Predicting early discharge from hospital after liver transplantation (ERDALT) at a single center: a new model.

BACKGROUND & RATIONALE: Limited information related to Liver Transplantation (LT) costs in South America exists. Additionally, costs analysis from developed countries may not provide comparable models for those in emerging economies. We sought to evaluate a predictive model of Early Discharge from Hospital after LT (ERDALT = length of hospital stay ≤ 8 days). A predictive model was assessed based on the odds ratios (OR) from a multivariate regression analysis in a cohort of consecutively transplanted adult patients in a single center from Argentina and internally validated with bootstrapping technique. RESULTS: ERDALT was applicable in 34 of 289 patients (11.8%). Variables independently associated with ERDALT were MELD exception points OR 1.9 (P = 0.04), surgery time < 4 h OR 3.8 (P = 0.013), < 5 units of blood products consumption (BPC) OR 3.5 (P = 0.001) and early weaning from mechanical intubation OR 6.3 (P = 0.006). Points in the predictive scoring model were allocated as follows: MELD exception points (absence = 0 points, presence = 1 point), surgery time < 4 h (0-2 points), < 5 units of BPC (0-2 points), and early weaning (0-3 points). Final scores ranged from 0 to 8 points with a c-statistic of 0.83 (95% CI 0.77-0.90; P < 0.0001). Transplant costs were significantly lower in patients with ERDALT (median $23,078 vs. $28,986; P < 0.0001). Neither lower patient and graft survival, nor higher rates of short-term re-hospitalization and acute rejection events after discharge were observed in patients with ERDALT. In conclusion, the ERDALT score identifies patients suitable for early discharge with excellent outcomes after transplantation. This score may provide applicable models particularly for emerging economies.

Successful orthotopic liver transplantation and delayed delivery of a healthy newborn in a woman with fulminant hepatic failure during the second trimester of pregnancy.

Severe liver dysfunction during pregnancy implies a serious risk for both mother and fetus, and represents a technical and ethical challenge for treating physicians. We report a case of a previously healthy 32-year old woman who was admitted to our hospital with idiopathic fulminant hepatic failure and underwent successful orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) at gestation week 21. Patient's and fetus' immediate postoperative course were relatively uneventful until week six after OLT, when the mother developed oligohydramnios and preeclampsia. At pregnancy week 27, after inducing baby's lung maturation, a cesarean section was performed with the delivery of an otherwise healthy girl. After 3 years of follow-up, mother and child are leading normal lives with no complications related either to pregnancy or to OLT. We describe the case of a successful emergency liver transplant in a woman during the second trimester of pregnancy, demonstrating that OLT can be a viable option to preserve the life of the mother and an otherwise unviable fetus. Intrauterine baby's growths until the attainment of a viable gestational age was feasible despite the mother's fulminant hepatic failure and liver transplant surgery.

Lista de control o verificación ("checklist") en procedimientos artroscópicos / Safety checklist in arthroscopic procedures

La seguridad del paciente es un componente fundamental de la calidad asistencial. La Organización Mundial de la Salud publicó una serie de guías orientadas a aumentar la seguridad de los pacientes durante los procedimientos quirúrgicos. Diversas características propias de la cirugía artroscópica exponen al error médico: a. Elevado volumen de prácticas en una misma sesión quirúrgica (errores de identificación de paciente, de sitio quirúrgico y de procedimiento). b. Equipo quirúrgico multidisciplinario (errores por comunicación inefectiva, curvas de aprendizaje desalineadas). c. Arsenal quirúrgico de alta gama tecnológica (errores por mantenimiento deficitario). Una de las herramientas recomendadas es la Lista de Control o de Verificación (“Check List”), de probado beneficio en la aviación civil. Uno de los objetivos fundamentales consiste en asegurar la realización de la práctica correcta, en el paciente correcto y en el sitio correcto. El objetivo del presente trabajo consiste en describir el modelo de Lista de Control normatizada institucionalmente en el Hospital Universitario Austral (HUA) y aplicada en particular por el Equipo de Artroscopia. Se recomienda que la aplicación de la lista de control o de verificación sea adoptada sistemáticamente por los equipos especializados en cirugía artroscópica.

Patient safety represents a keystone of patient health care management. Errors and medical negligence due to countless daily medical interventions cause morbidity and mortality. Therefore in 2008 the World Health Organization published a safety checklist and implementation manual in order to improve compliance with standards and decrease complications during surgical procedures. Surgical Checklist control application bases on avoiding surgical related errors, being the most frequent: wrong site surgery. In arthroscopic surgery, highly demanding surgical shift in the operation room makes this routine practice advisable. Our aim is to describe the surgical check list protocol we use, encouraging go surgeons to routinely use these protocols in order to improve patient safety in their practice.

Estimulación nerviosa periférica: análisis de la respuesta motora en diferentes circunstancias experimentales / Peripheral nerve stimulation: motor response analysis in different experimental circumstances

Introducción. Con una aguja aislada, en aparente contacto nervioso testeado por ultrasonido (US) o por la referencia de una parestesia, no se consigue respuesta motora (RM) a la estimulación nerviosa en un porcentaje variable de casos. El objetivo de nuestros estudios fue observar el comportamiento de la RM a valores < 1mA / 0.1 mseg en diferentes circunstancias experimentales. Aportar evidencia científica que contribuya determinar si con técnica usual de estimulación nerviosa (NS) un nervio puede contactarse o penetrarse sin obtenerse antes una RM. Material y Métodos. Bajo visión directa, doce nervios ciáticos de diferentes animales fueron expuestos y estimulados en dos mitades imaginarias. Observadores ciegos a la intensidad utilizada, consignaron la RM obtenida con 1 mA / 0.1 mseg sin y con contacto nervioso; y con 0.5 mA en contacto; el valor mínimo de intensidad en contacto con que aparece una RM y se obtiene una RM Grado 2, el comportamiento de la RM con la inyección anestésica local (AL) extraneural y la necesidad de aumentar o no la intensidad para obtener una RM de igual intensidad. Luego de colocar la aguja intraneural, se aumentó la intensidad hasta obtener una primer RM y una RM Grado 2. Finalmente se inyectó el AL intraneural y se consignó el comportamiento de la RM. Resultados. Sin contacto nervioso con 1 mA, se obtuvo RM en el 91.6 por ciento de los intentos en ambas mitades del nervio ciático y en el 100 por ciento con contacto neural. Con 0.5 mA en contacto, no se consiguió RM en una mitad en 33.3 por ciento de los intentos (8/24), al recolocarse la aguja, se obtuvo una RM en el 91.6 por ciento en ambas mitades (22/24), en un nervio no se obtuvo RM en ninguna mitad (2/24)... (TRUNCADO)

Introduction. With a needle apparently in contact with a nerve, tested by US or with the reference of a paresthesia, a MR is not observed during nerve stimulation in a variable percentage of the cases. The object of this study was to experimentally observe the behavior of MR within values + 1mA / 0.1 mseg in different circumstances. Provide scientific evidence to contribute to determine if, with the usual nerve stimulation technique (NS) a nerve can be contacted or penetrated without obtaining before a MR. Material and Methods. Under direct visualization, twelve sciatic nerves from different animals were exposed and stimulated in two imaginary halves. Blinded Observers to the intensity, classified the MR at 1 mA/0.1 mseg, with and without nerve contact and with 0.5 mA in contact. Also, minimum intensity value in contact in which a MR appears and when a MR G2 is obtained was determined, the behavior of the MR with the injection of the LA (local anesthetic), extra-neural and the need to increase or not the intensity to obtain a MR at same intensity. After introducing the needle intraneurally, the intensity was increased until a first MR and a Grade 2 was obtained. Finally, LA was injected intraneurally and the behavior of the RM was observed. Results. RM was obtained with 1 mA in 91.6 per cent of the cases in both halves of the Sciatic nerve without contact, and 100 per cent in contact. With 0.5 mA in 33.3 per cent (8/24) of the cases, MR wasn't observed in one half of the nerve. In one case, MR wasn't obtained in any half. After relocalizing the needle a MR was obtained in 91.6 per cent of the cases in both halves (22/24). The mean minimum intensity in contact for a first MR was of 0.16 + 0.08 mA, and 0.36 + 0.08 mA for a MR Grade 2. An intraneural MR was found in 92 per cent with a mean minimum value of 0.19 + 0.08 mA... (TRUNCADO)

Com uma agulha isolada em aparente contato com o nervo, conforme teste de ultra-som (US) ou presença de parestesia, nao é conseguida resposta motora (RM) a estimulação nervosa em uma porcentagem variável de casos. O objetivo de nossos estudos foi observar o comportamento da RM a valores < 1 mA /0.1 mseg em diferentes circunstancias experimentais. Proporcionar evidencia científica que ajude a determinar se com a técnica usual de estimulação nervosa (NS) é possível contatar ou penetrar um nervo sem antes se obter RM. Material e métodos. Sob visão direta, doze nervos ciáticos de diferentes animais foram expostos e estimulados em duas metades imaginárias. Observadores cegos a intensidade utilizada consignaram a RM obtida com 1 mA/0.1 mseg com e sem contato nervoso, e com 0.5 mA em contato; o valor mínimo de intensidade em contato ao qual aparece uma RM e é obtida uma RM grau 2; o comportamento da RM com injeção anestésica local (AL) extraneural e a necessidade de aumentar ou nao a intensidade para se obter uma RM de igual intensidade. Colocada a agulha intraneural, aumentou-se a intensidade até se obter uma primeira RM e uma RM grau 2. Finalmente, foi injetado o AL intraneural e registrado o comportamento da RM. Resultados. Sem contato nervoso e com 1 mA, obteve-se RM em ambas metades do nervo ciático em 91.6 por cento dos intentos, e com contato neural em 100 por cento. Com 0.5 mA em contato, nao se obteve RM em uma metade em 33.3 por cento dos intentos (8/24); recolocada a agulha, obteve-se RM em 91.6 por cento em ambas metades (22/24), e em um nervo nao foi obtida RM em nenhuma metade (2/24). A intensidade mínima em contato para uma primeira RM foi de 0.14 + 0.07 mA, e de 0.31 + 0.11 mA para uma RM grau 2. Houve RM intraneural em 92 por cento com valor mínimo de 0.19 + 0.08 mA. A RM desapareceu com a injeção de anestésico local; nao foi observado deslocamento do nervo da ponta da agulha. (TRUNCADO)

Relationship between evoked motor response and sensory paresthesia in interscalene brachial plexus block.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: This study sought to define the relationship between a paresthesia and a motor response (MR) to electrical nerve stimulation using a peripheral nerve stimulator (PNS) during interscalene block. We sought to determine if at a low amperage (< or =1.0 mA) a MR would precede a paresthesia. METHODS: Twenty-two interscalene blocks were performed using insulated needles and a PNS. A MR was obtained at 0.5 mA and then the PNS was turned off. The needle was further advanced until a paresthesia was elicited. The PNS was again turned on, the needle held immobile, and the amperage increased in 0.1 mA increments up to 0.5 mA, or an MR obtained, whichever occurred first. If no MR was obtained, the needle was withdrawn at 0.5 mA in the same direction as it entered until MR was again observed. RESULTS: A MR was obtained at 0.5 mA in all the patients. After the PNS was turned off and the needle further advanced, a paresthesia was elicited in 21 patients. When the PNS was turned on again, a MR was produced at 0 to 0.5 mA in 13 patients. In a subset of 8 patients without a second MR to stimulation up to 0.5 mA, the needle was withdrawn at that amperage. A MR was subsequently obtained during withdrawal in each patient in this subset. CONCLUSIONS: MR preceded paresthesia in every patient. The most likely explanation for this observation is that MR can be achieved at a small distance from the nerve, whereas elicitation of mechanical paresthesia requires either nerve contact or more intimate location of the needle's tip relative to the nerve. Another possible explanation is that motor fibers are located in a more superficial position and are therefore encountered first. Motor and sensory responses are separate and discrete phenomena.