Citations

A woman in her 50s presented with a 4-day history of left knee pain, erythema, swelling as well as malaise and rigours 1 month after undergoing a left knee meniscectomy. She was diagnosed with left native knee septic arthritis and underwent arthroscopic irrigation and debridement of the knee; cultures from synovial tissue grew Rhodococcus erythropolis. Rhodococcus spp are soil-dwelling and livestock-dwelling bacteria which occasionally cause disease in immunocompromised hosts. Infection in immunocompetent hosts is rare, and septic arthritis secondary to Rhodococcus erythropolis has not been reported previously.

SummaryNine children and adolescents with chronic intestinal diseases and growth failure were treated with home parenteral nutrition (HPN) for 7–63 months. All patients improved their growth velocities on HPN, with an average height gain of 9 cm. The mean growth velocity in six patients with Crohn's disease increased more than fivefold (from 0.67 ± 0.4 cm/year to 3.8 ± 1.09 cm/year), and they gained a mean of 11.4 ± 3.4 kg/year. The three patients without Crohn's disease [intestinal pseudo‐obstruction (two), severe short bowel (one)] increased growth velocity from an average of 2.9 ± 1.1 cm to 6.1 ± 1.34 cm/year and gained a mean of 10 ± 2.84 kg/year. Patients without Crohn's disease grew faster on HPN than age comparable patients with Crohn's disease. Also, the two patients with Crohn's disease who were younger and had their disease for a shorter period (<3 years) grew better than older patients with Crohn's disease who had their disease for a mean of 8 ± 1.3 years. All patients improved clinically, and three with Crohn's disease achieved complete remission. Five of the nine patients had psychosocial adjustment problems while on HPN. In conclusion, HPN is a relatively safe and effective means to stimulate growth in children and adolescents who cannot meet nutritional needs by the enteral route.

AbstractBackgroundThe real‐world data on the safety profile of transvenous lead extraction (TLE) for infected cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) among elderly patients is not well‐established. This study aimed to evaluate the hospital outcomes between patients of different age groups who underwent TLE for infected CIED.MethodUsing the Nationwide Readmissions Database, our study included patients aged ≥18 years who underwent TLE for infected CIED between 2017 and 2020. We divided the patients into four groups: Group A. Young (<50 years), Group B. Young intermediate (50–69 years old), Group C. Older intermediate (70–79 years old), and Group D. Octogenarian (≥80 years old). We then analyzed the in‐hospital outcome and 30‐day readmission between these age groups.ResultsA total of 10,928 patients who were admitted for TLE of infected CIED were included in this study: 982 (9.0%) patients in group A, 4,234 (38.7%) patients in group B, 3,204 (29.3%) patients in group C and 2,508 (23.0%) of patients in group D. Our study demonstrated that the risk of early mortality increased with older age (Group B vs. Group A: OR: 1.92, 95% CI: 1.19‐3.09, p < .01; Group C vs. Group A: OR: 2.47, 95% CI: 1.51‐4.04, p < .01; Group D vs. Group A: OR: 2.82, 95% CI: 1.69‐4.72, p < .01). The risk of non‐home discharge also increased in elderly groups (Group B vs. Group A: OR: 1.89; 95% CI: 1.52‐2.36; p < .01; Group C vs. Group A: OR: 2.82; 95% CI 2.24‐3.56; p < .01; Group D vs. Group A: OR: 4.16; 95% CI: 3.28‐5.28; p < .01). There was no significant difference in hospitalization length and 30‐day readmission between different age groups. Apart from a higher rate of open heart surgery in group A, the procedural complications were comparable between these age groups.ConclusionElderly patients had worse in‐hospital outcomes in early mortality and non‐home discharge following the TLE for infected CIED. There was no significant difference between elderly and non‐elderly groups in prolonged hospital stay and 30‐day readmission. Elderly patients did not have a higher risk of procedural complications.

AbstractBackgroundThe real‐world data on the safety profile of ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablation among elderly patients is not well‐established. This study aimed to evaluate the procedural outcomes among those aged 18–64 years versus those aged ≥65 years who underwent catheter ablation of VT.MethodUsing the Nationwide Readmissions Database, our study included patients aged ≥18 years who underwent VT catheter ablation between 2017 and 2020. We divided the patients into non‐elderly (18–64 years old) and elderly age groups (≥65 years old). We then analyzed the in‐hospital procedural outcome and 30‐day readmission between these two groups.ResultsOur study included 2075 (49.1%) non‐elderly patients and 2153 (50.9%) elderly patients who underwent VT ablation. Post‐procedurally, elderly patients had significantly higher rates of prolonged index hospitalization (≥7 days; 35.5% vs. 29.3%, p < .01), non‐home discharge (13.4% vs. 6.0%, p < .01), 30‐day readmission (17.0% vs. 11.4%, p < .01), and early mortality (5.5% vs. 2.4%, p < .01). There was no significant difference in the procedural complications between two groups, namely vascular complications, hemopericardium/cardiac tamponade, cerebrovascular accident (CVA), major bleeding requiring blood transfusion, and systemic embolization. Through multivariable analysis, the elderly group was associated with higher odds of early mortality (OR: 7.50; CI 1.86–30.31, p = .01), non‐home discharge (OR: 2.41; CI: 1.93–3.00, p < .01) and 30‐day readmission (OR: 1.58; CI 1.32–1.89, p < .01).ConclusionElderly patients have worse in‐hospital outcome, early mortality, non‐home discharge, and 30‐day readmission following catheter ablation for VT. There was no significant difference between elderly and non‐elderly groups in the procedural complications.

Atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) is a benign lesion of the breast that is associated with an increased risk of invasive breast cancer. This review explores the pathophysiology, risk factors for progression to breast cancer, and lifetime management for patients diagnosed with ADH on core needle biopsy (CNB). The management plan for patients diagnosed with ADH includes regular clinical surveillance, diagnostic mammography, along with risk-reduction strategies such as lifestyle modifications or the use of adjuvant endocrine therapies. This review aims to delve into the complexities of ADH from diagnosis to management to aid clinicians in finding the best way to approach this high-risk breast lesion.