Effect of Compressive Shoulder Draping With Adhesive Incise Drape on Soft Tissue Swelling in Shoulder Arthroscopy: A Prospective Randomized Trial.

Background: Soft tissue swelling in shoulder arthroscopy is common and may lead to complications. Measures aimed at reducing this phenomenon are routinely used with limited efficacy. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of the study was to assess (1) soft tissue swelling of the shoulder (the operated site) and (2) soft tissue swelling of the neck, chest, and arm (the surrounding tissue) in patients with versus without compressive draping during shoulder arthroscopy. It was hypothesized that compressive draping of the shoulder with adhesive incise drape would reduce soft tissue swelling during shoulder arthroscopy. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. Methods: A total of 50 patients undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair were prospectively randomized to either the study group (in which the shoulder was draped with adhesive incise drape tightened around the shoulder) or the control group (in which a standard shoulder arthroscopy drape was used). The circumferences of the shoulder, arm, chest, and neck were measured preoperatively and postoperatively and compared between the groups. Results: The shoulder circumference in the standard draping group increased by 16% during the procedure (from 21.2 ± 1.5 cm preoperatively to 24.5 ± 1.7 cm postoperatively) compared with only 6% in the compressive draping group (from 21.0 ± 1.3 cm preoperatively to 22.3 ± 1.1 cm postoperatively) (P < .01). No serious postoperative complications were observed in either group. Conclusion: Compressive shoulder draping with adhesive incise drape was effective in reducing soft tissue swelling around the shoulder in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair compared with standard arthroscopic draping and was not associated with any adverse reactions. Registration: NCT03216590 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

Prevalence of polyps ≥6 mm on follow-up CT colonography in a cohort with no significant colon polyps at baseline.

AIM: Assess the prevalence of neoplasia ≥6 mm at repeat CT colonoscopy (CTC) in individuals with no significant lesions at baseline. METHODS: Individuals aged ≥18 years, with/without CRC risk factors, with no polyps ≥6 mm on baseline CTC (negative baseline) who underwent repeat CTC in a large HMO from 2001 to 2011 were retrospectively identified. Studies were reviewed by board-certified radiologists with experience interpreting CTC. Demographic details, CRC risk factors, and the number, size, and location of incident lesions were noted. Findings were classified using the C-RADS scale. Lesion prevalence at CTC-2 was determined, and study interval and risk characteristics of patients with- and without findings were compared. RESULTS: Our study included 636 individuals (369 men [58.0%]; mean age 59.9 years) with negative baseline CTC who underwent repeat CTC after a mean 4.6 year interval (SD 1.6 years). At baseline, 469/636 (73.7%) were at average risk for CRC; 418 remained at average risk for CTC-2 with 51 (8.0%) developing new risk factors in the interval between studies. At CTC-2, 47 participants (7.4%) presented 52 significant neoplasia: 35 polyps 6-9 mm, 14 polyps ≥10 mm, and 3 masses in 3/636 participants (0.47%). 2/3 masses, 6/14 polyps ≥10 mm (42.9%), and 12/25 polyps 6-9 mm (48.0%) were in individuals with risk factors for CRC. Histopathology was available for 12/52 lesions (23.1%): 8 tubular adenomas, 2 villous adenomas, 1 hamartomatous polyp, 1 case of normal tissue. CONCLUSION: A mean 4.6 years after negative-baseline CTC, neoplasia ≥6 mm were seen in 7.4% of participants, including masses in 0.47%, supporting recommendations for a 5-year study interval.