Neptune versus canister-based surgical waste management in Europe: results of the GREEN study.

Background: Ineffective surgical fluid waste management in operating rooms (OR) creates a significant environmental burden, reduces OR efficiency, and adds physical challenges for surgical staff. There is a need for waste management systems that improve OR efficiency, safety, and sustainability. The GREEN study (Greening operating Rooms in EuropE comparing Neptune vs. canisters) was conducted to compare the impact of two fluid waste management systems. Materials and methods: This 2-arm, nonrandomized, prospective service evaluation of fluid waste extraction was conducted using observational time series and surveys. Fluid waste-related data were collected from routine urologic and orthopedic surgeries across three European hospital sites. The primary endpoint of waste disposal impact was the volume of treated waste after surgery (kilograms) using Stryker's Neptune device (n=43) or canisters (n=41). The authors hypothesized that the surgical waste volume related to Neptune is less than the waste volume related to canisters. Secondary endpoints included time efficiency, user satisfaction, and staff ergonomics. Results: The total weight of device-related treated waste products was reduced by 98.5% when using Neptune (0.2±0.7 kg) compared with traditional canisters (13.2±16.6 kg; P<0.001). Decreased waste weight also translated to enhanced ergonomic safety for surgical staff, as Neptune reduced surgical fluid weight handled by staff by an average of 34 kg per procedure, a 96% reduction compared to canisters. Furthermore, the use of the Neptune system improved OR efficiency by reducing the number of staff required to manage the fluid suction device (P<0.001) and the time spent disposing of fluid waste (P<0.001). Conclusion: Stryker's Neptune waste management system significantly reduces the volume of treated waste per surgery and improves OR efficiency, staff safety, and user satisfaction over the traditional canister system. This is a more eco-responsible approach to OR fluid waste management and could be considered in any healthcare establishment that generates fluid waste.

Almagate interference in breath test results for the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection.

BACKGROUND: Infection by Helicobacter pylori is common and affects both genders at any age. The 13C-urea breath test is a widely used test for the diagnosis of this infection. However, multiple drugs used for the treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection symptoms have interactions with this breath test that generate false negative results. This observational study was to assess the potential interaction between almagate and the breath test. METHODS: Thirty subjects on almagate therapy who underwent a breath test were included. If the result was negative, almagate was withdrawn for a month and the breath test was then repeated. RESULTS: In general, 51.9 % of assessed subjects had a negative result after the first test, and 100 % of these also had a negative result after the second test. CONCLUSIONS: It was concluded that the use of almagate does not interfere in breath test results. These results provide a drug therapy option for the treatment of symptoms associated with Helicobacter pylori infection during the diagnostic process.

Interferencia del almagato con el resultado del test del aliento para el diagnóstico de la infección por Helicobacter pylori / Almagate interference in breath test results for the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection

Introducción: la infección por Helicobacter pylori es muy frecuente y afecta a cualquier edad y sexo. El test del aliento con urea 13C es una prueba ampliamente utilizada para el diagnóstico de esta infección. Sin embargo, múltiples fármacos utilizados para tratar los síntomas de la infección por Helicobacter pylori presentan interacciones con la realización del test del aliento dando como resultado falsos negativos. Este estudio observacional tiene como objetivo evaluar la posible interacción entre el uso de almagato y el test del aliento. Métodos: se incluyeron 30 participantes en tratamiento con almagato y se les realizó el test del aliento. En caso de resultado negativo, se les retiró la administración de almagato durante un mes y se les repitió el test del aliento. Resultados: el 51,9 % de los participantes analizados presentaron un resultado negativo en el primer test y el 100 % de estos se les confirmó el resultado negativo en el segundo test. Conclusiones: se concluyó que el uso de almagato no interfiere con el resultado del test del aliento. Estos resultados aportan una alternativa farmacológica para tratar la sintomatología de la infección por Helicobacter pylori durante el periodo de su diagnóstico (AU)

Background: Infection by Helicobacter pylori is common and affects both genders at any age. The 13C-urea breath test is a widely used test for the diagnosis of this infection. However, multiple drugs used for the treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection symptoms have interactions with this breath test that generate false negative results. This observational study was to assess the potential interaction between almagate and the breath test. Methods: Thirty subjects on almagate therapy who underwent a breath test were included. If the result was negative, almagate was withdrawn for a month and the breath test was then repeated. Results: In general, 51.9 % of assessed subjects had a negative result after the first test, and 100 % of these also had a negative result after the second test. Conclusions: It was concluded that the use of almagate does not interfere in breath test results. These results provide a drug therapy option for the treatment of symptoms associated with Helicobacter pylori infection during the diagnostic process (AU)