Citations

Abstract » A thorough understanding of glenoid deformity is essential to anticipate intraoperative needs and manage bony deficiencies. Management strategies include eccentric reaming, alternate scapular line baseplate orientation, bone grafting, or metallic augmentation as either “off-the-shelf” or custom baseplates. Accurate implantation of the glenoid component in the presence of glenoid bone loss (GBL) may also benefit from shoulderspecific guides, navigation, or robotic assistance. » GBL can negatively affect outcomes due to compromised bony fixation, altered soft tissue tensioning, and component malposition, which can contribute to impingement, dislocation, aseptic loosening, polyethylene wear, and component failure. » In this article, we provide a comprehensive review of published literature regarding the management of GBL in primary RSA and provide additional insight on the effectiveness of current approaches to manage bony deficiency.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic pancreatitis (CP) is a disease associated with chronic inflammation, fibrosis, and pain. There is a lack of tools available that facilitate early diagnosis, when intervention could prevent irreversible damage. Pilot data suggested prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) as a candidate biomarker for early CP. PGE2 activates signaling pathways that promote inflammation, pain, and fibrosis. METHODS: We assessed PGE2, metabolites, and downstream targets in pancreatic fluid collected endoscopically 0–10 (n = 110) and 10–20 (n = 111) minutes after intravenous secretin administration. PGE2 and metabolites were measured in plasma (n = 75) and urine (n = 71) from the same subjects. Subjects were enrolled in the PROCEED study and classified symptomatic controls, acute/recurrent acute pancreatitis (AP/RAP), or CP. RESULTS: A significant main effect was detected in 10–20 minutes pancreas fluid ( P = 0.027) and plasma ( P = 0.046); post hoc testing showed PGE2 was lower in the AP/RAP group compared with symptomatic controls. There was also trend toward lower PGE2 in urine ( P = 0.062). To elucidate the active downstream pathways, calcitonin gene-related peptide, substance P, and matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) 1, 2, 3, 7, 9, and 13 were measured in pancreas fluid. A significant difference between the 3 groups was detected for both MMP7 and MMP9. MMP7 was elevated in individuals with CP vs AP/RAP ( P = 0.012) for samples collected early but both time points for MMP9 ( P = 0.027, P = 0.002). DISCUSSION: While PGE2 is detectable in pancreas fluid, these data suggest that it may not be sensitive enough to distinguish between AP/RAP and CP. However, MMPs may distinguish between stages of pancreatitis and require further testing as potential diagnostic biomarkers.

Pancreatogenic or type 3c diabetes, which occurs as a consequence of pancreatitis, may have several mechanisms. Mechanisms overlapping with those of type 2 diabetes have been explored, including insulin resistance and insulin deficiency. However, autoimmune mechanisms in response to unmasking β-cell antigens, similar to those of type 1 diabetes (T1D), have not been thoroughly examined. We performed cross-sectional T1D autoantibody profiling in a large prospective cohort (N = 927) of adults with acute, recurrent acute, or chronic pancreatitis. We examined correlations of prevalence of autoantibodies against GAD (GAD antibody), IA-2 (IA-2 antibody), zinc transporter 8 (ZnT8; ZnT8 antibody), and insulin (insulin autoantibody [IAA]) with clinical and demographic features, including presence of diabetes, diabetes treatment, and family history of diabetes. Diabetes was present in 11 (12%) of 94 participants with acute pancreatitis, 69 (27%) of 273 with recurrent acute pancreatitis, and 235 (43%) of 560 with chronic pancreatitis. Among these groups, islet autoantibodies were respectively found in five (5.3%) of 94, 48 (17.6%) of 273, and 127 (22.6%) of 560. The proportions of individuals with diabetes who were autoantibody positive were 45%, 70%, and 54%, respectively (most commonly IAA, which may reflect exogenous insulin use). However, across the entire cohort, 27 participants (2.9%) had two, two (0.2%) had three, and one (0.1%) had four T1D-associated autoantibodies, respectively, suggesting a potential pathogenic link that should be further explored. ARTICLE HIGHLIGHTS Type 1 diabetes–associated autoimmune mechanisms have not been thoroughly examined in pancreatitis-associated diabetes. We assessed the prevalence of four islet autoantibodies in serum from a large prospective cohort of patients with acute, recurrent acute, or chronic pancreatitis. Diabetes was present in 11 (12%) of 94 participants with acute pancreatitis, 69 (27%) of 273 with recurrent acute pancreatitis, and 235 (43%) of 560 with chronic pancreatitis. Excluding those with only insulin autoantibody positivity, which is confounded by insulin treatment, islet autoantibodies were identified in 51 (5.5%) of 927 participants, and 30 (3.2%) of 297 were positive for two or more autoantibodies. Our findings suggest pancreatitis may elicit islet autoimmunity in a subset of patients, necessitating prospective longitudinal follow-up.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic pancreatitis (CP) remains difficult to manage with few treatment options. Prior studies have implicated prostaglandin E 2 (PGE 2 ) in mediating chronic inflammation in the pancreas. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate whether indomethacin, a cyclooxygenase-2 enzyme inhibitor, would reduce PGE 2 levels in CP. METHODS: In this pilot multicenter randomized controlled trial, participants with CP received oral indomethacin (50 mg) or placebo twice daily for 28 days. Measurement of PGE 2 levels in pancreatic fluid collected endoscopically after secretin administration at baseline and posttreatment (day 28) was performed. Quality of life and pain were also assessed at baseline and posttreatment. RESULTS: A total of 27 participants were randomized (indomethacin = 13, placebo = 14). Although PGE 2 levels decreased after treatment in pancreas fluid, plasma, and saliva in the indomethacin group, there was no significant difference in mean change in pancreas fluid PGE 2 levels between the indomethacin and placebo groups (−457.7 pg/mL vs −840.4 pg/mL, P = 0.25). There was also no significant change in pain severity composite score (−1.3 indomethacin vs −0.5 placebo, P = 0.33), but the improvement in pain interference score (−2.9 indomethacin vs −0.4, P = 0.058) trended toward significance. There was no difference in adverse events between the 2 groups. DISCUSSION: In this phase 1/2 study, oral indomethacin was safe and well tolerated by patients with CP. Although there was no significant difference in change in PGE 2 levels, further studies are needed to determine the effect of indomethacin on the inflammatory pathway of CP and patient-centered outcomes.

Abstract Background We examined how the COVID-19 pandemic influenced influenza vaccination, healthcare engagement, and patient satisfaction. Methods We retrospectively analyzed influenza vaccination records and patient experience surveys of adult primary care patients in southeastern Minnesota during two 3-year phases: Prepandemic (1 January 2017–28 February 2020) and Pandemic-Plus (1 March 2020–31 December 2023). Vaccination status was defined as “always vaccinated” (AV), “never vaccinated” (NV), or “intermittently vaccinated” (IV) for seasonal influenza. Results During the Pandemic-Plus phase, 7.0% (n = 3556) of the Prepandemic AV and 48.7% (n = 16 710) of the Prepandemic IV patients never received another influenza vaccine. Compared to AV, IV and NV patients were more likely to reside in areas with greater socioeconomic deprivation (odds ratio [OR], 1.58 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.53–1.62] and 1.99 [1.94–2.05], respectively), have a high school education or less (2.86 [2.74–2.98] and 3.38 [3.23–3.53]), and report healthcare disengagement (1.59 [1.55–1.64] and 4.21 [4.09–4.33]). After adjusting for Area Deprivation Index and medical comorbidities, healthcare disengagement increased among the NV versus AV between phases (3.33 [3.24–3.41] and 4.23 [4.10–4.35]). In a subgroup analysis those with severe comorbidities were less likely AV (NV vs AV: 1.21 [1.14–1.27]) and more dissatisfied with care (NV vs AV: 1.25 [1.18–1.33]). Conclusions The COVID-19 pandemic altered vaccination behaviors and healthcare satisfaction, especially among those at high risk of developing influenza-related complications. Medical providers and public health officials should be aware of factors associated with vaccine refusal to better target interventions.

Abstract INTRODUCTION Neurofilament light chain (NfL) quantification aids in diagnosing and predicting neurological disorders, but clinical and laboratory practices vary across centers. Differences in result interpretation and reporting further challenge test commutability. This study aimed to review the global analytical and post‐analytical methods used for NfL measurement in routine clinical practice across different contexts. METHODS We established an international working group (WG) and distributed a survey to its members to gather information on context of use (COU), (pre) analytical methods, cutoff usage, as well as the interpretation and reporting of NfL measurements. RESULTS Among the centers, 63% measured NfL in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), 87% in blood, and 53% in both. COU was widespread, with 50% defining pathological cutoffs based on publications and 42% considering age. Reporting was primarily done through numeric results (95%). DISCUSSION Harmonizing cutoffs, reporting, and interpretation across various clinical contexts will facilitate the incorporation of this biomarker into routine clinical practice. Highlights Unique international overview of current analytical and post‐analytical methods for neurofilament light chain (NfL) measurement in routine clinical practice. Tailored sheets for each neurological application. Strategies to harmonize cutoffs, reporting, and interpretation of NfL's measurement.

Abstract Objective Despite exponential growth in artificial intelligence (AI) research for laboratory medicine and pathology, a significant gap exists between model development and clinical AI implementation. This article introduces a structured framework, the Clinical AI Readiness Evaluator (CARE), to bridge this gap and support the responsible adoption of AI in clinical laboratory settings. Methods Building upon the Machine Learning Technology Readiness Levels framework, we developed CARE specifically for the clinical laboratory environment by incorporating health care–specific requirements, regulatory considerations, and workflow integration needs. This framework was iteratively refined through practical application across diverse AI use cases within laboratory medicine and pathology. Results The CARE framework provides a systematic approach to AI development and implementation through 8 component workstreams: clinical use case, data, data pipeline, code, clinical user experience, clinical technology infrastructure, clinical orchestration, and regulatory compliance. Unlike generic AI frameworks, CARE distinguishes itself by emphasizing both health care and laboratory workflow integration, regulatory requirements, ethical considerations, and comprehensive validation for clinical contexts. The framework accommodates both internally developed models and commercial AI solutions, providing clear guidance through technology readiness levels and structured review processes. Conclusions The CARE framework addresses the unique challenges of implementing AI in laboratory medicine and pathology by providing a comprehensive roadmap from initial concepts through clinical deployment and maintenance. This article, the first in a series of 4, establishes the foundational AI lifecycle framework, while subsequent articles will explore data documentation, ethical AI considerations, and governance structures. By adopting this structured approach, laboratories can responsibly harness AI’s potential to enhance diagnostic accuracy and operational efficiencies and, ultimately, improve patient care.

Abstract Background Hospital‐at‐home programs (HaH) in the United States have evolved to include a virtual‐hybrid delivery model, where all physician encounters are virtual and partnered with a home care team. Objective To examine whether a virtual hybrid HaH program enabled by technology has similar clinical outcomes to traditional brick‐and‐mortar (B&M) hospital care. Methods We conducted a pragmatic trial at three hospitals, randomizing 1150 acutely ill patients requiring hospital care between July 10, 2023, and October 31, 2023 one‐to‐one into two groups: intervention (HaH) and control (B&M). The primary analysis was an intention‐to‐treat non‐inferiority analysis of the primary outcome, which was a composite of 30‐day all‐cause mortality and unplanned readmissions. Secondary outcomes included 30‐day readmission, all‐cause mortality, and patient experience. Results The mean age was 67.8 (standard deviation [SD] 16.3) years, and 52.2% were female. The primary outcome occurred in 99 (17.3%) HaH patients and 114 (19.8%) B&M patients (odds ratio [OR] 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.63–1.14, p = .28), meeting the non‐inferiority criterion. Thirty‐day unplanned readmission occurred in 84 (14.7%) HaH patients and 101 (17.5%) B&M patients (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.59–1.11, p = .19). Thirty‐day all‐cause mortality occurred in 25 (4.4%) HaH patients and 19 (3.3%) B&M patients (OR 1.34, 95% CI 0.73–2.46, p = .35). No HaH patients died while receiving their hospital care at home. HaH program was associated with a higher likelihood of patients reporting feeling extremely comfortable or very comfortable (84.4% HaH; 60.9% B&M, p = .001). Conclusion A hybrid HaH model is a safe and comfortable alternative to traditional B&M hospital care.

Background: Anaplasma phagocytophilum is an emerging tick-borne zoonotic pathogen that typically causes mild infections, which are often successfully managed in outpatient settings. Immunosuppression associated with splenectomy is a well-documented risk factor for severe infections from pathogens such as Babesia microti and encapsulated bacteria. However, splenectomy has not previously been identified as a risk factor for severe anaplasmosis. Case Presentation: This report describes a rare case of severe anaplasmosis complicated by multiorgan failure in a patient who had undergone splenectomy several decades earlier. The clinical course was notable for pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, acute kidney injury, rhabdomyolysis, atrial fibrillation, and possible myocarditis. Despite the severity of the presentation, prompt initiation of doxycycline led to recovery, albeit with a significantly prolonged hospital stay. Conclusions: Patients with splenectomy might be more likely to develop a serious form of Anaplasmosis infection such as multiorgan failure. Clinicians in tick-borne endemic areas should be aware that non-specific symptoms can indicate anaplasmosis.

OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to determine risk factors for distal junctional failure (DJF) following three-column osteotomy (3CO) for the correction of cervical deformity. METHODS A retrospective review was performed of patients who underwent a cervical or upper thoracic 3CO for cervical deformity correction by the senior author from 2008 to 2023. The main outcome of interest was DJF, defined as revision surgery with extension of the distal end of the fusion construct. Patients were excluded if the lowest instrumented vertebra (LIV) was the sacrum/pelvis, and if patients had prior autofusion throughout the distal part of the spine to the sacrum (e.g., ankylosing spondylitis). The minimum follow-up duration was 1 year. RESULTS One hundred fourteen patients were identified who underwent a cervical or upper thoracic 3CO for cervical deformity correction, 41 of whom met inclusion criteria for this study. The median patient age was 66 years, median BMI was 27, and 61% were male. Ten patients (24%) experienced DJF, requiring reoperation and distal extension of the construct to the pelvis in 9 cases and to L1 in 1 case. On univariable analysis, patients who experienced DJF compared with those who did not were more likely to be female (80% vs 35%, p = 0.007), had lower LIV Hounsfield units (HUs; 127 vs 167, p = 0.041), were less likely to have an LIV in a small autofused segment (10% vs 45%, p = 0.02), had an LIV that was closer to the first lordotic level (one level above vs three, p = 0.043), and had a longer length of fusion (17 vs 13 levels, p = 0.033). A stepwise multivariable regression model showed that having an LIV closer to the first lordotic vertebra was the only statistically significant predictor of DJF (OR 0.49, p = 0.013) and low LIV HUs did not reach statistical significance (OR 0.97, p = 0.09). CONCLUSIONS Patients with cervical deformity undergoing a 3CO are at higher risk for DJF with constructs terminating near the first lordotic vertebra. While LIV selection is complex and patient specific, choosing an LIV at least two levels above the first lordotic vertebra may help prevent DJF.