Introduction of a New Policy of no Nighttime Appendectomies: Impact on Appendiceal Perforation Rates and Postoperative Morbidity

Background Working hour limitations and tight health care budgets have posed significant challenges to emergency surgical services. Since 1 January 2010, surgical interventions at Berne University Hospital between 23:00 and 08:00 h have been restricted to patients with an expected serious adverse outcome if not operated on within 6 h. This study was designed to assess the safety of this new policy that restricts nighttime appendectomies (AEs). Methods The patients that underwent AE from 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2011 (“2010-2011 group”) were compared retrospectively with patients that underwent AE before introduction of the new policy (1 January 2006–31 December 2009; “2006-2009 group”). Results Overall, 390 patients were analyzed. There were 255 patients in the 2006–2009 group and 135 patients in the 2010–2011 group. Patients’ demographics did not differ statistically between the two study groups; however, 45.9 % of the 2006–2009 group and 18.5 % of the 2010–2011 group were operated between 23:00 and 08:00 h (p < 0.001). The rates of appendiceal perforations and surgical site infections did not differ statistically between the 2006–2009 group and the 2010–2011 group (20 vs. 18.5 %, p = 0.725 and 2 vs. 0 %, p = 0.102). Additionally, no difference was found for the hospital length of stay (3.9 ± 7.4 vs. 3.4 ± 6.0 days, p = 0.586). However, the proportion of patients with an in-hospital delay of >12 h was significantly greater in the 2010–2011 group than in the 2006–2009 group [55.6 vs. 43.5 %, p = 0.024, odds ratio (95 % confidence interval 1.62 (1.1–2.47)]. Conclusions Restricting AEs from 23:00 to 08:00 h does not increase the perforation rates and occurrence of clinical outcomes. Therefore, these results suggest that appendicitis may be managed safely in a semielective manner.

Improvements in Implant Dentistry over the Last Decade: Comparison of Survival and Complication Rates in Older and Newer Publications

Purpose: The objective of this systematic review was to assess and compare the survival and complication rates of implant-supported prostheses reported in studies published in the year 2000 and before, to those reported in studies published after the year 2000. Materials and Methods: Three electronic searches complemented by manual searching were conducted to identify 139 prospective and retrospective studies on implant-supported prostheses. The included studies were divided in two groups: a group of 31 older studies published in the year 2000 or before, and a group of 108 newer studies published after the year 2000. Survival and complication rates were calculated using Poisson regression models, and multivariable robust Poisson regression was used to formally compare the outcomes of older and newer studies. Results: The 5-year survival rate of implant-supported prostheses was significantly increased in newer studies compared with older studies. The overall survival rate increased from 93.5% to 97.1%. The survival rate for cemented prostheses increased from 95.2% to 97.9%; for screw-retained reconstruction, from 77.6% to 96.8%; for implant-supported single crowns, from 92.6% to 97.2%; and for implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs), from 93.5% to 96.4%. The incidence of esthetic complications decreased in more recent studies compared with older ones, but the incidence of biologic complications was similar. The results for technical complications were inconsistent. There was a significant reduction in abutment or screw loosening by implant-supported FDPs. On the other hand, the total number of technical complications and the incidence of fracture of the veneering material was significantly increased in the newer studies. To explain the increased rate of complications, minor complications are probably reported in more detail in the newer publications. Conclusions: The results of the present systematic review demonstrated a positive learning curve in implant dentistry, represented in higher survival rates and lower complication rates reported in more recent clinical studies. The incidence of esthetic, biologic, and technical complications, however, is still high. Hence, it is important to identify these complications and their etiology to make implant treatment even more predictable in the future.

Simple Estimation of Incident HIV Infection Rates in Notification Cohorts Based on Window Periods of Algorithms for Evaluation of Line-Immunoassay Result Patterns

Background Tests for recent infections (TRIs) are important for HIV surveillance. We have shown that a patient's antibody pattern in a confirmatory line immunoassay (Inno-Lia) also yields information on time since infection. We have published algorithms which, with a certain sensitivity and specificity, distinguish between incident (< = 12 months) and older infection. In order to use these algorithms like other TRIs, i.e., based on their windows, we now determined their window periods. Methods We classified Inno-Lia results of 527 treatment-naïve patients with HIV-1 infection < = 12 months according to incidence by 25 algorithms. The time after which all infections were ruled older, i.e. the algorithm's window, was determined by linear regression of the proportion ruled incident in dependence of time since infection. Window-based incident infection rates (IIR) were determined utilizing the relationship ‘Prevalence = Incidence x Duration’ in four annual cohorts of HIV-1 notifications. Results were compared to performance-based IIR also derived from Inno-Lia results, but utilizing the relationship ‘incident = true incident + false incident’ and also to the IIR derived from the BED incidence assay. Results Window periods varied between 45.8 and 130.1 days and correlated well with the algorithms' diagnostic sensitivity (R2 = 0.962; P<0.0001). Among the 25 algorithms, the mean window-based IIR among the 748 notifications of 2005/06 was 0.457 compared to 0.453 obtained for performance-based IIR with a model not correcting for selection bias. Evaluation of BED results using a window of 153 days yielded an IIR of 0.669. Window-based IIR and performance-based IIR increased by 22.4% and respectively 30.6% in 2008, while 2009 and 2010 showed a return to baseline for both methods. Conclusions IIR estimations by window- and performance-based evaluations of Inno-Lia algorithm results were similar and can be used together to assess IIR changes between annual HIV notification cohorts.