A Rare Variation of the Extensor Indicis Proprius Tendon With Important Clinical Implications

Introduction: Anatomical variations of the extensor tendons to the fingers are of great clinical interest, due to the relatively high frequency of tendon injury in clinical practice. Material and methods: During routine dissection of the right upper limb of a 67-year-old female preserved corpse, the extensor indicis proprius (EIP) muscle belly originated 3 independent tendons, each with a separate fascial sheath, forming a triple EIP tendon. There was a larger tendon, which occupied a central position, that represented the usual single EIP tendon. In addition, there were two thinner radial and ulnar accessory EIP tendons. The radial-EIP tendon crossed deep to the extensor digitorum communis (EDC) tendon to the index finger in the distal half of the dorsum of the hand to reach the radial side of the extensor expansion hood of the index finger. Discussion: According to the literature, the frequency of a triple EIP tendon ranges from 0%, to as high as 7%, although most authors do not acknowledge the presence of this variant in their series. This variant of the EIP tendon, in which the radial-EIP terminated laterally to the termination of the tendon of the EDC to the index finger, may be a source of confusion intraoperatively, as the EIP tendon has traditionally been identified on the basis of its ulnar location with respect to the EDC tendon. Conclusion: The possibility of a triple EIP tendon should certainly be born in mind by all surgeons when performing tendon repairs, tenoplasties or tendon transfers.

Achieving K/DOQI Targets with Cinacalcet in Dialysis Patients with Secondary Hyperparathyroidism. A Portuguese Observational Study

Secondary hyperparathyroidism is a common complication of chronic kidney disease. The elevated serum intact parathyroid hormone, phosphorus, calcium and calcium x phosphorus product have been independently associated with an increased relative risk of mortality. The standard therapy for secondary hyperparathyroidism, including active vitamin D analogues and phosphate binders, is often insufficient to allow patients to achieve the recommended Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative targets for bone and mineral metabolism. Randomised controlled phase III clinical studies in chronic kidney disease patients with secondary hyperparathyroidism have shown that cinacalcet treatment increases the proportion of patients achieving the recommended Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative targets for intact parathyroid hormone, phosphorus, calcium and calcium x phosphorus product. Aims: This observational multicentre study aims to evaluate cinacalcet’s ability to achieve and maintain Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative targets in a population with secondary hyperparathyroidism on chronic haemodialysis in Portugal. Patients and Methods: Patients on chronic dialysis that received cinacalcet during a free sampling programme were enrolled. Retrospective and prospective monthly data were collected from 3 months before until 6 months after the beginning of cinacalcet treatment. Additional assessment included a 12 month evaluation of all parameters. Results: 140 dialysis patients with secondary hyperparathyroidism were enrolled, 60% male, mean age 57.4±14.1 years. The mean intact parathyroid hormone, calcium, phosphorus, and calcium x phosphorus product values at baseline were 751.7±498.8 pg/ml, 9.7±3.8 mg/dl, 5.5±1.5 mg/dl, and 52.7±25.3 mg2/dl2, respectively. After 6 months’ cinacalcet treatment, 26.2%, 53.6%, 59.3%, and 81.0% of the patients achieved the Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative recommended levels for intact parathyroid hormone, calcium, phosphorus, and calcium x phosphorus product, respectively. The mean dose of cinacalcet at 6 months was 57.1±29.7 mg/day. Conclusions: The use of cinacalcet in clinical practice is an effective option for the treatment of secondary hyperparathyroidism in chronic dialysis patients, allowing more patients to reach and maintain the Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative targets.

Position Statement on Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffolds in Portugal

BACKGROUND: Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) were recently approved for percutaneous coronary intervention in Europe. The aim of this position statement is to review the information and studies on available BVS, to stimulate discussion on their use and to propose guidelines for this treatment option in Portugal. METHODS AND RESULTS: A working group was set up to reach a consensus based on current evidence, discussion of clinical case models and individual experience. The evidence suggests that currently available BVS can produce physiological and clinical improvements in selected patients. There are encouraging data on their durability and long-term safety. Initial indications were grouped into three categories: (a) consensual and appropriate - young patients, diabetic patients, left anterior descending artery, long lesions, diffuse disease, and hybrid strategy; (b) less consensual but possible - small collateral branches, stabilized acute coronary syndromes; and (c) inappropriate - left main disease, tortuosity, severe calcification. CONCLUSION: BVS are a viable treatment option based on the encouraging evidence of their applicability and physiological and clinical results. They should be used in appropriate indications and will require technical adaptations. Outcome monitoring and evaluation is essential to avoid inappropriate use. It is recommended that medical societies produce clinical guidelines based on high-quality registries as soon as possible.

The Oncological and Functional Risks of the Organ Preservation Experimental Treatment Approach

We increasingly face conservative surgery for rectal cancer and even the so called ‘wait and see’ approach, as far as 10–20% patients can reach a complete pathological response at the time of surgery. But what can we say to our patients about risks? Standard surgery with mesorectal excision gives a <2% local recurrence with a post operative death rate of 2–8% (may reach 30% at 6 months in those over 85), but low AR has some deterioration in bowel function and in low cancer a permanent stoma may be required. Also a long-term impact on urinary and sexual function is possible. Distant metastasis rate seem to be identical in the standard and conservative approach. It is difficult to evaluate conservative approach because a not clear standardization of surgery for low rectal cancer. Rullier et al tried to clarify, and they found identical results for recurrence (5–9%), disease free survival (70%) at 5y for coloanal anastomosis and intersphinteric resection. Other series have found local recurrence higher than with standard approach and functional results may be worse and, in some situations, salvage therapy is compromised or has more complications. In this context, functional outcomes are very important but most studies are incomplete in measuring bowel function in the context of conservative approach. In 2005 Temple et al made a survey of 122/184 patient after sphinter preserving surgery and found a 96.9% of incomplete evacuation, 94.4% clustering, 93.2% food affecting frequency, 91.8% gas incontinence and proposed a systematic evaluation with a specific questionnaire. In which concerns ‘Wait and see’ approach for complete clinical responders, it was first advocated by Habr Gama for tumors up to 7cm, with a low locoregional failure of 4.6%, 5y overall survival 96%, 72% for disease free survival; one fifth of patients failed in the first year; a Dutch trial had identical results but others had worse recurrence rates; in other series 25% of patients could not be salvaged even with APR; 30% have subsequent metastatic disease what seems equal for ‘wait and see’ and operated patients. In a recent review Glynne Jones considers that all the evaluated ‘wait and see’ studies are heterogeneous in staging, inclusion criteria, design and follow up after chemoradiation and that there is the suggestion that patients who progress while under observation fare worse than those resected. He proposes long-term observational studies with more uniform inclusion criteria. We are now facing a moment where we may be more aggressive in early cancer and neoadjuvant treatment to be more conservative in the subsequent treatment but we need a better stratification of patients, better evaluation of results and more clear prognostic markers.