Citations

Objective: The Complete Cochlear Implant Care (CCIC) model is a highly coordinated care delivery model reducing and condensing in-person visits for cochlear implant (CI) patients, leveraging telehealth and remote programming. Clinical, quality-of-life, implementation, patient experience, and financial outcomes of the clinical trial are reported. Study design: Prospective, nonrandomized, 2-arm clinical trial Setting: Tertiary referral CI center Patients: Adult CI candidates Interventions: Cochlear implantation Main outcome measures: Speech perception, quality of life, implementation, patient experience, and financial outcomes for both CCIC and traditional care delivery models. Results: Patients participating in the traditional and CCIC delivery models demonstrated 12-month postoperative speech perception scores comparable to nationally reported outcomes (CNC 61% and 72% and AzBio in quiet 75% and 87% for traditional and CCIC cohorts, respectively). Quality-of-life evaluation using the CIQOL-10 demonstrated similar 12-month postoperative scores between groups (52 and 54 for traditional and CCIC cohorts, respectively). The CI Patient Experience Survey demonstrated high satisfaction outcomes in ease of communication, preparedness for surgery, and overall care in both cohorts. Implementation analysis of the CCIC model revealed perceived benefits from staff and clinicians; however, support for expansion of the program was contingent upon the availability of app-based or web-based remote programming technology. Finally, financial analysis revealed decreased out-of-pocket costs for CCIC patients. Conclusion: The CCIC model has the potential to dramatically streamline hearing health care delivery and reduce out-of-pocket costs for CI recipients. Clinical outcomes between cohorts were comparable in this feasibility study; however, a sufficiently powered trial is required to definitively comment on clinical outcomes with the new care delivery model.

Arthrofibrosis is a common complication following total knee arthroplasty and is the result of a dysregulated immuno-inflammatory cascade, which culminates in excessive scar deposition by myofibroblasts within the knee joint. Pharmacotherapies for arthrofibrosis are limited, with treatment reliant on manipulation under anesthesia or lysis of adhesions with or without component revision. Bupivacaine (a local anesthetic) and meloxicam (a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug) combination therapy may exert antifibrotic properties by limiting inflammatory cell recruitment and the subsequent release of profibrotic cytokines. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of this combination therapy in a rabbit model of arthrofibrosis by evaluating live and postsacrifice knee biomechanics and gene expression of posterior knee capsule tissue. Forty New Zealand white rabbits were equally divided into two experimental groups and prospectively studied to assess knee passive extension angles (PEA), terminal posterior capsular stiffness, and the inflammatory milieu of the posterior knee joint capsule. Experimental limbs with and without combination therapy showed similar live PEAs and terminal posterior capsular stiffness, with no significant differences between the groups. Gene expression analysis, however, revealed significant reduction in inflammatory genes but not profibrotic genes. In summary, bupivacaine and meloxicam combination therapy did not exert antifibrotic effects in a rabbit model of arthrofibrosis but significantly reduced the expression of inflammatory markers in the local environment of the posterior capsule.

Background: Myxofibrosarcomas are notoriously highly infiltrative soft-tissue sarcomas, making negative surgical margins difficult to obtain. Recently, vacuum-assisted closure (VAC) is used to delay wound closure until a negative margin has been achieved; however, this can delay care and increase costs. Our institution has historically performed single-stage resections with intraoperative frozen margin analysis and reconstruction in these patients. The purpose of this study is to report the outcomes of this technique. Methods: We reviewed 112 patients (62 males, mean age 70 ± 14 years) with superficial myxofibrosarcoma. Eighty-eight patients received preoperative radiation. All patients underwent surgical resection with intraoperative frozen margin analysis, and the planned reconstruction was performed in a single anesthetic. Results: The 10-year local recurrence-free survival was 90%; positive intraoperative frozen section (HR 7.44, p = 0.004) and final permanent margins (HR 8.53, p = 0.007) were associated with local recurrence. Intraoperative margins were negative in 103 (92%) of patients, 1 of which was positive on final permanent section. There were nine cases of microscopically positive margins, of which seven underwent immediate re-excision to a negative margin. The accuracy of frozen margin assessment for myxofibrosarcoma was between 92.92 and 98.23%. All patients underwent reconstruction at the time of resection, with 19% needing an additional procedure, most commonly due to a wound complication (12%). Conclusions: Multidisciplinary single-stage excision with intraoperative frozen margin assessment and soft-tissue reconstruction yields low rates of local recurrence in patients with superficial myxofibrosarcoma.

Objective: To characterize patient outcomes after primary stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for the management of sporadic facial nerve schwannoma. Study design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: Six tertiary referral centers across the United States and United Kingdom. Patients: Adults undergoing SRS from 2000 through 2023 for sporadic facial nerve schwannoma along any segment of the facial nerve were included. Patients with NF2-related schwannomatosis were excluded. Intervention: Stereotactic radiosurgery. Main outcome measure: Long-term tumor control. Results: Among 60 patients meeting inclusion, the median age at SRS was 52 years (IQR: 41 to 64) with a median tumor size of 19.5 mm (IQR: 14.7 to 22.8). Tumors commonly involved the internal auditory canal (73%), cisternal (49%), geniculate/labyrinthine (47%), and tympanic segments (22%). Two patients experienced SRS failure and underwent salvage treatment; salvage-free survival rates (95% CI; number still at risk) at 1, 3, 5, and 10 years after SRS were 100% (100 to 100; 55), 100% (100 to 100; 36), 100% (100 to 100; 18), and 87% (72 to 100; 9), respectively. Among 31 (52%) patients with House-Brackmann (HB) grade I facial function at presentation, only 6 demonstrated worse facial function at a median of 3.2 years (IQR: 1.7 to 6.6) after SRS. Of 18 patients with serviceable hearing (AAO-HNS class A/B) at SRS, 13 maintained serviceable hearing at a median of 1.0 years (IQR: 0.5 to 4.9) of post-SRS audiometric follow-up. Conclusions: Durable tumor control after primary SRS for sporadic facial nerve schwannoma is achieved in most patients. Among those with HB grade I facial function at presentation, treatment with SRS harbors limited additional risk of facial paresis beyond observation alone.

Abstract Objectives/Background The intent of this review is to provide practical guidance for trainees considering a headache medicine fellowship and examine key factors that contribute to program selection. Headache medicine continues to gain appeal as a neurologic subspecialty, and the number of headache fellowship programs across the country has paralleled that growth. Residents who develop interest in the field must decide whether to pursue fellowship for more specialized training. Establishing a framework for navigating this process can help trainees better evaluate programs and make informed decisions. Methods This narrative review was conducted as an initiative by the New Investigators and Trainees Special Interest Group of the American Headache Society in collaboration with a group of academic leaders and headache clinicians who participated in headache fellowship and/or the match process. Topics were selected based on themes identified in existing literature on fellowship selection across other disciplines. Headache‐specific information was obtained from a review of literature on headache education and fellowship, along with relevant professional society and program institution websites. This information was supplemented by the authors' perspectives when available evidence was limited. Results Physicians choose headache medicine for various reasons. This career path derives from inspiration through mentorship received during residency, exposure to a diverse patient population during training, and the desire to provide new therapies and procedural interventions. Headache medicine fellowships offer structured and in‐depth training through clinical, educational, professional, and scholarly activities. Programs may vary in size, structure, support, and patient care settings. These factors can help trainees decide whether to pursue fellowship and what to evaluate in different programs. Conclusion This review identifies key factors in pursuing a headache medicine fellowship, allowing trainees to seek programs that support professional interests and career aspirations.