The publication data currently available has been vetted by Vanderbilt faculty, staff, administrators and trainees. The data itself is retrieved directly from NCBI's PubMed and is automatically updated on a weekly basis to ensure accuracy and completeness.
If you have any questions or comments, please contact us.
Objective Precurved electrode arrays (EAs) are commonly used in cochlear implants (CIs). Modiolar placement of such arrays has been shown to lead to better hearing outcomes. In this project, we retrospectively evaluated the modiolar positioning of EAs within a large CI imaging database. We aimed to discover the rate at which perimodiolar placement is successfully achieved and to evaluate a new technique we propose to preoperatively plan patient-customized EA insertion depths to improve perimodiolar placement at the time of surgery. Study Design Retrospective chart review and radiographic analysis. Setting Single tertiary academic referral center. Subjects and Methods Ninety-seven CI ears were evaluated. Perimodiolar positioning of electrodes was quantified using pre- and postimplantation computed tomography scans and automated image analysis techniques. Results Average perimodiolar distance was 0.59 ± 0.18 mm. Disagreement between the actual and our recommended insertion depth was found to be positively correlated with perimodiolar distance ( r = 0.49, P < .0001). Conclusions These results show that the average CI recipient with a precurved EA has a number of electrodes distant to the modiolus where they are not most effective. Our results also indicate the approach we propose for selecting patient-customized EA insertion depth would lead to better perimodiolar placement of precurved EAs.
BACKGROUND - The purpose of this study was to compare hemiepiphysiodesis implants for late-onset tibia vara and to evaluate patient characteristics that may predict surgical failure.
METHODS - This is a retrospective review of late-onset tibia vara patients treated with temporary hemiepiphysiodesis from 1998 to 2012. Mechanical axis deviation (MAD), mechanical axis angle, mechanical lateral distal femoral angle, and medial proximal tibial angle were measured on standing bone length radiographs. Surgical failure was defined as residual deformity requiring osteotomy, revision surgery, or MAD exceeding 40 mm at the time of final follow-up. Implant failure was recorded. Costs included implants and disposables required for construct placement. Staple constructs included 2 or 3 staples. Plate constructs included the plate, screws, guide wires, and drill bits.
RESULTS - A total of 25 patients with 38 temporary lateral proximal tibia hemiepiphysiodeses met the inclusion criteria. The average body mass index (BMI) was 39.1 kg/m with an average follow-up of 3.0 years (minimum 1 y). Surgical failure occurred in 57.9% of patients. Greater BMI (P=0.05) and more severe deformity (MAD, mechanical axis angle, and medial proximal tibial angle; P<0.01) predicted higher rates of surgical failure. Younger age predicted higher rates of implant failure (P<0.01). There were no differences in surgical or implant failure between staple and plate systems. Hospital costs of plate constructs ($781 to $1244) were 1.5 to 3.5 times greater than the staple constructs ($332 to $498).
CONCLUSIONS - Greater BMI, more severe deformity, and younger age were predictive of surgical or implant failure. There was no difference in success between implant types, whereas the cost of plate constructs was 1.5 to 3.5 times greater than staples. The rate of surgical failure was high (58%) and consideration should be given to reserving hemiepiphysiodesis for patients with lower BMI and less severe deformity. In our population, if hemiepiphysiodesis was not offered to patients with BMI>35 or MAD>80 mm varus, the surgical failure rate would diminish to 28%. The failure rate outside these parameters would be 88%.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE - Level II—Prognostic.
BACKGROUND - The HeartWare (HW) (Framingham, MA) and the HeartMate II (HM II) (Thoratec Inc, Pleasanton, CA) continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (CF-LVADs) are commonly used to bridge patients to transplantation. We hypothesized that there are differences in perioperative blood product (BP) use and chest tube (CT) output between CF-LVAD types.
METHODS - We retrospectively evaluated BP use in 71 patients who were implanted with a CF-LVAD (HM II = 38; HW = 33) by median sternotomy for bridge to transplantation (BTT) indications from 2009 to 2013. Detailed BP use data were collected during the intraoperative and postoperative periods and included packed red blood cells, platelets, fresh frozen plasma, and cryoprecipitate.
RESULTS - Preoperative characteristics (age, left ventricular ejection fraction, previous sternotomy, ischemic cause), and risk stratification scores (Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support [INTERMACS]) profile, Leitz-Miller score, Kormos score) were comparable between groups (all p > 0.05). Total average intraoperative and postoperative BP use was different between device types: HW = 8.3 ± 13 versus HM II = 12.6 ± 14.0 units (p = 0.002) and HW = 6.1 ± 12.0 units compared with HM II = 13.5 ± 24.1 units (p = 0.022), respectively. Average postoperative CT output for HW (3,231 ± 3,648 mL) and HM II (3,463 ± 3,050) (p < 0.008) were different between device types. Multivariate analysis revealed that a higher preoperative Leitz-Miller score, implantation of an HM II CF-LVAD, previous sternotomy, and a longer duration of cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time were independently associated with increased need for BP use, whereas only use of the HM II device and a longer bypass time predicted a greater CT output.
CONCLUSIONS - Compared with HM II, implantation of the HW CF-LVAD was associated with reduced intraoperative and postoperative BP use and decreased CT output. Increased awareness of device-related differences in bleeding and BP use may improve CF-LVAD patient outcomes.
Copyright © 2014 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS - Three surgical approaches: cochleostomy (C), round window (RW), and extended round window (ERW); and two electrodes types: lateral wall (LW) and perimodiolar (PM), account for the vast majority of cochlear implantations. The goal of this study was to analyze the relationship between surgical approach and electrode type with final intracochlear position of the electrode array and subsequent hearing outcomes.
STUDY DESIGN - Comparative longitudinal study.
METHODS - One hundred postlingually implanted adult patients were enrolled in the study. From the postoperative scan, intracochlear electrode location was determined and using rigid registration, transformed back to the preoperative computed tomography which had intracochlear anatomy (scala tympani and scala vestibuli) specified using a statistical shape model based on 10 microCT scans of human cadaveric cochleae. Likelihood ratio chi-square statistics were used to evaluate for differences in electrode placement with respect to surgical approach (C, RW, ERW) and type of electrode (LW, PM).
RESULTS - Electrode placement completely within the scala tympani (ST) was more common for LW than were PM designs (89% vs. 58%; P < 0.001). RW and ERW approaches were associated with lower rates of electrode placement outside the ST than was the cochleostomy approach (9%, 16%, and 63%, respectively; P < 0.001). This pattern held true regardless of whether the implant was LW or PM. When examining electrode placement and hearing outcome, those with electrode residing completely within the ST had better consonant-nucleus-consonant word scores than did patients with any number of electrodes located outside the ST (P = 0.045).
CONCLUSION - These data suggest that RW and ERW approaches and LW electrodes are associated with an increased likelihood of successful ST placement. Furthermore, electrode position entirely within the ST confers superior audiological outcomes.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE - 2b.
© 2014 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.
Over the last 20 years, cochlear implants (CIs) have become what is arguably the most successful neural prosthesis to date. Despite this success, a significant number of CI recipients experience marginal hearing restoration, and, even among the best performers, restoration to normal fidelity is rare. In this paper, we present image processing techniques that can be used to detect, for the first time, the positions of implanted CI electrodes and the nerves they stimulate for individual CI users. These techniques permit development of new, customized CI stimulation strategies. We present one such strategy and show that it leads to significant hearing improvement in an experiment conducted with 11 CI recipients. These results indicate that image-guidance can be used to improve hearing outcomes for many existing CI recipients without requiring additional surgical procedures.
In megaprostheses, the tibial component is rarely a source of failure. The evolution of these implants has followed standard arthroplasty trends moving from majority use of all-polyethylene tibias (APT) to high volume use of metal-backed tibial (MBT) components. We report the results of 72 endoprostheses using either MBT (n = 42) or APT (n = 30) implanted between 1994 and 2006. Failures of the implant related to the tibial component were isolated, and 5-year survival of the tibial implant of the MBT cohort was 94%, and for the APT cohort, 87% (P = .39). The difference in tibial component failures between the 2 groups was not statistically significant (Pearson χ(2) = 0.1535, P = .6952). Revision rates for the entire implant and infection rates were not significantly different between the 2 groups.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Nephroureteral and double J stents are routinely placed by interventional radiologists but quality literature on placement and management of these devices is limited. The purpose of this review is to detail indications for ureteral stent placement, review the types of antegrade and retrograde devices that are placed including technical tips, and discuss management of common complications that occur in this patient population. An algorithm for placement and management is included.
Aortic valvular stenosis remains the most common debilitating valvular heart lesion. Despite the benefit of aortic valve (AV) replacement, many high-risk patients cannot tolerate surgery. AV implantation treats aortic stenosis without subjecting patients to sternotomy, cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB), and aorta cross-clamping. This transcatheter procedure is performed via puncture of the left ventricular (LV) apex or percutaneously, via the femoral artery or vein. Patients undergo general anesthesia, intense hemodynamic manipulation, and transesophageal echocardiography (TEE). To elucidate the role of the anesthesiologist in the management of transcatheter AV implantation, we review the literature and provide our experience, focusing on anesthetic care, intraoperative events, TEE, and perioperative complications. Two approaches to the aortic annulus are performed today: transfemoral retrograde and transapical antegrade. Iliac artery size and tortuosity, aortic arch atheroma, and pathology in the area of the (LV) apex help determine the preferred approach in each patient. A general anesthetic is tailored to achieve extubation after procedure completion, whereas IV access and pharmacological support allow for emergent sternotomy and initiation of CPB. Rapid ventricular pacing and cessation of mechanical ventilation interrupts cardiac ejection and minimizes heart translocation during valvuloplasty and prosthesis implantation. Although these maneuvers facilitate exact prosthesis positioning within the native annulus, they promote hypotension and arrhythmia. Vasopressor administration before pacing and cardioversion may restore adequate hemodynamics. TEE determines annulus size, aortic pathology, ventricular function, and mitral regurgitation. TEE and fluoroscopy are used for positioning the introducer catheter within the aortic annulus. The prosthesis, crimped on a valvuloplasty balloon catheter, is implanted by inflation. TEE immediately measures aortic regurgitation and assesses for aortic dissection. After repair of femoral vessels or LV apex, patients are allowed to emerge and assessed for extubation. Observed and published complications include aortic regurgitation, prosthesis embolization, mitral valve disruption, hemorrhage, aortic dissection, CPB, stroke, and death. Transcatheter AV implantation relies on intraoperative hemodynamic manipulation for success. Transfemoral and transapical approaches pose unique management challenges, but both require rapid ventricular pacing, the management of hypotension and arrhythmias during beating-heart valve implantation, and TEE. Anesthesiologists will care for debilitated patients with aortic stenosis receiving transcatheter AV implantation.
Concerned by a perceived high revision rate, we retrospectively reviewed the survivorship of a series of 43 cemented, medial, mobile-bearing Preservation unicompartmental knee replacements implanted during a 2-year period at a single institution. The initial post-operative AP and lateral radiographs were independently assessed to test the hypothesis that suboptimal implantation of the prosthesis was responsible for early failure. An X-ray scoring system based on the criteria for assessing the Oxford mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee replacement was devised. The components of this score included assessment of prosthesis alignment, sizing and cementation. Nine (21%) LCS Preservation mobile-bearings prostheses had required revision at a mean of 22 months post-implantation. The commonest causes for failure were pain (44%) and tibial component loosening (33%). Analysis of post-operative radiographs showed no difference (n.s.) between the compound error scores for the revised and the surviving prostheses. No particular surgical error was identifiable leading to subsequent need for revision. The high failure rates shown in this study have led us to cease using this implant. The clinical relevance of this study is that the captive running track of the LCS mobile-bearing prosthesis may over constrain the meniscal component leading to early failure.
BACKGROUND - The purpose of this paper is to examine the intra-observer and inter-observer reliability of preoperative templating to help determine its usefulness for approximating proximal humeral stem and head size in shoulder arthroplasty.
METHODS - Thirty-one nonconsecutive patients underwent uncemented total shoulder arthroplasty using 1 of 2 commonly used prostheses. Templating was performed by 4 independent observers (2 experienced shoulder surgeons and 2 PGY-3 residents). Two readings were performed with a minimum 2-week interval between templating sessions. Templating was performed in a blinded manner using appropriately magnified templates provided by the prosthesis manufacturer. Postoperative radiographs were analyzed in the same fashion and each observer graded qualitative stem and head size radiographically. Pre-operative templated sizes were compared to actual implant sizes obtained from dictated operative reports.
RESULTS - There was substantial (kappa > 0.7) intraobserver reliability for stem and head size selection for both prostheses. Interobserver reliability was moderate for stem size (kappa = 0.53) and substantial (kappa = 0.66) for head size. Preoperative templating accurately predicted stem (84-95%) and head (44-66%) size within 1 size variation (stem width, head thickness, or diameter) for shoulder replacement surgery. There was no significant difference in accuracy between attendings and residents when templating for stem or head size.
CONCLUSION - Preoperative templating is a reliable and reasonably accurate step when planning shoulder replacement surgery. Templating for stem size is more accurate than for head size.