Citations

Mayo Clinic

Clear

2 citation(s) found for "Valente, Michael".

Turnbull–Cutait abdominoperineal pull‐through operation: The Cleveland Clinic experience in the 21st century
Lavryk, Olga , Bandi, Bethany, Shawki, Sherief , Floruta, Crina, Jia, Xue , Valente, Michael , Hull, Tracy L. , Steele, Scott R.

Colorectal Disease | May 1, 2022 | Volume: 24 | Issue: 10 | Pages: 1184-1191

10.1111/codi.16163 | PMID 35490348 Get It

AbstractAimThe Turnbull–Cutait pull‐through procedure (TCO) restores intestinal continuity in the setting of chronic pelvic sepsis, colorectal anastomotic leak, complex pelvic fistulas and technical challenges related to complicated rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of the TCO for salvaging complex pelvic conditions and to compare it to hand‐sewn immediate coloanal anastomosis (CAA).MethodsThis is a retrospective single‐institution study where we searched a prospectively maintained database to identify patients who underwent the TCO. Patient demographics, operative indications and outcomes were analysed. TCO success was defined as maintenance of intestinal continuity and being stoma‐free. Kaplan–Meier analysis was employed for stoma‐free survival analysis.ResultsA total of 81 patients with TCO and 129 patients with CAA were included. The TCO success rate was 69% at a median of 1.4 years’ follow‐up with 25 (31%) patients ending up with a permanent stoma compared to 22 (17%) in the CAA group with a median follow‐up of 4 years (P = 0.03). The Kaplan–Meier cumulative incidence of TCO success at 1, 3 and 5 years was 79%, 60% and 51%, respectively, compared to 91%, 81% and 73% after CAA.ConclusionThe TCO has a high success rate for patients with complex pelvic conditions who may be facing a permanent stoma as their only option.
Clinical Practice Guideline
Stachler, Robert J., Chandrasekhar, Sujana S. , Archer, Sanford M., Schwartz, Seth, Barrs, David M., Fife, Terry D., Ford, Peg, Ganiats, Théodore G. , Hollingsworth, Deena B., Lewandowski, Christopher , Montano, Joseph J., Saunders, James E., Tucci, Debara L. , Valente, Michael , Warren, Barbara, Yaremchuk, Kathleen , Rosenfeld, Richard M. , Brown, Steven Ross , Robertson, Peter J.

Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery | March 1, 2012 | Volume: 146 | Issue: S3 | Pages: No page available

10.1177/0194599812436449 | PMID 22383545 Get It

Objective Sudden hearing loss (SHL) is a frightening symptom that often prompts an urgent or emergent visit to a physician. This guideline provides evidence‐based recommendations for the diagnosis, management, and follow‐up of patients who present with SHL. The guideline primarily focuses on sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL) in adult patients (aged 18 and older). Prompt recognition and management of SSNHL may improve hearing recovery and patient quality of life (QOL). Sudden sensorineural hearing loss affects 5 to 20 per 100,000 population, with about 4000 new cases per year in the United States. This guideline is intended for all clinicians who diagnose or manage adult patients who present with SHL. Purpose The purpose of this guideline is to provide clinicians with evidence‐based recommendations in evaluating patients with SHL, with particular emphasis on managing SSNHL. The panel recognized that patients enter the health care system with SHL as a nonspecific, primary complaint. Therefore, the initial recommendations of the guideline deal with efficiently distinguishing SSNHL from other causes of SHL at the time of presentation. By focusing on opportunities for quality improvement, the guideline should improve diagnostic accuracy, facilitate prompt intervention, decrease variations in management, reduce unnecessary tests and imaging procedures, and improve hearing and rehabilitative outcomes for affected patients. Results The panel made strong recommendations that clinicians should (1) distinguish sensorineural hearing loss from conductive hearing loss in a patient presenting with SHL; (2) educate patients with idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (ISSNHL) about the natural history of the condition, the benefits and risks of medical interventions, and the limitations of existing evidence regarding efficacy; and (3) counsel patients with incomplete recovery of hearing about the possible benefits of amplification and hearing‐assistive technology and other supportive measures. The panel made recommendations that clinicians should (1) assess patients with presumptive SSNHL for bilateral SHL, recurrent episodes of SHL, or focal neurologic findings; (2) diagnose presumptive ISSNHL if audiometry confirms a 30‐dB hearing loss at 3 consecutive frequencies and an underlying condition cannot be identified by history and physical examination; (3) evaluate patients with ISSNHL for retrocochlear pathology by obtaining magnetic resonance imaging, auditory brainstem response, or audiometric follow‐up; (4) offer intratympanic steroid perfusion when patients have incomplete recovery from ISSNHL after failure of initial management; and (5) obtain follow‐up audiometric evaluation within 6 months of diagnosis for patients with ISSNHL. The panel offered as options that clinicians may offer (1) corticosteroids as initial therapy to patients with ISSNHL and (2) hyperbaric oxygen therapy within 3 months of diagnosis of ISSNHL. The panel made a recommendation against clinicians routinely prescribing antivirals, thrombolytics, vasodilators, vasoactive substances, or antioxidants to patients with ISSNHL. The panel made strong recommendations against clinicians (1) ordering computerized tomography of the head/brain in the initial evaluation of a patient with presumptive SSNHL and (2) obtaining routine laboratory tests in patients with ISSNHL.