Unplanned return to theater: A quality of care and risk management index?

INTRODUCTION: Surgical quality and risk management is a major public health issue. The consequences of unplanned return to theater are social, occupational, financial and even legal. Unscheduled revision surgery is a major adverse event, resulting from serious complications - some of which are thought to be avoidable. The present study sought to assess and analyze the incidence of unplanned return to theater in an orthopedic surgery department. The study hypothesis was that some of the complications involved could be avoided. PATIENTS AND METHOD: A mixed retrospective-prospective study examined a consecutive series of 10,158 patients operated on in an orthopedic and traumatologic surgery department between January 2011 and December 2013. Patients undergoing revision surgery for reasons directly related to the primary procedure were analyzed. Patients were distributed among the following subgroups: infection, implant dislocation; hemorrhagic complication, mechanical complication, problem of primary technique, stiffness, wound healing disorder. Specific indicators of dysfunction liable to have contributed to onset of the complication were applied in each subgroup, to determine the avoidable or unavoidable nature of the event. RESULTS: Two hundred and twenty-four patients (2.2%) underwent revision surgery for reasons directly related to the primary procedure. One hundred and eight cases (48.2%) were considered to have been avoidable: 48 infections (21.4%), 27 implant dislocations (12%), 15 hemorrhagic complications (6.7%), 66 mechanical complications (29.5%), 35 technical problems at primary surgery (15.6%), 21 cases of stiffness (9.3%), and 12 cases of delayed wound healing (5.3%). Mean time to revision surgery was 2.7 ± 2.6 months. Extending the time-window to 1 year recruited extra cases: in 31.7% of cases, onset was after the 90th postoperative day, which is the usual deadline. The rate of unplanned return to theater was higher after unscheduled (traumatic: 3.2%) than scheduled surgery (1.7%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Return to surgery in orthopedic and traumatologic surgery is underestimated. Annual incidence was 2.2%, and twice as high (3.2%) following traumatologic compared to scheduled surgery (1.7%). Analysis found that almost half the cases were avoidable. They represent a relevant and easily assessed indicator of treatment quality and associated risk management. A national or even international database in the form of an anonymous registry of revision surgeries would be useful.

[Hypokalemia induced quadriparesis as the presenting manifestation of Gougerot-Sjögren's syndrome]. / Tétraparésie hypokaliémique révélant un syndrome de Gougerot-Sjögren.

We report a 30-year-old woman who presented with a hypokaliemia-related subacute quadriparesis. The various causes of hypokalemia induced paresis were discussed but the association of hypokalemia with metabolic acidosis and normal anion gap was diagnostic of distal renal tubular acidosis. The renal tubulopathy was the presenting manifestation of a primary Sjogren's syndrome. Distal renal tubular acidosis concerns a third of the patients affected by this auto-immune disease.

Response to second-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast carcinoma previously responsive to first-line treatment: prognostic factors.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this retrospective study was to determine those prognostic factors associated with response to a second-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast carcinoma (MBC) that was previously responsive to a first-line chemotherapy. METHODS: The 70 MBC patients studied had previously responded to a first-line chemotherapy, mainly anthracycline or anthracenedione-containing regimens. During first-line chemotherapy they had received treatment until the maximum response was obtained, at which time treatment was discontinued. Second-line chemotherapy regimens were of several types (48.5% with anthracycline). A study of prognostic factors associated with response to second-line chemotherapy was performed by univariate and multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Second-line chemotherapy achieved a 44% response rate, with a median response duration of 10 months. Survival was 13 months in the entire patient group, 22 months in responders, and 8 months in nonresponders. Univariate analysis identified seven factors related to patient response rate to second-line treatment. A better response rate to second-line chemotherapy was observed in patients with the following features: 1) chemotherapy free time (time between onset of metastatic disease and initiation of first-line) < 12 months (P = 0.03); 2) complete response to first-line chemotherapy (P = 0.013); 3) response duration to first-line chemotherapy > 14 months (P = 0.0001); 4) progression free interval (time between end of first-line treatment and initiation of second-line chemotherapy) > 11 months (P = 0.0001); 5) performance status at second-line treatment < 2 (P = 0.04); 6) tumor index at second-line chemotherapy < 4 (P = 0.05); and 7) treatment with an anthracycline-containing second-line regimen (P = 0.03). In multivariate analysis, only progression free interval was identified as being associated with response rate to second-line chemotherapy (P = 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Retained chemosensitivity appeared to be an important characteristic in patients responding to second-line chemotherapy.

Correlation between leuteinizing hormone responses to luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LH-RH) and to D-leu-6-LH-RH-ethylamide in patients with hypothalamo-pituitary disease.

Seventeen patients (eleven females and six males) with organic hypothalamo-pituitary disease were subjected to a test consisting of a rapid intravenous injection of 50 mug of luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LH-RH) at 8:00 A.M., with blood sampling before and 30 and 60 minutes afterward. Two to four weeks later, a rapid intravenous injection of 50 mug of D-Leu-6-des-Gly-10-LH-RH-ethylamide (D-Leu-6-LH-RH-EA) was given under similar conditions, with blood sampling before and 30, 60, and 90 minutes afterward. Serum LH levels were determined by radioimmunoassay. D-Leu-6-LH-RH-EA caused a greater and more sustained rise in serum LH levels than did an equal dose of LH-RH. However, functional classifications of patients were similar with either preparation. This finding suggests that acute administration of D-Leu-6-LH-RH-EA does not cause a higher number of relevant responses as compared with LH-RH, but only a greater stimulation of LH releases in responsive patients.