Association between Vitamin D Deficiency and Prognosis after Hip Fracture Surgery in Older Patients in a Dedicated Orthogeriatric Care Pathway.

OBJECTIVES: Vitamin D deficiency is common in patients undergoing hip fracture surgery (HFS) and has been found to be associated with poor post-operative outcome in other settings. This study aimed to analyze the association between vitamin D status and prognosis after HFS. DESIGN: Observational, prospective, single-center study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: All patients admitted in a peri-operative geriatric unit between 2009 and 2020 for HFS were included. MEASUREMENTS: A moderate vitamin D deficiency was defined by a vitamin D level between 25 and 75 nmol/l and a severe deficiency by a vitamin D level <25 nmol/l. Primary endpoint was mortality 6 months after surgery. Secondary endpoints were bacterial infections and delirium during hospitalization. Odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (95%CI) were computed using logistic regression models with adjustment for confounders. RESULTS: 1197 patients were included (median age 87 years, IQR [82-91]). Median vitamin D level was 55 nmol/l (IQR [30-75 nmol/l]). Moderate and severe vitamin D deficiencies were reported in 53% and 21% of patients, respectively. There was no significant association between moderate or severe vitamin D deficiencies and 6-month mortality (OR 0.91, 95%CI [0.59-1.39], and OR 1.31, 95%CI [0.77-2.22], respectively), bacterial infection (OR 0.89, 95%CI [0.60-1.31] and OR 1.55, 95%CI [0.99-2.41], respectively), nor delirium (OR 1.03, 95%CI [0.75-1.40], and OR 1.05, 95%CI [0.70-1.57], respectively). CONCLUSION: Vitamin D deficiency was not associated with mortality, bacterial infection or delirium after HFS. Our results suggest that comorbidities, functional status and post-operative complications are the main determinants of post-operative outcome after HFS.

Hysteroscopic resection on virtual reality simulator: What do we measure?

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to compare results of two groups of population (novices and experts) on a virtual reality simulator of hysteroscopy resection for different metrics and for a multimetric score to assess its construct validity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Nineteen gynecologist who had at least 5 years of experience with hysteroscopy and self-evaluated their expertise at 4/5 or 5/5 were included as expert population. Twenty first-year gynecology residents in Paris were included as novice population. A standardized set of 4 hysteroscopy resection cases (polypectomy, myomectomy, roller ball endometrial ablation and septum resection) was performed on a virtual reality simulator (HystSim™) by the group of novices and experts. Results obtained on the simulator for overall score and for the parameters were compared by applying the Mann-Whitney test. RESULTS: Overall score of novices and experts were significantly different for three resection cases (polypectomy P<0.001, myomectomy P<0.001, roller ball endometrial ablation <0.001). The overall score was not different in the septum resection (P=0.456). For the four cases, the economy score (included cumulative path length, procedure time and camera alignment) were statistically different between novices and experts (polypectomy P<0.001, myomectomy P=0.001, roller ball endometrial ablation P<0.001, septum resection P<0.001). CONCLUSION: The overall score on HystSim™ was able to discriminate novices between experts on polypectomy, myomectomy and roller ball endometrial ablation cases but not on septum resection. The economy score was the more reliable to reflect the surgeon experience. It could be used to evaluate and to train students on hysteroscopic resection on a virtual reality simulator.

Early analgesic treatment regimens for patients with acute abdominal pain: a nationwide survey among general surgeons.

INTRODUCTION: Early pain relief in patients with acute nontraumatic abdominal pain in emergency departments has been discussed for years. Some randomized trials have addressed this issue but conclusive data are lacking. In this study, we assessed the current treatment practice in German hospitals in order to evaluate the necessity of a further clinical trial. METHODS: An online survey containing 27 questions was sent to general and visceral surgeons at attending level using a mailing list provided by the Professional Board of German Surgeons (BDC) using a standard interview software. The questionnaire collected demographic data, current treatment policies about frequency of early analgesia, types of pain medication, and opinions about their use and effects. RESULTS: Four hundred ninety-five completed questionnaires were returned. Many surgeons were cautious about early analgesia in the emergency department. Forty-five percent of the surgeons would provide analgesia prior to diagnosis to the majority of patients. Within the departments, differing opinions existed regarding the analgesic treatment (41 %). Thirty-two percent of all the respondents knew about a false diagnosis after early analgesia. There was heterogeneity in the estimation of the impact of pain medication on masking of clinical symptoms. A randomized controlled trial would be supported by the majority of respondents. As influencing factors for withdrawing early analgesia, we found the examiner being over 40 years of age (p < 0.05), low experience with the clinical picture of acute abdominal pain (p < 0.05), high estimation of the masking of clinical findings (p < 0.001), and knowing about a false diagnosis after early analgesia (p < 0.001) to be significant. CONCLUSION: Discordance in the analgesic treatment regimens in patients with acute abdominal pain still exists in German hospitals. The topic remains subject of frequent discussions. More high quality data are needed before a clear guideline can be given for implementation in clinical routine management.