Citations

Post-COVID conditions (PCCs) are common and have significant morbidity. Risk factors for PCC include advancing age, female sex, obesity, and diabetes mellitus. Little is known about treatment, inflammation, and PCC. Among 882 individuals with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection participating in a randomized trial of COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) vs control plasma with available biospecimens and symptom data, the association between early CCP treatment, cytokine levels, and PCC was evaluated. Cytokine and chemokine levels were assessed at baseline, day 14, and day 90 using a multiplexed sandwich immunoassay (Meso Scale Discovery). Presence of any self-reported PCC symptoms was assessed at day 90. Associations between CCP treatment, cytokine levels, and PCC were examined using multivariate logistic regression models. One third of the 882 participants had day 90 PCC symptoms, with fatigue (14.5%) and anosmia (14.5%) being most common. Cytokine levels decreased from baseline to day 90. In a multivariable analysis, female sex (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 2.69 [1.93–3.81]), older age (AOR = 1.32 [1.17–1.50]), and elevated baseline levels of IL-6 (AOR = 1.59 [1.02–2.47]) were independently associated with development of PCC. Those who received early CCP treatment (≤5 days after symptom onset) compared to late CCP treatment had statistically significant lower odds of PCC. IMPORTANCE Approximately 20% of individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2 experienced long-term health effects, as defined PCC. However, it is unknown if there are any early biomarkers associated with PCC or whether early intervention treatments may decrease the risk of PCC. In a secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial, this study demonstrates that among outpatients with SARS-CoV-2, increased IL-6 at time of infection is associated with increased odds of PCC. In addition, among individuals treated early, within 5 days of symptom onset, with COVID-19 convalescent plasma, there was a trend for decreased odds of PCC after adjusting for other demographic and clinical characteristics. Future treatment studies should be considered to evaluate the effect of early treatment and anti-IL-6 therapies on PCC development.

ObjectiveDesign thinking is a creative problem‐solving process used to better understand users’ needs and experiences so that a product or service can be improved. Its emphasis on empathy, iterative prototyping, and participatory collaboration make it an ideal methodology for innovation in medical education. We apply this framework to the virtual rheumatology fellowship interview process so that interviews can become more applicant centered.MethodsThis educational quality improvement project uses a design‐thinking framework to identify opportunities and challenges for rheumatology fellowship applicants. The investigators use the 5‐step process (Empathize, Define, Ideate, Prototype, Test) and incorporate rapid qualitative analysis of semistructured interviews to innovate the interview experience. The iterative and collaborative nature of this process has empowered participants to codesign an applicant‐centered interview experience.ResultsInterviews with fellowship applicants (n = 9), fellow physicians (n = 4), and faculty members (n = 3) identified three major dynamics of the interview process: (1) Is it a safe environment to ask questions? (2) How do I exchange information effectively? and (3) How do I fit all these data into the bigger picture? Creative brainstorming techniques at a series of three workshops yielded four prototypes emphasizing customization, hybridization, facilitation, and preparation. A finalized applicant‐centered interview template was devised in preparation for the 2023‐2024 application season.ConclusionDesign thinking has yielded insights into three important dynamics that drive applicant experiences. These insights allow for a redesign of processes so that virtual interviews can be more applicant centered. This framework allows for further iterations and modifications as the needs of applicants and programs evolve over time.

Background: Arthrofibrosis (AF) after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) remains a challenge. There is a paucity of data on arthroscopic interventions for AF after ACLR. Purpose: To (1) describe the patient, injury, and surgical characteristics and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of those requiring an arthroscopic intervention for loss of motion after ACLR and (2) compare outcomes between patients undergoing an early intervention (within 3 months) versus those undergoing a late intervention (after 3 months). Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: Patients with a history of ACLR and a subsequent operative procedure for postoperative AF at a single institution between 2000 and 2018 were retrospectively identified. Arthroscopic interventions included lysis of adhesions, capsular release with or without manipulation under anesthesia, and excision of cyclops lesions. Patients were excluded if they had a knee dislocation or multiple-ligament injury, a periarticular fracture, or less than 2-year follow-up from the arthroscopic intervention. PROs including the Tegner activity score, visual analog scale pain score, and International Knee Documentation Committee score as well as knee range of motion (ROM) were recorded. Results: A total of 40 patients were included with a mean age of 27.2 years (range, 11.0-63.8 years) at surgery and a mean follow-up of 10.0 years (range, 2.9-20.7 years). The mean preoperative flexion and extension were 102° (range, 40°-150°) and 8° (range, 0°-25°), respectively. The mean postoperative flexion and extension were 131° (range, 110° to 150°) and 0° (range, –10° to 5°), respectively. After the arthroscopic intervention, the mean ROM improved from 94° (range, 40°-140°) preoperatively to 131° (range, 107°-152°) at final follow-up ( P < .001), and the visual analog scale pain score improved from 3.0 preoperatively to 1.2 postoperatively ( P = .001). Overall, 13 patients (32.5%) underwent an intervention within 3 months and 27 (67.5%) after 3 months. The early intervention group had a higher postoperative International Knee Documentation Committee score compared with the late intervention group (86.8 vs 71.7, respectively; P = .035). Conclusion: An arthroscopic intervention for AF after ACLR successfully improved knee ROM and pain. Patients who underwent either early or late surgery obtained satisfactory motion and function, although improved PROs were observed when the intervention occurred within 3 months of the primary procedure.

Background The increasing incidence of reverse total shoulder arthroplasties (RTSA) has led to an increase in revision surgery. We aimed to compare patients undergoing re-revision RTSA to a matched cohort undergoing first-revision RTSA. Methods A retrospective review of all revision RTSAs was performed at a single institution. Sixteen shoulders that underwent re-revision RTSA were matched 1:3 to shoulders that underwent revision RTSA with a minimum two-year follow-up. Outcome scores including the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Shoulder Score (ASES), Short-Form 12 (SF-12), Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI), and Simple Shoulder Test (SST) scores, range of motion (ROM), and improvement from preoperative to postoperative outcomes after re-revision RTSA were assessed. Additionally, postoperative outcomes after re-revision RTSA were compared to patients that underwent first revision RTSA and subsequently compared to the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) values for the outcome scores and ROM measurements assessed. Results Sixteen shoulders that underwent re-revision RTSA and 78 revision RTSAs met the final inclusion criteria to be included in this study. Significant improvement from preoperative to postoperative re-revision RTSA was seen in the ASES score (p = 0.046), SPADI score (p = 0.044), SST (p = 0.008), abduction (p = 0.016), and elevation (p = 0.025), but not the SF-12 score (p = 0.396), external rotation (p = 0.449), or internal rotation (p = 0.451). Outcomes after revision RTSA were found to be superior to outcomes after re-revision RTSA for all outcome scores (ASES p = 0.029, SF-12 p = 0.018, SPADI p = 0.003) except the SST score (p = 0.080) and all ROM measures (p > 0.05 for all). Internal rotation was equivalent postoperatively between both groups. From preoperative to postoperative re-revision RTSA, the mean improvement exceeded the MCID for the SST score, abduction, forward elevation, and external rotation. When comparing postoperative revision RTSA to postoperative re-revision RTSA, the mean difference between revision and re-revision RTSA exceeded the MCID for the SPADI score and external rotation. The complication rate was 19% in shoulders undergoing first revision and 41% in shoulders undergoing re-revision RTSA. Conclusion Patients undergoing re-revision RTSA receive improvement in clinical outcomes, but do not achieve outcomes comparable to those achieved after first revision RTSA.

In this qualitative study, we explored perspectives of patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) and their families on the Get to Know Me board (GTKMB). Of the 46 patients approached, 38 consented to participate. Of the 66 family members approached, 60 consented to participate. Most patients (26, 89%) and family members (52, 99%) expressed that GTKMB was important in recognizing patient's humanity. Most patients (20, 68%) and families (39, 74%) said that it helped to build a better relationship with the provider team. 60% of patients and families commented that the GTKMB was used as a platform by providers to interact with them. Up to 45 (85%) of the family members supported specific contents of the GTKMB. In structured interviews (11 patients, 7 family members), participants additionally commented on ways providers used the GTKMB to communicate, support patient's personhood, and on caveats in interacting with GTKMB. Critically ill patients and families found the GTKMB helpful in preserving personhood of patient, fostering communication, and building relationships with clinicians.

Surgery has long been an important treatment for limiting optic nerve damage and minimising visual loss in patients with glaucoma. Numerous improvements, modifications, and innovations in glaucoma surgery over recent decades have improved surgical safety, and have led to earlier and more frequent surgical intervention in glaucoma patients at risk of vision loss. This review summarises the latest advancements in trabeculectomy surgery, glaucoma drainage device (GDD) implantation, and minimally invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS). A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases, alongside subsequent hand searches—limited to the past 10 years for trabeculectomy and GDDs, and the past 5 years for MIGS—yielded 2283 results, 58 of which were included in the final review (8 trabeculectomy, 27 GDD, and 23 MIGS). Advancements in trabeculectomy are described in terms of adjunctive incisions, Tenon’s layer management, and novel suturing techniques. Advancements in GDD implantation pertain to modifications of surgical techniques and devices, novel methods to deal with postoperative complications and surgical failure, and the invention of new GDDs. Finally, the popularity of MIGS has recently promoted modifications to current surgical techniques and the development of novel MIGS devices.

Abstract Objective The aim of this study was to identify the most useful contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) features for differentiating pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) from mass-forming chronic pancreatitis (MFCP) in chronic calcific pancreatitis (CCP). Methods In total, 101 patients with CCP and focal pancreatic mass formed the study group. Sixteen qualitative and four quantitative parameters were analyzed. Qualitative parameters included size, site, margin, intralesional hypodensity, collateral duct sign, abrupt pancreatic duct (PD) cutoff, upstream PD dilatation, distal pancreatic atrophy, double duct sign, enhancement pattern, contrast attenuation, peripancreatic inflammation, vascular involvement, regional nodes, and metastasis. Quantitative parameters included duct-to-body ratio, common bile duct (CBD) diameter, main pancreatic duct (MPD) diameter, and carcinoembryonic antigen 19-9 (CA19-9). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy were calculated for prediction of PDAC. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed and the area under ROC curve (AUROC) was calculated to determine diagnostic accuracy to assess the optimal cutoff. Results PDAC was confirmed in 48 patients and MFCP in 53 patients. A duct-to-body ratio greater than 0.48 had 95.5% sensitivity, 83.3% specificity, 80.8% PPV, 96.2% NPV, and 88.5% accuracy for predicting PDAC. A CBD diameter cutoff ≥9.5 mm had an accuracy of 75% (p < 0.019) and an MPD cutoff ≥6.25 mm had an accuracy of 67.8% (p = 0.008) for predicting PDAC. On binary logistic regression, the duct-to-body ratio was found to be the significant independent factor associated with malignancy. Conclusion A duct-to-body ratio greater than 0.48, intralesional hypodensity, and abrupt duct cutoff are the most helpful computed tomography (CT) features for distinguishing PDAC from MFCP in CCP. On binary logistic regression, the duct-to-body ratio was found to be a significant independent factor. Interspersed normal parenchyma was observed as a very specific sign of MFCP. Intraparenchymal hypodensity has high specificity, but further validation is needed.