CK20 versus AMACR and p53 immunostains in evaluation of Urothelial Carcinoma in Situ and Reactive Atypia.

Ancillary testing with immunohistochemistry has shown recent promise in the workup of equivocal bladder lesions. We read with interest the recent findings of Alston et al., who assessed the diagnostic utility of alpha-methylacyl-CoA racemase (AMACR) in comparison to cytokeratin 20 (CK20) in evaluation of atypia in challenging flat urothelial lesions in the differential between carcinoma in situ (CIS) and reactive atypia. AMACR was reported to be a somewhat more specific but less sensitive marker for CIS than CK20, though showing weaker intensity. Spurred by their report, with the knowledge that we had consistently and consecutively performed AMACR, CK20, and p53 on flat urothelial lesions challenging enough to reach intradepartmental consensus, we performed a retrospective review. Similarly, we found that AMACR was less sensitive (80%) and more specific (100%) than CK20, with the same caveat of less staining intensity. Additionally, our p53 review identified a significant rate (~ 27%) of equivocal/non-informative findings. Taken together, our experience in this consecutive cohort confirms the impression of Alston et al. regarding the utility and challenges of AMACR use, while highlighting challenges with p53, which we plan to use more sparingly prospectively.

Pilot program to improve self-management of patients with heart failure by redesigning care coordination.

Objectives. We tested both an educational and a care coordination element of health care to examine if better disease-specific knowledge leads to successful self-management of heart failure (HF). Background. The high utilization of health care resources and poor patient outcomes associated with HF justify tests of change to improve self-management of HF. Methods. This prospective study tested two components of the Chronic Care Model (clinical information systems and self-management support) to improve outcomes in the self-management of HF among patients who received intensive education and care coordination during their acute care stay. A postdischarge follow-up phone call assessed their knowledge of HF self-management compared to usual care patients. Results. There were 20 patients each in the intervention and usual care groups. Intervention patients were more likely to have a scale at home, write down their weight, and practice new or different health behaviors. Conclusion. Patients receiving more intensive education knew more about their disease and were better able to self-manage their weight compared to patients receiving standard care.

-PLUS prehospital mass-casualty triage: a strategy for addressing unusual injury mechanisms.

INTRODUCTION: Simple Triage and Rapid Treatment (START) and more recently developed prehospital casualty triage algorithms are widely used, in part because they are easy to teach and learn, and can be performed rapidly. Every rapid triage protocol has inherent, significant limitations: (1) no mechanism of injury (MOI) considerations; (2) limited assessment points; and (3) no refinement in truly mass-casualty situations where transport of "minor" or "moderate" patients may be delayed. HYPOTHESIS: When rapid initial triage protocols are utilized, a significant triage deficiency ("under-triage") may occur when "minor" or "moderate" casualties actually are more severely injured than initially triaged. Some MOI produce casualties with subtle or latent (i.e., hidden or delayed) signs and symptoms not considered in the commonly used prehospital triage algorithms. This research did not focus on START or other initial triage screening methods. Instead, it focuses on developing follow-on triage guidance to more specifically prioritize "delayed transport" casualties based upon signs and symptoms related to their MOI. METHODS: Using expert opinion and accepted clinical criteria, triage algorithms were developed to re-evaluate patients triaged to "minor" and "moderate" cohorts. A detailed literature search produced a draft list of relevant signs and symptoms for each selected MOI. The lists then were evaluated by a multi-disciplinary panel of experts via an anonymous, mail-based Delphi method. The input shaped triage algorithms for each selected MOI, which then were subjected to a second stage Delphi process. RESULTS: Consensus was achieved using the Delphi method. The algorithms extend patient assessment beyond the rapid initial triage protocols and incorporate triage criteria specific to each selected injury mechanism or condition: (1) penetrating injuries; (2) unconventional MOI (burns, blast, chemical, radiation); (3) smoke and other inhalation exposure; and (4) injuries with concomitant pregnancy. The full list of triage protocols is designated by the acronym "-PLUS". CONCLUSIONS: "-PLUS" Prehospital Casualty Triage may supplement the strengths of already existing, widely accepted mass-casualty triage strategies. It does not displace START or other rapid initial triage protocols, but in mass-casualty situations with extensive delays in transport, it provides a method to identify under-triage of seriously injured casualties. "-PLUS" also presents a framework for capturing the triage considerations used by experienced medical providers, and so may provide a valuable teaching tool for training future triage professionals. Further research and field assessment is required.