Citations

Purpose The diagnosis of monoclonal B-cell lymphocytosis (MBL) is used to characterize patients with a circulating population of clonal B cells, a total B-cell count of less than 5 × 109/L, and no other features of a B-cell lymphoproliferative disorder including lymphadenopathy/organomegaly. The natural history of clinically identified MBL is unclear. The goal of this study was to explore the outcome of patients with MBL relative to that of individuals with Rai stage 0 chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Patients and Methods We used hematopathology records to identify a cohort of 631 patients with newly diagnosed MBL or Rai stage 0 CLL. Within this cohort, 302 patients had MBL (B-cell counts of 0.02 to 4.99 × 109/L); 94 patients had Rai stage 0 CLL with an absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) ≤ 10 × 109/L; and 219 patients had Rai stage 0 CLL with an ALC more than 10 × 109/L. Data on clinical outcome were abstracted from medical records. Results The percentage of MBL patients free of treatment at 1, 2, and 5 years was 99%, 98%, and 93%, respectively. B-cell count as a continuous variable (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.9, P = .04) and CD38 status (HR = 10.8, P = .006) predicted time to treatment (TTT) among MBL patients. The likelihood of treatment for MBL patients was lower (HR = 0.32, P = .04) than that of both Rai stage 0 CLL patients with an ALC less than 10 × 109/L (n = 94) and Rai stage 0 CLL patients with an ALC more than 10 × 109/L (n = 219; P = .0003). Conclusion Individuals with MBL identified in clinical practice have a low risk for progression at 5 years. Because B-cell count seems to relate to TTT as a continuous variable, additional studies are needed to determine what B-cell count should be used to distinguish between MBL and CLL.

Background The authors' department conducted a performance improvement initiative aimed to reduce the rate of perioperative corneal injuries. This study reports the effects of the initiative and examines the risk factors for corneal injury. Method The rate of corneal injuries during nonophthalmologic procedures under anesthesia was compared between the two time periods: preinitiative baseline (August 1, 2005-December 31, 2005) and initiative period (January 1, 2006-April 30, 2007). To examine the risk factors for corneal injury, a nested case-control study with a 2:1 matched-set design was separately performed and included cases between January 1, 2006 and July 31, 2008. Results During the baseline period, the corneal injury rate was 1.51 per 1,000, and it decreased to 0.79 per 1,000 during the performance initiative (P = 0.008). Independent risk factors were longer anesthetics (odds ratio = 1.2, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1-1.3 per 30 min), lower American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status (odds ratio 0.5, 95% CI 0.3-0.8 for American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status 3-4 vs. 1-2), and student nurse anesthetist as a primary anesthesia provider (odds ratio 2.6, 95% CI 1.3-5.0). Conclusion Corneal injury rate in our institution was significantly reduced and remains at low levels long after initiation of perioperative eye care improvement initiative. The higher rate of corneal injuries among student nurse anesthetists highlights the importance of standardizing education and supervision among all anesthesia providers. We believe that our model of performance improvement initiative can be used to improve other perioperative outcomes.