Considerações acerca do preparo ortodôntico direcionado à cirurgia ortognática

This work aims at contributing to increase and improve the communication between orthodontists and maxillofacial surgeons, reviewing and discussing the principles of diagnosis and orthodontic movement specific to patients with surgical indication. It describes the elective points in the conduct of the orthodontist so that their decisions could lead to an individualized and appropriate planning, striving for excellence in terms of outcomes for the surgical-orthodontic treatment of dentofacial discrepancies.

Patients' preferences on information and involvement in decision-making for gastrointestinal surgery

Objective: The relationship between physicians and patients has undergone¦important changes, and the current emancipation of patients has led to¦a real partnership in medical decision-making. This study aimed to assess¦patients' preferences on different aspects of decision-making during treatment¦and potential complications, as well as the amount and type of preoperative¦information before visceral surgery.¦Methods: Prospective non-randomized study based on a questionnaire given¦to 253 consecutive patients scheduled for elective GI surgery.¦Results: Concerning surgical complications or treatment in the intensive care¦unit, 64% of patients wished to take actively part in any medical decisions.¦The respective figures for cardiac resuscitation and treatment limitations were¦89% and 60%. About information, 73%, 77% and 47% of patients wish¦detailed information, information on a potential ICUhospitalization and cardiac¦resuscitation, respectively. Elderly and low-educated patients were significantly¦less interested in shared medical decision-making (p = 0·003 and 0·015) and in¦information receiving (p = 0·03 and 0·05). Similarly, involvement of the family¦in decision-making was significantly less important in elderly and male patients¦(p = 0·05 and 0·03 respectively). Neither the type of operation (minor or major)¦nor the severity of disease (malignancies vs. non-malignancies) was a significant¦factor for shared decision-making, information or family involvement.¦Conclusion: The vast majority of surgical patients clearly want to get adequate¦preoperative information about their disease and the planned treatment. They¦also consider it as crucial to be involved in any kind of decision-making for¦treatment and complications. The family's role is limited to support the treating¦physicians if the patient is unable to participate in taking decisions.

Patients' preferences on information and involvement in decision making for gastrointestinal surgery.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between physicians and patients has undergone important changes, and the current emancipation of patients has led to a real partnership in medical decision making. The present study aimed to assess patients' preferences on different aspects of decision making during treatment and potential complications, as well as the amount and type of preoperative information wanted before visceral surgery. METHODS: This was a prospective non-randomized study based on a questionnaire given to 253 consecutive patients scheduled for elective gastrointestinal surgery. RESULTS: In considering surgical complications or treatment in the intensive care unit, 64 % of patients wished to take an active role in any medical decisions. The respective figures for cardiac resuscitation and treatment limitations were 89 and 60 %. As for information, 73, 77, and 47 % of patients wish detailed information, information on a potential ICU hospitalization, and knowledge of cardiac resuscitation, respectively. Elderly and low-educated patients were significantly less interested in shared medical decision making (p = 0.003 and 0.015), and in receiving information (p = 0.03 and 0.05). Similarly, involvement of the family in decision making was significantly less important to elderly and male patients (p = 0.05 and 0.03, respectively). Neither the type of operation (minor or major) nor the severity of disease (malignancies versus non-malignancies) was a significant factor for shared decision making, information, or family involvement. CONCLUSIONS: The vast majority of surgical patients clearly want to get adequate preoperative information about their disease and the planned treatment. They also consider it crucial to be involved in any kind of decision making for treatment and complications. For most patients, the family role is limited to supporting the treating physicians if the patient is unable to participate in decision making.

Decision-making in aortic root surgery in Marfan syndrome: bleeding, thromboembolism and risk of reintervention after valve-sparing or mechanical aortic root replacement†

OBJECTIVES Valve-sparing root replacement (VSRR) is thought to reduce the rate of thromboembolic and bleeding events compared with aortic root replacement using a mechanical aortic root replacement (MRR) with a composite graft by avoiding oral anticoagulation. But as VSRR carries a certain risk for subsequent reinterventions, decision-making in the individual patient can be challenging. METHODS Of 100 Marfan syndrome (MFS) patients who underwent 169 aortic surgeries and were followed at our institution since 1995, 59 consecutive patients without a history of dissection or prior aortic surgery underwent elective VSRR or MRR and were retrospectively analysed. RESULTS VSRR was performed in 29 (David n = 24, Yacoub n = 5) and MRR in 30 patients. The mean age was 33 ± 15 years. The mean follow-up after VSRR was 6.5 ± 4 years (180 patient-years) compared with 8.8 ± 9 years (274 patient-years) after MRR. Reoperation rates after root remodelling (Yacoub) were significantly higher than after the reimplantation (David) procedure (60 vs 4.2%, P = 0.01). The need for reinterventions after the reimplantation procedure (0.8% per patient-year) was not significantly higher than after MRR (P = 0.44) but follow-up after VSRR was significantly shorter (P = 0.03). There was neither significant morbidity nor mortality associated with root reoperations. There were no neurological events after VSRR compared with four stroke/intracranial bleeding events in the MRR group (log-rank, P = 0.11), translating into an event rate of 1.46% per patient-year following MRR. CONCLUSION The calculated annual failure rate after VSRR using the reimplantation technique was lower than the annual risk for thromboembolic or bleeding events. Since the perioperative risk of reinterventions following VSRR is low, patients might benefit from VSRR even if redo surgery may become necessary during follow-up.

Patients' preferences on information and involvement in decision-making in gastrointestinal surgery

Contexte et but de l'étude: La relation médecin-patient a subi d'importants changements et l'actuelle émancipation des patients a conduit à un véritable partenariat dans la prise de décisions thérapeutiques. Notre étude a pour but de déterminer les préférences des patients pour différents aspects de la prise de décisions au cours d'un traitement et de ses potentielles complications, de même que la quantité et le type d'information souhaitée avant une intervention chirurgicale digestive. Patients et méthodes : Il s'agit d'une étude prospective non-randomisée basée sur un questionnaire donné lors de la consultation préopératoire à 254 patients consécutifs prévus pour une chirurgie gastro-intestinale élective. Résultats : Pour les potentielles complications chirurgicales et la possibilité d'un séjour aux soins intensifs, 64% des patients souhaitent participer activement aux décisions médicales, et respectivement 89% et 60% des patients aimeraient discuter d'une éventuelle réanimation cardio-pulmonaire et de limitations au traitement. Respectivement 73%, 77% et 47% des patients ont souhaité une information très détaillée, une infoimation pour une possible hospitalisation en soins intensifs ou une éventuelle réanimation cardiaque. Les patients âgés ou avec un niveau de formation bas étaient significativement moins intéressés à une prise de décision partagée (p=0.003 et 0.015) et à une information complète (p=0.03 et 0.05), De plus, l'implication des familles dans les prises de décision n'était favorisée que si le patient est en coma (74%), et significativement moins importante chez les personnes âgées et de sexe masculin (p=0.04 et 0.03 respectivement). Ni le type de chirurgie prévue (majeure ou mineure) ni la sévérité de la pathologie (cancer ou non) ne furent des facteurs statistiquement significatifs pour un désir plus élevé de partager la prise de décision, pour plus d'information ou pour impliquer d'avantage la famille. Conclusions : Notre étude démontre que la majorité des patients chirurgicaux souhaitent recevoir une information préopératoire complète concernant leur maladie et le traitement planifié. Ils considèrent également comme crucial d'être impliqués dans les prises de décisions thérapeutiques pour le traitement et pour les possibles complications. Le rôle de la famille est limité aux situations ou le patient n'est plus en mesure de participer aux décisions.

Can decision making in general surgery be based on evidence? An empirical study of Cochrane Reviews

BACKGROUND: This empirical study analyzes the current status of Cochrane Reviews (CRs) and their strength of recommendation for evidence-based decision making in the field of general surgery. METHODS: Systematic literature search of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the Cochrane Collaboration's homepage to identify available CRs on surgical topics. Quantitative and qualitative characteristics, utilization, and formulated treatment recommendations were evaluated by 2 independent reviewers. Association of review characteristics with treatment recommendation was analyzed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression models. RESULTS: Ninety-three CRs, including 1,403 primary studies and 246,473 patients, were identified. Mean number of included primary studies per CR was 15.1 (standard deviation [SD] 14.5) including 2,650 (SD 3,340) study patients. Two and a half (SD 8.3) nonrandomized trials were included per analyzed CR. Seventy-two (77%) CRs were published or updated in 2005 or later. Explicit treatment recommendations were given in 45 (48%). Presence of a treatment recommendation was associated with the number of included primary studies and the proportion of randomized studies. Utilization of surgical CRs remained low and showed large inter-country differences. The most surgical CRs were accessed in UK, USA, and Australia, followed by several Western and Eastern European countries. CONCLUSION: Only a minority of available CRs address surgical questions and their current usage is low. Instead of unsystematically increasing the number of surgical CRs it would be far more efficient to focus the review process on relevant surgical questions. Prioritization of CRs needs valid methods which should be developed by the scientific surgical community.

Putting children forward for epilepsy surgery:a qualitative study of UK parents' and health professionals' decision-making experiences

Background Against a backdrop of recommendations for increasing access to and uptake of early surgical intervention for children with medically intractable epilepsy, it is important to understand how parents and professionals decide to put children forward for epilepsy surgery and what their decisional support needs are. Aim The aim of this study was to explore how parents and health professionals make decisions regarding putting children forward for pediatric epilepsy surgery. Methods Individual interviews were conducted with nine parents of children who had undergone pediatric epilepsy surgery at a specialist children's hospital and ten healthcare professionals who made up the children's epilepsy surgery service multidisciplinary healthcare team (MDT). Three MDT meetings were also observed. Data were analyzed thematically. Findings Four themes were generated from analysis of interviews with parents: presentation of surgery as a treatment option, decision-making, looking back, and interventions. Three themes were generated from analysis of interviews/observations with health professionals: triangulating information, team working, and patient and family perspectives. Discussion Parents wanted more information and support in deciding to put their child forward for epilepsy surgery. They attempted to balance the potential benefits of surgery against any risks of harm. For health professionals, a multidisciplinary approach was seen as crucial to the decision-making process. Advocating for the family was perceived to be the responsibility of nonmedical professionals. Conclusion Decision-making can be supported by incorporating families into discussions regarding epilepsy surgery as a potential treatment option earlier in the process and by providing families with additional information and access to other parents with similar experiences.

Primary care physician decision making regarding severe obesity treatment and bariatric surgery: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Less than 1% of severely obese US adults undergo bariatric surgery annually. It is critical to understand the factors that contribute to its utilization. OBJECTIVES: To understand how primary care physicians (PCPs) make decisions regarding severe obesity treatment and bariatric surgery referral. SETTING: Focus groups with PCPs practicing in small, medium, and large cities in Wisconsin. METHODS: PCPs were asked to discuss prioritization of treatment for a severely obese patient with multiple co-morbidities and considerations regarding bariatric surgery referral. Focus group sessions were analyzed by using a directed approach to content analysis. A taxonomy of consensus codes was developed. Code summaries were created and representative quotes identified. RESULTS: Sixteen PCPs participated in 3 focus groups. Four treatment prioritization approaches were identified: (1) treat the disease that is easiest to address; (2) treat the disease that is perceived as the most dangerous; (3) let the patient set the agenda; and (4) address obesity first because it is the common denominator underlying other co-morbid conditions. Only the latter approach placed emphasis on obesity treatment. Five factors made PCPs hesitate to refer patients for bariatric surgery: (1) wanting to "do no harm"; (2) questioning the long-term effectiveness of bariatric surgery; (3) limited knowledge about bariatric surgery; (4) not wanting to recommend bariatric surgery too early; and (5) not knowing if insurance would cover bariatric surgery. CONCLUSION: Decision making by PCPs for severely obese patients seems to underprioritize obesity treatment and overestimate bariatric surgery risks. This could be addressed with PCP education and improvements in communication between PCPs and bariatric surgeons.

Decision-making in lumbar spinal stenosis: A survey on the influence of the morphology of the dural sac.

Surgical decision-making in lumbar spinal stenosis involves assessment of clinical parameters and the severity of the radiological stenosis. We suspected that surgeons based surgical decisions more on dural sac cross-sectional area (DSCA) than on the morphology of the dural sac. We carried out a survey among members of three European spine societies. The axial T2-weighted MR images from ten patients with varying degrees of DSCA and morphological grades according to the recently described morphological classification of lumbar spinal stenosis, with DSCA values disclosed in half the assessed images, were used for evaluation. We provided a clinical scenario to accompany the images, which were shown to 142 responding physicians, mainly orthopaedic surgeons but also some neurosurgeons and others directly involved in treating patients with spinal disorders. As the primary outcome we used the number of respondents who would proceed to surgery for a given DSCA or morphological grade. Substantial agreement among the respondents was observed, with severe or extreme stenosis as defined by the morphological grade leading to surgery. This decision was not dependent on the number of years in practice, medical density or specialty. Disclosing the DSCA did not alter operative decision-making. In all, 40 respondents (29%) had prior knowledge of the morphological grading system, but their responses showed no difference from those who had not. This study suggests that the participants were less influenced by DSCA than by the morphological appearance of the dural sac. Classifying lumbar spinal stenosis according to morphology rather than surface measurements appears to be consistent with current clinical practice.

Influence of the morphology of the dural sac on surgical decision making in lumbar spinal stenosis

Introduction: Surgical decision making in lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) takes into account primarily clinical symptoms as well as concordant radiological findings. We hypothesized that a wide variation of operative threshold would be found in particular as far as judgment of severity of radiological stenosis is concerned. Patients and methods: The number of surgeons who would proceed to decompression was studied relative to the perceived severity of radiological stenosis based either on measurements of dural sac cross sectional area (DSCA) or on the recently described morphological grading as seen on axial T2 MRI images. A link to an electronic survey page with a set of ten axial T2 MRI images taken from ten patients with either low back pain or LSS were sent to members of three national or international spine societies. Those 10 images were randomly presented initially and re-shuffled on a second page including this time DSCA measurements in mm2, ranging from 14 to 226 mm2, giving a total of 20 images to appraise. Morphological grades were ranging from grade A to D. Surgeons were asked if they would consider decompression given the radiological appearance of stenosis and that symptoms of neurological claudication were severe in patients who were otherwise fit for surgery. Fisher's exact test was performed following dichotomization of data when appropriate. Results: A total of 142 spine surgeons (113 orthopedic spine surgeons, 29 neurosurgeons) responded from 25 countries. A substantial agreement was observed in operating patients with severe (grade C) or extreme (grade D) stenosis as defined by the morphological grade compared to lesser stenosis (A&B) grades (p<0.0001). Decision to operate was not dependent on number of years in practice, medical density in practicing country or specialty although more neurosurgeons would operate on grade C stenosis (p<0.005). Disclosing the DSCA measurement did not alter the decision to operate. Although 20 surgeons only had prior knowledge of the description of the morphological grading, their responses showed no statistically significant difference with those of the remaining 122 physicians. Conclusions: This study showed that surgeons across borders are less influenced by DSCA in their decision making than by the morphological appearance of the dural sac. Classifying LSS according to morphology rather than surface measurements appears to be consistent with current clinical practice.

Factors affecting treatment decision making for women with breast cancer

This study examined the factors affecting treatment decision making for young women with early stage breast cancer. Thirty women, aged 35 to 52 years, were presented information about two equally effective chemotherapy treatments following surgery for breast cancer using an educational instrument called a "decision board." Although equally effective, the treatments differ with regards to side effects and treatment schedule. The purpose of this research was to investigate what factors affect the decision-making process. Following administration of the decision board, women were given a take-home version to review and asked to return one to two weeks later with a decision, at which time they completed a questionnaire. theoretical framework for this study was constructed from the literature on self-directed learning and critical thinking. The Overall, the factors rated most important to the treatment decision were related to quality of life, side effects, and length of treatment. Five factors were found to be rated significantly different by the women who chose one treatment versus the other in terms of importance to their decision. These were side effects in general, vomiting, hair loss, family role, and the number of trips to the cancer centre required for treatment.Implications and recommendations for patient education, research, and practice evolved from the findings of this study.

ESMO Consensus Guidelines for management of patients with colon and rectal cancer. A personalized approach to clinical decision making

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the most common tumour type in both sexes combined in Western countries. Although screening programmes including the implementation of faecal occult blood test and colonoscopy might be able to reduce mortality by removing precursor lesions and by making diagnosis at an earlier stage, the burden of disease and mortality is still high. Improvement of diagnostic and treatment options increased staging accuracy, functional outcome for early stages as well as survival. Although high quality surgery is still the mainstay of curative treatment, the management of CRC must be a multi-modal approach performed by an experienced multi-disciplinary expert team. Optimal choice of the individual treatment modality according to disease localization and extent, tumour biology and patient factors is able to maintain quality of life, enables long-term survival and even cure in selected patients by a combination of chemotherapy and surgery. Treatment decisions must be based on the available evidence, which has been the basis for this consensus conference-based guideline delivering a clear proposal for diagnostic and treatment measures in each stage of rectal and colon cancer and the individual clinical situations. This ESMO guideline is recommended to be used as the basis for treatment and management decisions.

Contrast-enhanced 3-D MRA in decision making for carotid endarterectomy: a 6-year experience

BACKGROUND: Systematic need for angiography in diagnosis of carotid artery stenosis and indication of surgical therapy is still debated. Noninvasive imaging techniques such as MR angiography (MRA) or CT angiography (CTA) offer an alternative to digital subtraction angiography (DSA) and are increasingly used in clinical practice. In this study, we present the radiological characteristics and clinical results of a series of patients operated on the basis of combined ultrasonography (US)/MRA. METHODS: This observational study included all the patients consecutively operated for a carotid stenosis in our Department from October 1998 to December 2004. The applied MRA protocol had previously been established in a large correlation study with DSA. DSA was used only in case of discordance between US and MRA. The preoperative radiological information furnished by MRA was compared with intraoperative findings. The outcome of the operation was assessed according to ECST criteria. RESULTS: Among 327 patients, preoperative MRA was performed in 278 (85%), DSA in 44 (13.5%) and CT angiography in 5 (1.5%). Most of DSA studies were performed as emergency for preparation of endovascular therapy or for reasons other than carotid stenosis. Eleven additional DSA (3.3%) complemented US/MRA, mostly because diverging diagnosis of subocclusion of ICA. No direct morbidity or intraoperative difficulty was related to preoperative MRA. Combined mortality/major morbidity rate was 0.9% (3 patients) and minor morbidity rate 5.5% (18 patients). CONCLUSIONS: This observational study describes a well-established practice of carotid surgery and supports the exclusive use of non invasive diagnostic imaging for indicating and deciding the operation.

Decision making in patients with acute abdominal pain at a university and at a rural hospital: Does the value of abdominal sonography differ?

Introduction and objectives Abdominal sonography is regarded as a quick and effective diagnostic tool for acute abdominal pain in emergency medicine. However, final diagnosis is usually based on a combination of various clinical examinations and radiography. The role of sonography in the decision making process at a hospital with advanced imaging capabilities versus a hospital with limited imaging capabilities but more experienced clinicians is unclear. The aim of this pilot study was to assess the relative importance of sonography and its influence on the clinical management of acute abdominal pain, at two Swiss hospitals, a university hospital (UH) and a rural hospital (RH). Methods 161 patients were prospectively examined clinically. Blood tests and sonography were performed in all patients. Patients younger than 18 years and patients with trauma were excluded. In both hospitals, the diagnosis before and after ultrasonography was registered in a protocol. Certainty of the diagnosis was expressed on a scale from 0% to 100%. The decision processes used to manage patients before and after they underwent sonography were compared. The diagnosis at discharge was compared to the diagnosis 2 – 6 weeks thereafter. Results Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of sonography were high: 94%, 88% and 91%, respectively. At the UH, management after sonography changed in only 14% of cases, compared to 27% at the RH. Additional tests were more frequently added at the UH (30%) than at the RH (18%), but had no influence on the decision making process-whether to operate or not. At the UH, the diagnosis was missed in one (1%) patient, but in three (5%) patients at the RH. No significant difference was found between the two hospitals in frequency of management changes due to sonography or in the correctness of the diagnosis. Conclusion Knowing that sonography has high sensitivity, specificity and accuracy in the diagnosis of acute abdominal pain, one would assume it would be an important diagnostic tool, particularly at the RH, where tests/imaging studies are rare. However, our pilot study indicates that sonography provides important diagnostic information in only a minority of patients with acute abdominal pain. Sonography was more important at the rural hospital than at the university hospital. Further costly examinations are generally ordered for verification, but these additional tests change the final treatment plan in very few patients.

[Role of coronary artery bypass grafting in the treatment of coronary artery disease - a well-balanced information of the patients and objective decision making are welcome]

Most recently discussion about the optimal treatment for different subsets of patients suffering from coronary artery disease has re-emerged, mainly because of the uncertainty caused by doctors and patients regarding the phenomenon of unpredictable early and late stent thrombosis. Surgical revascularization using multiple arterial bypass grafts has repeatedly proven its superiority compared to percutaneous intervention techniques, especially in patients suffering from left main stem disease and coronary 3-vessels disease. Several prospective randomized multicenter studies comparing early and mid-term results following PCI and CABG have been really restrictive, with respect to patient enrollment, with less than 5% of all patients treated during the same time period been enrolled. Coronary artery bypass grafting allows the most complete revascularization in one session, because all target coronary vessels larger than 1 mm can be bypassed in their distal segments. Once the patient has been turn-off for surgery, surgeons have to consider the most complete arterial revascularization in order to decrease the long-term necessity for re-revascularization; for instance patency rate of the left internal thoracic artery grafted to the distal part left anterior descending artery may be as high as 90-95% after 10 to 15 years. Early mortality following isolated CABG operation has been as low as 0.6 to 1% in the most recent period (reports from the University Hospital Berne and the University Hospital of Zurich); beside these excellent results, the CABG option seems to be less expensive than PCI with time, since the necessity for additional PCI is rather high following initial PCI, and the price of stent devices is still very high, particularly in Switzerland. Patients, insurance and experts in health care should be better and more honestly informed concerning the risk and costs of PCI and CABG procedures as well as about the much higher rate of subsequent interventions following PCI. Team approach for all patients in whom both options could be offered seems mandatory to avoid unbalanced information of the patients. Looking at the recent developments in transcatheter valve treatments, the revival of cardiological-cardiosurgical conferences seems to a good option to optimize the cooperation between the two medical specialties: cardiology and cardiac surgery.