Hand-held spectroscopic device for in vivo and intraoperative tumor detection: contrast enhancement, detection sensitivity, and tissue penetration.

Surgery is one of the most effective and widely used procedures in treating human cancers, but a major problem is that the surgeon often fails to remove the entire tumor, leaving behind tumor-positive margins, metastatic lymph nodes, and/or satellite tumor nodules. Here we report the use of a hand-held spectroscopic pen device (termed SpectroPen) and near-infrared contrast agents for intraoperative detection of malignant tumors, based on wavelength-resolved measurements of fluorescence and surface-enhanced Raman scattering (SERS) signals. The SpectroPen utilizes a near-infrared diode laser (emitting at 785 nm) coupled to a compact head unit for light excitation and collection. This pen-shaped device effectively removes silica Raman peaks from the fiber optics and attenuates the reflected excitation light, allowing sensitive analysis of both fluorescence and Raman signals. Its overall performance has been evaluated by using a fluorescent contrast agent (indocyanine green, or ICG) as well as a surface-enhanced Raman scattering (SERS) contrast agent (pegylated colloidal gold). Under in vitro conditions, the detection limits are approximately 2-5 × 10(-11) M for the indocyanine dye and 0.5-1 × 10(-13) M for the SERS contrast agent. Ex vivo tissue penetration data show attenuated but resolvable fluorescence and Raman signals when the contrast agents are buried 5-10 mm deep in fresh animal tissues. In vivo studies using mice bearing bioluminescent 4T1 breast tumors further demonstrate that the tumor borders can be precisely detected preoperatively and intraoperatively, and that the contrast signals are strongly correlated with tumor bioluminescence. After surgery, the SpectroPen device permits further evaluation of both positive and negative tumor margins around the surgical cavity, raising new possibilities for real-time tumor detection and image-guided surgery.

Hand hygiene noncompliance and the cost of hospital-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection.

BACKGROUND: Hand hygiene noncompliance is a major cause of nosocomial infection. Nosocomial infection cost data exist, but the effect of hand hygiene noncompliance is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To estimate methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)-related cost of an incident of hand hygiene noncompliance by a healthcare worker during patient care. DESIGN: Two models were created to simulate sequential patient contacts by a hand hygiene-noncompliant healthcare worker. Model 1 involved encounters with patients of unknown MRSA status. Model 2 involved an encounter with an MRSA-colonized patient followed by an encounter with a patient of unknown MRSA status. The probability of new MRSA infection for the second patient was calculated using published data. A simulation of 1 million noncompliant events was performed. Total costs of resulting infections were aggregated and amortized over all events. SETTING: Duke University Medical Center, a 750-bed tertiary medical center in Durham, North Carolina. RESULTS: Model 1 was associated with 42 MRSA infections (infection rate, 0.0042%). Mean infection cost was $47,092 (95% confidence interval [CI], $26,040-$68,146); mean cost per noncompliant event was $1.98 (95% CI, $0.91-$3.04). Model 2 was associated with 980 MRSA infections (0.098%). Mean infection cost was $53,598 (95% CI, $50,098-$57,097); mean cost per noncompliant event was $52.53 (95% CI, $47.73-$57.32). A 200-bed hospital incurs $1,779,283 in annual MRSA infection-related expenses attributable to hand hygiene noncompliance. A 1.0% increase in hand hygiene compliance resulted in annual savings of $39,650 to a 200-bed hospital. CONCLUSIONS: Hand hygiene noncompliance is associated with significant attributable hospital costs. Minimal improvements in compliance lead to substantial savings.

A fruit in the hand or two in the bush? Divergent risk preferences in chimpanzees and bonobos.

Human and non-human animals tend to avoid risky prospects. If such patterns of economic choice are adaptive, risk preferences should reflect the typical decision-making environments faced by organisms. However, this approach has not been widely used to examine the risk sensitivity in closely related species with different ecologies. Here, we experimentally examined risk-sensitive behaviour in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and bonobos (Pan paniscus), closely related species whose distinct ecologies are thought to be the major selective force shaping their unique behavioural repertoires. Because chimpanzees exploit riskier food sources in the wild, we predicted that they would exhibit greater tolerance for risk in choices about food. Results confirmed this prediction: chimpanzees significantly preferred the risky option, whereas bonobos preferred the fixed option. These results provide a relatively rare example of risk-prone behaviour in the context of gains and show how ecological pressures can sculpt economic decision making.

Outcomes After Total Ankle Replacement in Association With Ipsilateral Hindfoot Arthrodesis.

BACKGROUND: Ipsilateral hindfoot arthrodesis in combination with total ankle replacement (TAR) may diminish functional outcome and prosthesis survivorship compared to isolated TAR. We compared the outcome of isolated TAR to outcomes of TAR with ipsilateral hindfoot arthrodesis. METHODS: In a consecutive series of 404 primary TARs in 396 patients, 70 patients (17.3%) had a hindfoot fusion before, after, or at the time of TAR; the majority had either an isolated subtalar arthrodesis (n = 43, 62%) or triple arthrodesis (n = 15, 21%). The remaining 334 isolated TARs served as the control group. Mean patient follow-up was 3.2 years (range, 24-72 months). RESULTS: The SF-36 total, AOFAS Hindfoot-Ankle pain subscale, Foot and Ankle Disability Index, and Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment scores were significantly improved from preoperative measures, with no significant differences between the hindfoot arthrodesis and control groups. The AOFAS Hindfoot-Ankle total, function, and alignment scores were significantly improved for both groups, albeit the control group demonstrated significantly higher scores in all 3 scales. Furthermore, the control group demonstrated a significantly greater improvement in VAS pain score compared to the hindfoot arthrodesis group. Walking speed, sit-to-stand time, and 4-square step test time were significantly improved for both groups at each postoperative time point; however, the hindfoot arthrodesis group completed these tests significantly slower than the control group. There was no significant difference in terms of talar component subsidence between the fusion (2.6 mm) and control groups (2.0 mm). The failure rate in the hindfoot fusion group (10.0%) was significantly higher than that in the control group (2.4%; p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this study represents the first series evaluating the clinical outcome of TARs performed with and without hindfoot fusion using implants available in the United States. At follow-up of 3.2 years, TAR performed with ipsilateral hindfoot arthrodesis resulted in significant improvements in pain and functional outcome; in contrast to prior studies, however, overall outcome was inferior to that of isolated TAR. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, prospective comparative series.