Neurosurgery compared to orthopedic spine consultation: A single level I trauma center experience.

Introduction: Both Orthopedic Surgery (OS) and Neurosurgery (NS) perform spine surgery in the setting of trauma. However, it is unknown whether outcomes differ between these specialties. This study compares management and outcomes for vertebral fractures between NS and OS, hypothesizing similar operation rate, length of stay (LOS), and readmission. Research question: Do outcomes differ between NS and OS in the management of vertebral fractures following trauma? Methods: A retrospective single-center study was conducted on adult patients with cervical, thoracic, lumbar, and sacral fractures treated at a single trauma center, where no standardized pathway exists across NS and OS. Patients were compared for injury profile, diagnostic imaging, and operative techniques as well as LOS, mortality, and complications. Results: A total of 630 vertebral fracture patients (OS:350 (55.6%); NS:280 (44.4%)) were included. NS utilized magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) more commonly (36.4% vs. 22.6%, p < 0.001). NS patients more often underwent operation (13.2% vs. 7.4%, p = 0.016) despite similar fracture number and severity (p > 0.05). Post-operative complications, LOS, and readmission rates were similar between cohorts (p > 0.05). Discussion and conclusion: Despite similar injury profiles, NS had higher rates of MRI usage and operative interventions in the context of traumatic spine fractures. Despite differences in management, major clinical outcomes were similar between NS and OS. However, we do call for further standardization of evaluation and treatment of patients based on established algorithms from such as the AOSpine Thoracolumbar Spine Injury Classification System (ATLICS).

Interventional oncology: new techniques and new devices.

Interventional oncology is a rapidly emerging field in the treatment of cancer. Minimally invasive techniques such as transarterial embolization with chemotherapeutic and radioactive agents are established therapies and are found in multiple guidelines for the management of primary and metastatic liver lesions. Percutaneous ablation is also an alternative to surgery for small liver, renal, and pancreatic tumors. Recent research in the niche of interventional oncology has focused on improving outcomes of established techniques in addition to the development of novel therapies. In this review, we address the recent and current advancements in devices, technologies, and techniques of chemoembolization and ablation: thermal ablation, histotripsy, high-intensity focused ultrasound, embolization strategies, liquid embolic agents, and local immunotherapy/antiviral therapies.

Irreversible electroporation for pancreatic cancer using intraprocedural cone-beam computed tomography fusion navigation: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Patients diagnosed with locally advanced pancreatic cancer are usually not eligible for surgical resection because of significant vascular involvement. Stereotactic body radiation therapy and chemotherapy are the treatments recommended by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria. For patients who do not respond to or tolerate stereotactic body radiation therapy and/or chemotherapy, a new option is irreversible electroporation. Irreversible electroporation is a nonthermal minimally invasive ablation technique that uses electrical pulses to induce apoptosis of tumor cells without damage to the extracellular matrix, thus preserving ducts and vessels. Irreversible electroporation requires very precise needle placement, which has limited its ubiquitous use. Intraprocedural cone-beam computed tomography with navigation can be fused with previous imaging to provide real-time tumor navigation capabilities during the procedure to allow for more accurate needle placement and treatment. Here, we present a patient who underwent percutaneous irreversible electroporation with intraprocedural cone-beam computed tomography fusion guidance to treat his pancreatic cancer. CASE PRESENTATION: The patient, an 88-year-old White male, initially presented with abdominal pain, and was ultimately diagnosed with locally advanced pancreatic cancer. He has an excellent performance status and no other comorbidities. He was started on chemotherapy and radiation therapy, with good response. However, continued vascular involvement of the tumors precluded him from safe surgical resection. The patient underwent irreversible electroporation with intraprocedural cone-beam computed tomography fusion navigation. The primary lesion demonstrates no residual tumor, and the soft tissue involvement of the adjacent vasculature has stabilized. CONCLUSIONS: Although not curative on its own, irreversible electroporation holds promise as a treatment option for patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer to increase downsizing to curative surgery or increase quality of life. Cone-beam computed tomography navigation can improve irreversible electroporation by providing guidance during needle guidance. Image fusion with previous advanced imaging can improve lesion visualization and targeting, thereby improving the effectiveness of irreversible electroporation.