Citations

OBJECTIVE Blister aneurysms of the internal carotid artery (ICA) have high associated mortality rates and are challenging due to their friable wall and poorly defined neck. Microsurgical and endovascular treatment options have been suggested, including bypass of the parent vessel to exclude the aneurysm. The goal of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of microsurgical versus endovascular interventions. Additionally, for patients treated with open surgery, the outcomes of bypass were compared to nonbypass techniques. METHODS Three databases were systematically queried for primary studies comparing microsurgery to endovascular therapy and assessing bypass versus nonbypass treatment modalities for blister aneurysms of the ICA. All relevant studies published between 2000 and 2023 were eligible for inclusion. All articles were screened against title and abstract by 2 authors, as were those eligible for full-text assessment. Ultimately, relevant data from all included studies were pooled for meta-analysis in which the Mantel-Haenszel method with random-effects modeling was used. RESULTS Among the 504 cases reported across 24 studies, 182 (35.1%) blister aneurysms of the ICA were surgically treated, whereas 337 (64.9%) involved endovascular treatment. There were 235 (46.6%) female patients in the cohort. Functional outcomes were comparable between groups, with 83% of surgically treated patients and 85% of endovascularly treated patients achieving a favorable outcome (p > 0.05). Among the 7 studies (178 patients) comparing bypass to nonbypass microsurgery, rates of postoperative bleeding, ischemic infarct, vasospasm, recurrence, favorable outcomes, and mortality were comparable for bypass (n = 54, 30.3%) and nonbypass groups (n = 124, 69.7%). CONCLUSIONS Blister aneurysms of the ICA are rare intracranial aneurysms that are difficult to treat with microsurgical and endovascular techniques. Considering only patients treated with open surgery, there appears to be no significant difference in complication profile or functional outcomes between patients undergoing bypass or alternative microsurgical techniques. However, it must be noted that the complex nature of bypass procedures means that much of the data granularity is lost on meta-analysis, suggesting that additional investigations comparing bypass to other open microsurgical techniques may be merited. Similarly, future studies should determine the limitations of dual antiplatelet therapy in endovascular treatment and the efficacy of different numbers and types of overlapping, flow-diverting devices.

Abstract Total wrist arthroplasty (TWA) is a motion-preserving treatment option for wrist arthritis. High-precision measurement methods for implant migration such as computed tomography motion-analysis (CTMA) can potentially detect poor implant fixation. The aim of this pilot study was to assess CTMA as a complementary method to diagnose aseptic loosening of TWA. Three patients with a TWA and wrist pain during activity underwent induced displacement CT (CTMA) with alternated provocations as a complement to plain radiographs. Two of the three patients had displacement of the carpal component on CTMA. The radial component was stable in all cases. The tool was adapted to clinical routine use. CT motion-analysis could be a valuable adjunct to plain radiographs in assessing component loosening in TWA.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to establish a set of guiding principles for data sharing and harmonization in critical care, focusing on the use of real-world data (RWD) and real-world evidence (RWE) to improve patient outcomes and research efficacy. The principles were developed through a systematic literature review and a modified Delphi process, with the goal of enhancing data accessibility, standardization, and interoperability across critical care settings. DATA SOURCES: Data sources included a comprehensive search of peer-reviewed literature, specifically studies related to the use of RWD and RWE in healthcare, guidelines, best practices, and recommendations on data sharing and harmonization. A total of 8150 articles were initially identified through databases such as MEDLINE and Web of Science, with 257 studies meeting inclusion criteria. STUDY SELECTION: Inclusion criteria focused on publications discussing health-related informatics, recommendations for RWD/RWE usage, data sharing, and harmonization principles. Exclusion criteria ruled out non-human studies, case studies, conference abstracts, and articles published before 2013, as well as those not available in English. DATA EXTRACTION: From the 257 selected studies, 322 statements were extracted. After removing irrelevant definitions and off-topic content, 232 statements underwent content validation and thematic analysis. These statements were then consolidated into 24 candidate guiding principles after rigorous review and consensus-building among the expert panel. DATA SYNTHESIS: A three-phase modified Delphi process was employed, involving a conceptualization group, a review group, and a Delphi group. In phase 1, experts identified key themes and search terms for the systematic review. Phase 2 involved validating and refining the prospective guiding principles, while phase 3 employed a Delphi panel to rate principles on acceptability, importance, and feasibility. This process resulted in 24 guiding principles, with high consensus achieved in rounds 2 and 3 on their relevance and applicability. CONCLUSIONS: The systematic review and Delphi process resulted in 24 guiding principles to improve data sharing and harmonization in critical care. These principles address challenges across the data lifecycle, including generation, storage, access, and usage of RWD and RWE. This framework is designed to promote more effective and equitable data practices, with relevance for the development of artificial intelligence-based decision support tools and clinical research. The principles are intended to guide the responsible use of data science in critical care, with emphasis on ethics and equity, while acknowledging the variability of resources across settings.

OBJECTIVES: To develop the first core Critical Care Data Dictionary (C2D2) with common data elements (CDEs) to characterize critical illness and injuries. DESIGN: Group consensus process using modified Delphi approach. SETTING: Electronic surveys and in-person meetings. SUBJECTS: A multidisciplinary workgroup of clinicians and researchers with expertise in the care of the critically ill and injured. INTERVENTIONS: The Delphi process was divided into domain and CDE portions with each composed of two item generation rounds and one item reduction/refinement rounds. Two in-person meetings augmented this process to facilitate review and consideration of the domains and by panel members. The final set of domains and CDEs was then reviewed by the group to meet the competing criteria of utility and feasibility, resulting in the core dataset. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The 23-member Delphi panel was provided 1833 candidate variables for potential dataset inclusion. The final dataset includes 226 patient-level CDCs in nine domains, which include anthropometrics and demographics (8), chronic comorbid illnesses (18), advanced directives (1), ICU diagnoses (61), diagnostic tests (42), interventions (27), medications (38), objective assessments (26), and hospital course and outcomes (5). Upon final review, 91% of the panel endorsed the CDCs as meeting criteria for a minimum viable data dictionary. Data elements cross the lifespan of neonate through adult patients. CONCLUSIONS: The resulting C2D2 provides a foundation to facilitate rapid collection, analyses, and dissemination of information necessary for research, quality improvement, and clinical practice to optimize critical care outcomes. Further work is needed to validate the effectiveness of the dataset in a variety of critical care settings.

Introduction: Data on outcomes between unfractionated heparin and bivalirudin anticoagulation during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in acute coronary syndromes remain inconclusive. We aimed to systematically analyze PCI outcomes by comparing unfractionated heparin and bivalirudin. Methods: We systematically searched Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Ovid Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Scopus, and Web of Science from database inception in 1966 through January 2024 for studies evaluating PCI outcomes comparing unfractionated heparin and bivalirudin. Two investigators independently reviewed the data. Conflicts were resolved through consensus. Random-effects meta-analyses were used. Results: A total of 10 prospective trials were identified that enrolled 42,253 individuals who presented with an acute coronary syndrome. Our analysis found that heparin when compared to bivalirudin was associated with an increased risk of trial-based definition of major bleeding [relative risk (RR): 1.68, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.29–2.20], nonaccess site complications (RR: 4.6, 95% CI: 1.75–12.09), thrombolysis in myocardial infarction major bleeding (RR: 1.70, 95% CI: 1.20–2.41), major bleeding risks (RR: 1.87, 95% CI: 1.49–2.36), cardiovascular disease death (RR: 1.26, 95% CI: 1.02–1.57), and thrombocytopenia (RR: 1.67, 95% CI: 1.07–2.62). There were no statistically significant differences between heparin and bivalirudin for all-cause mortality, major adverse cardiovascular event, stroke, reinfarction, target vessel revascularization, and acute or stent thrombosis. Conclusions: The present meta-analysis demonstrates bivalirudin reduces major bleeding when used for anticoagulation during PCI in patients with acute coronary syndromes and is not associated with an increased risk of stent thrombosis or major adverse cardiovascular event.