA) in ulcerative colitis (UC). Methods We retrospectively analyzed an ongoing multi-center cohort of UC patients(pts) in the United States who were started on UPA for active disease. Primary outcome was clinical remission at 1yr assessed by partial Mayo score(pMS)(resolution of all UC related symptoms and physician global assessment). Secondary outcomes assessed at various timepoints, including after re-escalation, included clinical response(&gt;50%reduction in symptoms utilizing the pMS), endoscopic response (Mayo endoscopic score≤1or absence of erosions/ulcerations) and histological remission(defined as normal or chronic inactive). Durable secondary outcomes achieved at both 6months and at 1yr and beyond were also assessed. Descriptive statistics were performed. Adverse events(AEs) investigated included cardiovascular events and herpes zoster (HZ). Results 416pts were included(Table 1) with median values for age at initiation of36.00yrs(range27-48), disease duration7.00yrs(range3-14)and follow-up 993days(IQR,672-1103), with206(49.52%)with follow-up at 1yr or beyond. Of these, 66.1%had extensive colitis. Induction duration was8wks in 86.5%and16wks in 4.8 %(20/416). Most received an induction dose of45mg(97.1%)and maintenance dose of30mg(85.8%). Among the evaluable population at1yr and beyond, 62.5%(45/80)were in clinical remission, 75.9%(22/29)in endoscopic response with58.6%(17/29) in remission and66.6%(20/30)in histological remission. At 6months, clinical remission was51.6%(42/93), endoscopic response was 75%(24/32) of which43.75%(14/32)were in remission and histologic remission was seen in 40.8%(20/49).Durable secondary outcomes of clinical remission were seen in 71.4%(30/42), endoscopic improvement in 45.8%(11/24), and histologic remission in35%(7/20). Re-escalation to 45mg occurred in 35pts, of which48.6%(17/35)were re-escalated due to incomplete induction clinical response with all achieving response(11 in remission). The rest(18/35)were re-escalated for clinical relapse after initial remission where72.2%(13/18)were able to recapture remission. After re-escalation,54.3%(19/35)continued on 45mg daily. AEs were reported in12.7%with HZ in 7pts(2.1%). One pt aged53yrs had an episode of TIA after 1yr on UPA at 15mg, without pre-existing cardiovascular risk factors and UPA use is ongoing at the same dose. There were no reported episodes of worsening of pre-existing cardiovascular disease or DVT/PE. Conclusion UPA is durably effective and safe in a real-world clinical setting with re-escalation to 45mg capturing response in a majority of the pts. Ongoing recruitment will provide further evidence on long term effectiveness and safety. Conflict of interest: Ms. Huang, Katherine: No conflict of interest Chandnani, Arun: No conflict of interest Samaan, Sami: None Tan, Tingyi: I have no conflict of interests to declare. Ramesh, Prajith Raj: None Conlon, Caroline: No conflict of interest Klein, Jeremy: None Reddy, Nikhil: No conflict of interest Ayoub, Malek: None Cervantes Limon, Gabriela: none Myers, Melissa: None Bucaram, Martha: No conflict of interest Lieto, Stephen: No conflict of interest Scalzo, Nicholas: No conflict of interest Cohen, Benjamin: Abbvie - consulting and speaking ALPCO - consulting J & J Innovative Medicine - consulting Takeda - consulting and speaking Emmes Biopharma Services LLC - DSMB Pfizer - consulting Mohamed, Islam: nothing to declare Ciorba, Matthew: Advisory Board: Janssen, AbbVie, Pfizer, Geneoscopy Consulting: Janssen, AbbVie, Pfizer, Geneoscopy Grant contracts: Janssen, Pfizer, Incyte Shukla, Richa: Speakers bureau - Abbvie and Lilly Wright, Michael: None Xu, An Tao: No conflict of interest Chowla, Navreet: No conflict of interest Ogholikhan, Sina: Abbvie Medical Director Kujawski, Michelle: Abbvie Scientific Director Dulaney, David: Speaker bureau - Regeneron Speaker bureau - Sanofi Speaker bureau - Takeda Speaker bureau - Eli Lilly Fenster, Marc: none Benson, Caroline: No conflict of interest Alhobayb, Tamara: No conflict of interest Berinstein, Jeffrey: No conflict of interest Shivashankar, Raina: Abbvie and BMS - speaker bureau Janssen and Celltrion - grant for IBD fellowship funding Pfizer - consultant Bishu, Shrinivas: None Patel, Anish: speaker: abbvie, J & J, Lilly, BMS, Pfizer, Phathom, Takeda consultant: abbvie Ungaro, Ryan: Personal Fees: AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Genentech, Lilly, Pfizer, Janssen, Takeda Johnson, Amanda: Research grant: Abbvie, Spyre Therapeutics Pekow, Joel R.: CVS Health - Consulting Abbvie, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Johnson and Johnson - Stocks Yarur, Andres: Personal Fees: Consultant for Takeda, Pfizer, Roche, Merck, Abbvie, Eli Lilly. Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Johnson and Johnson. Deepak, Parakkal: Parakkal Deepak has received research support under a sponsored research agreement unrelated to the data in the abstract from AbbVie, Johnson and Johnson, Sanofi, Merck, Teva, Direct Biologics, Tr1x, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Prometheus Biosciences, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Roche Genentech, Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca, Spyre and Agomab, has received consulting fees from Johnson and Johnson, Abbvie, Merck, Sobi, Celltrion, Fresenius Kabi, Asahi Kasei Pharma, Sandoz and CorEvitas, LLC and has served on the board of the Srategic Alliance for Intercultural Advocacy in GI.

OBJECTIVE: Volatile anesthetics (VAs) are gaining renewed interest as a sedation strategy in the intensive care, offering an alternative to traditional IV agents. VAs provide several pharmacologic advantages, including rapid onset and offset, minimal systemic metabolism, and favorable recovery profiles. Advances in delivery systems enabled the safe and practical administration of volatile agents in the ICU. Thus, we aimed to describe the pharmacology and safety aspects of inhaled agents as well as the systems designed to deliver VAs in the ICU. DATA SOURCES: Relevant literature was identified through PubMed and MEDLINE databases. STUDY SELECTION: Original research, review articles, commentaries, and guidelines addressing safety, efficacy, and use of VAs in adult ICU patients were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Studies were reviewed by the authors, with key findings summarized and organized by pharmacologic properties, delivery systems, and safety domains. DATA SYNTHESIS: VAs are halogenated hydrocarbons whose mechanism of action is not fully understood. Although the CNS is the primary site of action, the end-tidal concentration of exhaled anesthetic is used to monitor clinical effects such as immobility to a noxious stimulus. Inhaled agents have unique pharmacokinetics, minimal metabolisms, and distinct recovery. The side effect profile is also unique, with malignant hyperthermia being the most feared, yet rare complication. Two systems for inhalational sedation delivery are available internationally, with one currently under evaluation in the United States. The systems are composed of a miniature vaporizer, delivery controller, and a monitor. The systems have distinct safety considerations, such as tidal volume limits. CONCLUSIONS: VAs can be used as sedative agents in the ICU. This article comprehensively reviews the pharmacology of VAs along with their safety profile and describes the structure and function of miniature vaporizers currently available on the world market.