Riversblom9935

Background Percutaneous guide wire insertion for scaphoid screw fixation can be challenging and often requires multiple attempts with significant radiation exposure to the surgical team. A 3-dimensional (3D) printed targeting device has the potential to reduce procedure time and intraoperative radiation exposure. Methods Our targeting device protocol included a preprocedure computed tomography (CT) scan of a casted cadaver wrist, followed by 3D printing of a customized targeting guide. In a comparison trial, seven orthopedic surgery residents performed percutaneous scaphoid guide wire insertion on different cadaver specimens by both freehand technique and using our targeting device. Radiation exposure and procedure times were compared. All specimens underwent postprocedure CT to assess Kirschner wire (K-wire) accuracy, determined by central third placement. Pre- and postprocedure CT scans from the targeting device group were co-registered to compare planned and actual K-wire trajectories. Results Using the freehand technique, mean fluoroscopy time was 120 seconds (standard deviation ±53 seconds) generating 2.45 milligray of radiation. Average procedure time was 21 minutes with a mean of 6.4 (range 3-9) insertion attempts. A single insertion attempt was made using the targeting device with an average procedure time of 30 seconds and no fluoroscopy exposure. Four K-wires were placed within the central scaphoid in both groups. Using the targeting device, average linear deviation from the planned trajectory was 2.1 mm, while the maximum linear deviation was 3.75 mm. Conclusion When compared to freehand scaphoid guide wire insertion, our targeting device provides similar accuracy while significantly reducing intraoperative radiation exposure and procedure time.Purpose To determine the interocular symmetry of foveal cone topography in achromatopsia (ACHM) using non-confocal split-detection adaptive optics scanning light ophthalmoscopy (AOSLO).Methods Split-detector AOSLO images of the foveal cone mosaic were acquired from both eyes of 26 subjects (mean age 24.3 years; range 8-44 years, 14 females) with genetically confirmed CNGA3- or CNGB3-associated ACHM. Cones were identified within a manually delineated rod-free zone. Peak cone density (PCD) was determined using an 80 × 80 μm sampling window within the rod-free zone. The mean and standard deviation (SD) of inter-cell distance (ICD) were calculated to derive the coefficient of variation (CV). Cone density difference maps were generated to compare cone topography between eyes.Results PCD (mean ± SD) was 17,530 ± 9,614 cones/mm2 and 17,638 ± 9,753 cones/mm2 for right and left eyes, respectively (p = .677, Wilcoxon test). The mean (± SD) for ICD was 9.05 ± 2.55 µm and 9.24 ± 2.55 µm for right and left eyes, respectively (p = .410, paired t-test). The mean (± SD) for CV of ICD was 0.16 ± 0.03 µm and 0.16 ± 0.04 µm for right and left eyes, respectively (p = .562, paired t-test). Cone density maps demonstrated that cone topography of the ACHM fovea is non-uniform with local variations in cone density between eyes.Conclusions These results demonstrate the interocular symmetry of the foveal cone mosaic (both density and packing) in ACHM. As cone topography can differ between eyes of a subject, PCD does not completely describe the foveal cone mosaic in ACHM. Nonetheless, these findings are of value in longitudinal monitoring of patients during treatment trials and further suggest that both eyes of a given subject may have similar therapeutic potential and non-study eye can be used as a control.Background Medical malpractice accounts for more than $55 billion of annual health care costs. Updated malpractice risk to surgeons and physicians related to upper extremity peripheral nerve injury has not been published. Methods A comprehensive database analysis of upper extremity nerve injury claims between 1995 and 2014 in the United States was conducted using the Medical Professional Liability Association Data Sharing Project, representing 24 major insurance companies. Results Nerve injury in the upper extremity accounted for 614 (0.3%) malpractice claims (total of 188 323). Common presenting diagnoses included carpal tunnel syndrome (41%), upper extremity fractures (19%), and traumatic nerve injuries to the shoulder or upper limb (8%). Improper performance (49% of total claims) and claims without evidence of medical error (19%) were the most common malpractice suits. Orthopedic surgeons were the most frequently targeted specialists (42%). In all, 65% of nerve injury claims originated from operative procedures in a hospital, 59% of claims were dismissed or withdrawn prior to trial, and 30% resulted in settlements. Thirty-three percent of claims resulted in an indemnity payment to an injured party, with an average payout of $203 592 per successful suit. Only 8% of claims resulted in a completed trial and verdict, and verdicts were overwhelmingly in favor of the defendant (83%). MIRA-1 Conclusions Most malpractice claims from peripheral nerve injuries in the United States arise from the management of common diagnoses, occur in the operating room, and allege improper performance. Strategies to reduce malpractice risk should emphasize the management of common conditions and patient-physician communication.Elder abuse is an underdetected, under-reported issue with severe consequences. Its detection presents unique challenges based on characteristics of this vulnerable population, including cognitive impairment, age-related deconditioning, and an increased number of co-morbidities, all of which predispose to increase vulnerability to injury. While radiologists play a critical role in detection of child abuse, this role is currently not paralleled in detection of elder abuse. We conducted a thorough review of the literature using MEDLINE to describe the current knowledge on injury patterns and injury findings seen in elder abuse, as well as barriers to and recommendations for an increased role of diagnostic imaging in elder abuse detection. Barriers limiting the role of radiologists include lack of training and paucity of rigorous systematic research delineating distinctive imaging findings for physical elder abuse. We outline the current ways in which imaging can help raise clinical suspicion for elder abuse, including inconsistencies between purported mechanism of injury and imaging findings, injury location, multiple injuries at differing stages of healing, and particular patterns of injury likely to be intentionally inflicted.