Perforation of the pulmonary artery by a bronchial wall stent

Implantation of stents into the bronchial walls is a newly developed method to treat lung emphysema, which is now being tested clinically. During this procedure, a bronchoscope carrying a Doppler ultrasonography head is placed into a segmental bronchus and the blood vessels running in parallel to the bronchus are localized. Once a safe location without blood vessels is found, the bronchial wall is perforated and a stent is placed within the wall to improve the expiratory volume of these "bypasses" to the adjacent lung parenchyma. We observed a fatal complication with this method in a 60-year-old man. The bronchial wall and the pulmonary artery were perforated by one of the stents inducing massive bleeding, which could not be stopped. The patient died due to aspiration of blood in combination with massive loss of blood. The general risk to perforate the pulmonary artery during this procedure cannot be estimated from this single observation but should be considered regarding the legal and clinical aspects.

Perforation of the median nerve with an acupuncture needle guided by ultrasound

In an experiment on one of the authors, we used ultrasound to visualise an acupuncture needle completely perforating the median nerve at the acupuncture point PC6. During this procedure only a slight sensation occurred, and no pain. We conclude that, in individual cases, the median nerve might be perforated without causing pain or neurological problems.

Eosinophilic esophagitis: analysis of food impaction and perforation in 251 adolescent and adult patients

BACKGROUND ; AIMS: Eosinophilic esophagitis is a rapidly emerging, chronic inflammatory disorder. Prolonged inflammation evokes structural alterations and a fragile esophageal wall prone to perforation/rupture and food impaction. This report assesses the risk of spontaneously arising and procedure-induced complications and proposes practical recommendations. METHODS: The Swiss Esophageal Esophagitis Database documented 251 confirmed cases. A chart review identified which patients had required endoscopic bolus removal and/or experienced transmural esophageal perforation/rupture. In addition, a MEDLINE search for "eosinophilic esophagitis" with "esophageal perforation" or "esophageal rupture" was undertaken. RESULTS: During an 18-year period, 87 patients (34.7%) experienced 134 food impactions requiring flexible (124, 92.5%) or rigid (10, 7.5%) endoscopic bolus removal. Transmural perforation occurred in 20% (2/10) of rigid procedures, and 1 esophageal rupture (Boerhaave's syndrome) was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Bolus removal by rigid endoscopy is a high-risk procedure and should be avoided in eosinophilic esophagitis patients who require a gentler approach. Whether food impaction and esophageal wall remodeling can be prevented with anti-inflammatory medication is still undetermined. All Boerhaave's syndrome cases should be evaluated for underlying eosinophilic esophagitis.

Percutaneous closure of a postinfarction ventricular septal defect and an iatrogenic left ventricular free-wall perforation using two Amplatzer muscular VSD occluders

A 83-year-old woman underwent percutaneous closure of postinfarction ventricular septal defect following anteroseptal myocardial infarction and percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation of the left anterior descending coronary artery. Postinfarction percutaneous ventricular septal defect closure was initially complicated by an iatrogenic left ventricular free-wall perforation. Both defects were closed using two Amplatzer muscular VSD occluders during the same session.

Surgical glove perforation and the risk of surgical site infection

HYPOTHESIS: Clinically apparent surgical glove perforation increases the risk of surgical site infection (SSI). DESIGN: Prospective observational cohort study. SETTING: University Hospital Basel, with an average of 28,000 surgical interventions per year. PARTICIPANTS: Consecutive series of 4147 surgical procedures performed in the Visceral Surgery, Vascular Surgery, and Traumatology divisions of the Department of General Surgery. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The outcome of interest was SSI occurrence as assessed pursuant to the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention standards. The primary predictor variable was compromised asepsis due to glove perforation. RESULTS: The overall SSI rate was 4.5% (188 of 4147 procedures). Univariate logistic regression analysis showed a higher likelihood of SSI in procedures in which gloves were perforated compared with interventions with maintained asepsis (odds ratio [OR], 2.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4-2.8; P < .001). However, multivariate logistic regression analyses showed that the increase in SSI risk with perforated gloves was different for procedures with vs those without surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis (test for effect modification, P = .005). Without antimicrobial prophylaxis, glove perforation entailed significantly higher odds of SSI compared with the reference group with no breach of asepsis (adjusted OR, 4.2; 95% CI, 1.7-10.8; P = .003). On the contrary, when surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis was applied, the likelihood of SSI was not significantly higher for operations in which gloves were punctured (adjusted OR, 1.3; 95% CI, 0.9-1.9; P = .26). CONCLUSION: Without surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis, glove perforation increases the risk of SSI.

Septic peritonitis from pyloric and non-pyloric gastrointestinal perforation: prognostic factors in 44 dogs and 11 cats

OBJECTIVES To identify potential prognostic factors affecting outcome in septic peritonitis caused by gastrointestinal perforation in dogs and cats. METHODS A retrospective study. Animals operated on for septic peritonitis because of gastrointestinal perforation were evaluated. Risk factors assessed included age, duration of clinical signs, recent prior abdominal surgery, recent prior anti-inflammatory drug administration, placement of a closed-suction drain and location of perforation. RESULTS Fifty-five animals (44 dogs and 11 cats) were included. The overall mortality was 63·6%. No association was found between age, duration of clinical signs or prior abdominal surgery and outcome. Animals with a history of prior anti-inflammatory drugs were significantly (P=0·0011) more likely to have perforation of the pylorus (73·3%). No significant difference in outcome was found between animals treated with closed-suction drains and those treated with primary closure or between pyloric perforation and perforation at other gastrointestinal sites. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE Administration of anti-inflammatory drugs in dogs and cats is a significant risk factor for pyloric perforation. Pyloric perforation was not associated with a poorer outcome than perforation at other gastrointestinal sites. Placement of a closed suction drain did not improve outcome compared to primary closure.

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.

Perforation of the sinus membrane during sinus floor elevation: a retrospective study of frequency and possible risk factors.

PURPOSE To analyze the frequency of perforation of the sinus membrane during maxillary sinus floor elevation (SFE) and to assess possible risk factors. MATERIALS AND METHODS Seventy-seven cases of SFE performed with a lateral window approach were evaluated retrospectively. Clinical and radiographic variables potentially influencing the risk of sinus membrane perforation were evaluated and divided into patient-related factors (age, sex, smoking habit); surgery-related factors (type of surgical approach, side, units, sites, and technique of osteotomy); and maxillary sinus-related factors (presence and height of septum, height of residual ridge, thickness of lateral sinus wall, width of antrum, and thickness and status of sinus membrane). RESULTS The following factors presented with at least a 10% difference in rates of perforations: smokers (46.2%) versus nonsmokers (23.4%), simultaneous (32%) versus staged (18.5%) approach, mixed premolar-molar sites (41.2%) versus premolar-only sites (16.7%) versus molar-only sites (26.2%), presence of septa (42.9%) versus no septa (23.8%), and minimum height of residual ridge ≤4 mm (34.2%) versus > 4 mm (20.5%). These same parameters, except minimum height of residual ridge, also showed an odds ratio above 2. However, none of the comparisons reached statistical significance. CONCLUSION The present study failed to demonstrate any factor that statistically significantly increased the risk of sinus membrane perforation during SFE using the lateral window approach.

Percutaneous management of left atrial appendage perforation during device closure.

A 76-year-old male patient was admitted for percutaneous left atrial appendage (LAA) closure because of chronic atrial fibrillation and a history of gastrointestinal bleeding under oral anticoagulation. The procedure was complicated by perforation of the LAA with the lobe of the closure device being placed in the pericardial space. Keeping access to the pericardial space with the delivery sheath, the LAA closure device was replaced by an atrial septal defect closure device to seal the perforation. Then the initial LAA closure device was reimplanted in a correct position. Needle pericardiocentesis was required but the subsequent course was uneventful.