Major Burn Injury Successfully Treated with Cultured Epithelial Autografts, a Case Series Presentation: Establishing Standard Clinical Practices

Author(s):  
Kevin P McGovern ◽  
Julie A Rizzo

Abstract Cultured epithelial autografts have been an option for coverage of large surface area burns for over two decades. However, there remains extreme variability in clinical practice in wound bed preparation, application of cultured epithelial autografts, and post-operative wound care and rehabilitation practices, demonstrating the need for a standardized and multidisciplinary approach in the treatment of critically injured patients treated with cultured epithelial autografts. The purpose of this case series was to share the development of a clinical practice guideline and competency checklist in our institution where cultured epithelial autograft case volume is low. In this case series, we examined the medical records of three patients treated with cultured epithelial autografts at a single burn center over a period from 2015-2018. Operating room times and fluid resuscitation volumes were examined on days when cultured epithelial autograft grafting was performed. In order to facilitate meticulous post-operative wound care in a facility where only 1-2 cultured epithelial autograft applications are performed per year, a clinical practice guideline and competency checklist were generated and trialed on a series of nurses and rehabilitation therapists for the three applications of cultured epithelial autografts. Amongst the patients treated with cultured epithelial autografts, the average TBSA burned was 71.6%. Less intra-operative crystalloid administration and faster operative case times were associated with improved cultured epithelial autograft success. The inclusion of the clinical practice guideline and checklist into our practice led to reported improved confidence in patient care, along with the successful outcomes of these cultured epithelial autograft applications.

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (17) ◽  
pp. 1714-1768 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julie R. Brahmer ◽  
Christina Lacchetti ◽  
Bryan J. Schneider ◽  
Michael B. Atkins ◽  
Kelly J. Brassil ◽  
...  

Purpose To increase awareness, outline strategies, and offer guidance on the recommended management of immune-related adverse events in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICPi) therapy. Methods A multidisciplinary, multi-organizational panel of experts in medical oncology, dermatology, gastroenterology, rheumatology, pulmonology, endocrinology, urology, neurology, hematology, emergency medicine, nursing, trialist, and advocacy was convened to develop the clinical practice guideline. Guideline development involved a systematic review of the literature and an informal consensus process. The systematic review focused on guidelines, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, and case series published from 2000 through 2017. Results The systematic review identified 204 eligible publications. Much of the evidence consisted of systematic reviews of observational data, consensus guidelines, case series, and case reports. Due to the paucity of high-quality evidence on management of immune-related adverse events, recommendations are based on expert consensus. Recommendations Recommendations for specific organ system–based toxicity diagnosis and management are presented. While management varies according to organ system affected, in general, ICPi therapy should be continued with close monitoring for grade 1 toxicities, with the exception of some neurologic, hematologic, and cardiac toxicities. ICPi therapy may be suspended for most grade 2 toxicities, with consideration of resuming when symptoms revert to grade 1 or less. Corticosteroids may be administered. Grade 3 toxicities generally warrant suspension of ICPis and the initiation of high-dose corticosteroids (prednisone 1 to 2 mg/kg/d or methylprednisolone 1 to 2 mg/kg/d). Corticosteroids should be tapered over the course of at least 4 to 6 weeks. Some refractory cases may require infliximab or other immunosuppressive therapy. In general, permanent discontinuation of ICPis is recommended with grade 4 toxicities, with the exception of endocrinopathies that have been controlled by hormone replacement. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines and www.asco.org/guidelineswiki .


2018 ◽  
Vol 159 (5) ◽  
pp. 914-919 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua J. Sturm ◽  
Phillip Huyett ◽  
Amber Shaffer ◽  
Dennis Kitsko ◽  
David H. Chi

Objectives To determine the association between the introduction of statements 6 and 7 in the 2013 clinical practice guideline (CPG) for tympanostomy tubes in children and the identification of preoperative middle ear fluid (acute otitis media / otitis media with effusion [AOM/OME]) in children undergoing bilateral myringotomy and tube (BMT) placement. Study Design Case series with chart review. Setting Tertiary care children’s medical center. Subjects and Methods Patients who underwent BMT for recurrent AOM were retrospectively reviewed. We examined 240 patients before (BG; 2012) and 240 patients after (AG; 2014) the introduction of the CPG. Results The baseline characteristics of the 2 groups were comparable. The total annual number of BMT placements performed at our institution decreased from 3957 (BG) to 3083 (AG). There was no significant increase in the rate of preoperative AOM/OME identification following CPG introduction (BG 78.3% vs AG 83.3%, P = .164). The rate of identification of AOM/OME in the operating room (OR) increased from 54.2% (BG) to 71.3% (AG, P < .001). The rate of identification of AOM/OME both in the clinic and in the OR increased from 55.1% (BG) to 71.3% (AG, P < .001). Cases with concordant clinic and OR AOM/OME occurred among younger children ( P = .045), those with fewer episodes of AOM ( P = .043), and those with shorter time between the clinic and OR dates ( P = .008). Conclusions Following the introduction of the CPG, there was no change in the rate of identification of AOM/OME prior to recommending BMT placement in children with recurrent AOM. The lack of improved compliance with statements 6 and 7 may be related to multiple clinician- and patient-derived factors.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document