Citations

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) is a promising tool to aid in diagnostic accuracy and patient communication. Prior literature has shown that ChatGPT answers medical questions and can accurately diagnose surgical conditions. The purpose of this study was to determine the accuracy of ChatGPT 4.0 in evaluating radiologic imaging of common orthopedic upper extremity bony pathologies, including identifying the imaging modality and diagnostic accuracy. Methods: Diagnostic imaging was sourced from an open-source radiology database for 6 common upper extremity bony pathologies: distal radius fracture (DRF), metacarpal fracture (MFX), carpometacarpal osteoarthritis (CMC), humerus fracture (HFX), scaphoid fracture (SFX), and scaphoid nonunion (SN). X-ray, computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) modalities were included. Fifty images were randomly selected from each pathology where possible. Images were uploaded to ChatGPT 4.0 and queried for imaging modality, laterality, and diagnosis. Each image query was completed in a new ChatGPT search tab. Multinomial linear regression was used to identify variations in ChatGPT’s diagnostic accuracy across imaging modalities and medical conditions. Results: Overall, ChatGPT provided a diagnosis for 52% of images, with accuracy ranging from 0% to 55%. Diagnostic accuracy was significantly lower for SFX and MFX relative to HFX. ChatGPT was significantly less likely to provide a diagnosis for MRI relative to CT. Diagnostic accuracy ranged from 0% to 40% with regard to imaging modality (x-ray, CT, MRI) though this difference was not statistically significant. Conclusions: ChatGPT’s accuracy varied significantly between conditions and imaging modalities, though its iterative learning capabilities suggest potential for future diagnostic utility within hand surgery.

Background/Objectives: Spino-plastic surgery describes a specialized, multidisciplinary approach to addressing various spinal pathologies. The field is the innovative product of a multidisciplinary collaboration between plastic and reconstructive, orthopedic, and neurosurgery. Over the last few decades, this collaboration has borne promising surgical techniques and treatment plans geared toward restoring form, function, and aesthetics in patients with a variety of spinal conditions, including failed fusions, pseudoarthrosis, and the need for oncologic reconstruction. This paper explores the application of spino-plastic surgery in the context of post-sarcoma resection reconstructions, focusing on the efficacy in addressing the unique challenges posed by extensive tissue loss and structural deformities. Methods: Our study reviews a series of cases wherein spino-plastic techniques were utilized in patients with sarcomas of the spine and adjacent structures. We also discuss the technical considerations, including preoperative planning, intraoperative challenges, and overall patient care, that are crucial for the success of spino-plastic procedures. Results: The outcomes demonstrate significant improvements in patient mobility, pain reduction, and overall quality of life. Most notably, spino-plastic surgical techniques help facilitate the restoration of functional anatomy by leveraging vascularized bone grafts and muscle flaps, thereby enhancing long-term stability and reducing the risk of complications such as nonunion or infection. Conclusions: Spino-plastic collaboration represents a pivotal advancement in oncologic treatment, spinal care, and reconstructive surgery, offering new hope for patients undergoing post-sarcoma reconstruction. Further research and refinement of the techniques will only expand their application and improve outcomes for a broader range of patients in the future.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Stereotactic procedures are used to manage a diverse set of patients across a variety of clinical contexts. The stereotactic devices and software used in these procedures vary between surgeons, but the fundamental principles that constitute safe and accurate execution do not. The aim of this work is to describe these principles to equip readers with a generalizable knowledge base to execute and understand stereotactic procedures. METHODS: A combination of a review of the literature and empirical experience from several experienced surgeons led to the creation of this work. Thus, this work is descriptive and qualitative by nature, and the literature is used to support instead of generate the ideas of this framework. RESULTS: The principles detailed in this work are categorized based on 5 clinical domains: imaging, registration, mechanical accuracy, target planning and adjustment, and trajectory planning and adjustment. Illustrations and tables are used throughout to convey the concepts in an efficient manner. CONCLUSION: Stereotactic procedures are complex, requiring a thorough understanding of each step of the workflow. The concepts described in this work enable functional neurosurgeons with the fundamental knowledge necessary to provide optimal patient care.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Identifying and characterizing sources of targeting error in stereotactic procedures is essential to maximizing accuracy, potentially improving surgical outcomes. We aim to describe a generic framework which characterizes sources of stereotactic inaccuracy. METHODS: We assembled a list of stereotactic systems: ROSA, Neuromate, Mazor Renaissance, ExcelsiusGPS, Cirq, STarFix (FHC), Nexframe, ClearPoint, CRW, and Leksell. We searched the literature for qualitative and quantitative work identifying and quantifying potential sources of inaccuracy and describing each system's implementation using Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research guidelines. Our literature search spanned 1969 to 2024, and various studies were included, with formats ranging from phantom studies to systematic reviews. Keyword searches were conducted, and the details about each system were used to create a framework for identifying and describing the unique targeting error profile of each system. RESULTS: We describe and illustrate the details of various sources of stereotactic inaccuracies and generate a framework to unify these sources into a single framework. This framework entails 5 domains: imaging, registration, mechanical accuracy, target planning and adjustment, and trajectory planning and adjustment. This framework was applied to 10 stereotactic systems. CONCLUSION: This framework provides a rubric to analyze the sources of error for any stereotactic system. Illustrations allow the reader to understand sources of error conceptually so that they may apply them to their practice.

Background: Optimum timing of surgery for severe primary mitral regurgitation (MR) particularly in the absence of significant symptoms or echo evidence of LV impairment remains unclear. Other modalities of assessment include cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) and novel echo measurements, such as LV global longitudinal strain (LVGLS). We sought to evaluate whether pre-op CPET or LVGLS are associated with survival after surgery. Methods: We identified consecutive patients who had surgery for severe primary MR between 2007 and 2017 and had pre-op CPET. Clinical and mortality data were collected from chart review and our institutional database. LVGLS was retrospectively collected by a single person blinded to patient outcomes. Primary outcome was post surgery all cause death, and we used univariable analysis to identify variables associated with all cause death. Results: We included 176 patients with median age 63 (IQR 51, 71) years, 63 patients (35.8%) were female and 31 patients (14.8%) had a history of atrial fibrillation. 165 patients (93.8%) had mitral repair, 18 (10.2%) had concomitant CABG, 22 (12.5%) had concomitant ablation procedure and 14 (8.0%) had concomitant tricuspid procedure. 114 patients (64.8%) were in NYHA Class I and 56 (31.8%) were in NYHA Class II. There was no operative mortality. Median % predicted peak VO2 (ppVO2) was 89 (74, 101), median ventilatory equivalent of carbon dioxide (VE/VCO2) was 28.0 (25.7, 31.0) l/min/l/min and median respiratory exchange ratio was 1.2 (1.1, 1.2). 73 patients (41.5%) had abnormal CPET (defined as ppVO2<85%). Median LVEF was 65 (60, 68) %, median LVESD was 35 (32, 38) mm and median LVGLS was 18.5 (16.6, 20.3) %. 45 patients (25.9%) had abnormal LVEF (defined as ≤ 60%), 11 patients (6.7%) had abnormal LVESD (defined as ≥45mm) and 35 patients (20.8%) had abnormal LVGLS (defined as <16%). At a median follow up of 10.2 (6.8, 13.2) years, there were 19 (10.8%) deaths. In the univariate analysis, age at surgery (HR 1.12, p<0.001), LVESD (HR 1.11, p=0.009), LVGLS (HR 1.11, p=0.013) and VE/VCO2 (HR 1.08, p=0.044) were associated with all cause mortality. Conclusion: A significant proportion of patients with no or mild symptoms exhibit echocardiographic evidence of LV impairment when having surgery for severe primary MR. CPET parameters such as VE/VCO2 and novel echocardiographic measurements such as LVGLS may predict risk of long term mortality and potentially inform timing of surgery in these patients.

Background: Delivering ethical care in global plastic surgery is challenging due to the unique complexities of resource-limited settings. Additionally, the rise of medical tourism has highlighted the importance of informed consent and awareness of the potential risks that are associated with seeking medical care in foreign countries. This article aims to consider core medical ethics principles and apply them in the context of delivering global plastic surgery. Methods: This article examines the application of the four core medical ethics principles in a framework set forth by Beauchamp and Childress, namely autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice, in the context of delivering plastic surgery in international settings. A literature review was performed, where all potential global plastic surgery articles were reviewed to better understand the application of the four core medical ethics framework in this context. Results: Increased communication between visiting surgeons and local healthcare providers; heightened education of surgeons traveling to low-to-middle-income countries regarding local medical practices, resource availability, and cultural norms before providing surgical education; and a greater emphasis on collecting and publishing data analyzing short- and long-term outcomes in low-to-middle-income countries are all likely to improve the success of international medical missions, ensuring that all patients receive medical treatment in a manner that upholds Beauchamp and Childress’ four core medical ethics principles. Conclusion: Providing plastic and reconstructive surgery abroad can be done ethically if the four main principles of medical ethics (respect for autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice) are used.

Abstract Many patients in the emergency department present with signs and symptoms that arouse concern for sepsis; however, other explanations are also possible. There are currently no rapid tests used in clinical practice that reliably distinguish the presence of a bacterial or viral infection vs. a non-infectious etiology and can predict a patient’s likelihood to decompensate. The diagnostic and prognostic uncertainty in “gray zone” patients complicates the decision to begin therapy as clinicians need to balance the risk of withholding therapy vs. the risk of the therapy itself (e.g., overtreatment with antibiotics and hospitalization, which is costly, potentially harmful, and contributes to antibiotic resistance). The TriVerity™ Test uses isothermal amplification and machine-learning algorithms to quantify and interpret mRNA expression levels to determine both likelihood of bacterial infection, viral infection, or no infection, and whether the patient will likely require one or more critical interventions within 7 days. The three scores each fall into one of five interpretation bands ranging from Very high to Very low. Testing takes approximately 30 minutes using the proprietary Myrna™ Instrument with an operator hands-on-time of under one minute. We enrolled 1,222 patients from 22 emergency departments (ED) to validate the performance of the TriVerity Test. Patients were treated as per local standard of care and were followed for 28 days. Bacterial and viral TriVerity results were validated against clinically adjudicated infection status; the illness severity TriVerity result was validated against the need for at least one critical interventions within 7 days. The bacterial TriVerity result had high AUROC for the diagnosis of bacterial infection (0.83; 80% CI 0.81–0.85) and divided bacterial infection likelihood scores into five interpretation bands with increasing likelihood ratios of infection ranging from Very low (LR- 0.08, 80% CI 0.06–0.11) to Very high (LR + 8.04, 80% CI 5.72–11.78). The AUROC for the bacterial TriVerity result was significantly higher compared to AUROCs for C-reactive protein, procalcitonin or white blood cell count. Similarly, the viral TriVerity score showed high AUROC for the diagnosis of viral infection (0.91; 80% CI 0.90–0.93) and likelihood ratios from Very low (LR- 0.09, 80% CI 0.05–0.14) to Very high (LR + 40.93; 80% CI 29.11–79.23). The TriVerity Illness Severity score showed a high AUROC for the prediction of illness severity (0.77; 80% CI 0.77–0.81) with scores divided into five interpretation bands with increasing likelihood ratios ranging from Very low (LR- 0.22; 80% CI 0.14–0.33) to Very high (LR + 11.33; 80% CI 7.31–17.00). TriVerity illness severity results allowed marked re-classification of the risk for “ICU-level care” as compared to clinical assessment (qSOFA scores) alone. In conclusion, TriVerity provides rapid, highly accurate and actionable results for the diagnosis and prognosis of patients with suspected acute infection and/or sepsis, supporting a major unmet medical need. TriVerity may improve personalized management of patients with suspected acute infections and suspected sepsis for improved overall healthcare outcomes.