Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 6 of 6 items for

  • Author or Editor: Cody L. Nesvick x
Clear All Modify Search
Restricted access

Cody L. Nesvick, Soliman Oushy, David J. Daniels and Edward S. Ahn

OBJECTIVE

Postoperative pain can limit the recovery of children undergoing craniotomy for tumor resection, and pain management is highly variable between institutions and practitioners. Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are effective in treating postoperative pain following craniotomy, but their use has been limited by concerns about postoperative hemorrhage. The risk of postoperative hemorrhage is not insignificant in patients undergoing craniotomy for tumor resection. No study has specifically addressed the safety of NSAIDs in the immediate postoperative setting following craniotomy for tumor resection in pediatric patients.

METHODS

The authors performed a retrospective cohort study in patients younger than 18 years of age who underwent craniotomy for tumor resection at a single tertiary referral center between 2009 and 2019. The study outcomes were 1) postoperative hemorrhage requiring return to the operating room for decompression, evacuation, or CSF diversion for hemorrhage-associated hydrocephalus; and 2) more-than-minimal hemorrhage on routine postoperative imaging. Patients receiving any NSAID in the hospital formulary on the same day as surgery (postoperative day zero [POD0]) were designated as such.

RESULTS

Two hundred seventy-six children underwent 308 craniotomies for tumor resection over the study period. One hundred fifty-four patients (50.0%) received at least one dose of an NSAID on POD0. Six patients (1.9%) required a return to the operating room for a hemorrhagic complication, including 3 who received an NSAID on POD0 (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.20–5.03). Seventeen patients (6.3% of patients imaged) had more-than-minimal hemorrhage on routine postoperative imaging, 9 of whom received an NSAID on POD0 (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.40–2.89).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of NSAIDs on POD0 was not associated with either an increased risk of hemorrhage requiring a return to the operating room or asymptomatic hemorrhage on routine postoperative imaging. The overall incidence of clinically significant postoperative intracranial hemorrhage is low. These data support the use of NSAIDs as a safe measure for pain control in the postoperative setting for children undergoing craniotomy for tumor resection.

Full access

Nickalus R. Khan, Zachary Smalley, Cody L. Nesvick, Siang Liao Lee and L. Madison Michael II

OBJECTIVE

Paraplegia and paraparesis following aortic aneurysm repair occur at a substantially high rate and are often catastrophic to patients, their families, and the overall health care system. Spinal cord injury (SCI) following open thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) repair is reported to be as high as 20% in historical controls. The goal of this study was to determine the impact of CSF drainage (CSFD) on SCI following TAAA repair.

METHODS

In August 2015 a systematic literature search was performed using clinicaltrials.gov, the Cochrane Library, PubMed/MEDLINE, and Scopus that identified 3478 articles. Of these articles, 10 met inclusion criteria. Random and fixed-effect meta-analyses were performed using both pooled and subset analyses based on study type.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis demonstrated that CSFD decreased SCI by nearly half (relative risk 0.42, 95% confidence interval 0.25–0.70; p = 0.0009) in the pooled analysis. This effect remained in the subgroup analysis of early SCI but did not remain significant in late SCI.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis showed that CSFD could be an effective strategy in preventing SCI following aortic aneurysm repair. Care should be taken to prevent complications related to overdrainage. No firm conclusions can be drawn about the newer endovascular procedures at the current time.

Restricted access

Lorenzo Rinaldo, Adip G. Bhargav, Cody L. Nesvick, Giuseppe Lanzino and Benjamin D. Elder

OBJECTIVE

Although ventricular shunting is an effective therapy for idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (iNPH), the effect of shunt valve type on the incidence of revision surgery is not well defined. To address this issue, shunt revision rates between patients with iNPH receiving a fixed-setting valve (FSV) versus a programmable valve (PV) were compared.

METHODS

Patients with iNPH treated with ventricular shunting between 2001 and 2017 were included for analysis. The incidence of shunt revision was noted and risk factors for revision were identified using a Cox proportional hazards model. Costs associated with admission for ventricular shunt procedures were obtained from the Vizient national database.

RESULTS

There were 348 patients included for analysis, with 98 patients (28.1%) receiving a PV. Shunt revision occurred in 73 patients (21.0%), with 12 patients (3.4%) undergoing multiple revisions. Overall revision rates were lower in patients receiving a PV (13.3% vs 24.0%; p = 0.027), as was the incidence of multiple revisions (0.0% vs 4.8%; p = 0.023). Patients with initial placement of an FSV were also more likely to undergo valve exchange during follow-up (12.4% vs 2.0%; p = 0.003). Patients with a PV were less likely to undergo revision due to persistent symptoms without obstruction (2.0% vs 8.8%; p = 0.031) and distal obstruction (1.0% vs 6.8%; p = 0.030). In a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model, initial placement of a PV was associated with reduced risk of revision due to persistent symptoms without obstruction (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.04–0.93; p = 0.036). PVs were associated with more frequent shunt series (1.3 vs 0.6; p < 0.001) and head CT scans (3.6 vs 2.7; p = 0.038) during follow-up. There was no significant difference in mean total costs between patients receiving an FSV and a PV ($24,282.50 vs $24,396.90; p = 0.937).

CONCLUSIONS

The authors’ results suggest that PVs lead to reduced rates of shunt revision in patients with iNPH, and decreased risk of revision due to persistent symptoms of iNPH, thereby justifying the higher upfront cost of PVs despite similar overall treatment costs between these devices.

Full access

Paul Klimo Jr., Cody L. Nesvick, Alberto Broniscer, Brent A. Orr and Asim F. Choudhri

OBJECT

Malignant tumors of the brainstem, excluding classic diffuse intrinsic pontine gliomas (DIPGs), are a very rare, heterogeneous group of neoplasms that have been infrequently described in the literature. In this paper, the authors present their experiences with treating these unique cancers.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was conducted to identify eligible cases over a 15-year period. All tumors involving the pons were, by consensus, felt not to be DIPGs based on their neuroimaging features. Demographic information, pathological specimens, neuroimaging characteristics, surgical and nonsurgical management plans, and survival data were gathered for analysis.

RESULTS

Between January 2000 and December 2014, 29 patients were identified. The mean age at diagnosis was 8.4 years (range 2 months to 25 years), and 17 (59%) patients were male. The most common presenting signs and symptoms were cranial neuropathies (n = 24; 83%), hemiparesis (n = 12; 41%), and ataxia or gait disturbance (n = 10; 34%). There were 18 glial and 11 embryonal tumors. Of the glial tumors, 5 were radiation-induced and 1 was a malignant transformation of a previously known low-grade tumor. Surgical intervention consisted of biopsy alone in 12 patients and some degree of resection in another 15 patients. Two tumors were diagnosed postmortem. The median overall survival for all patients was 196 days (range 15 to 3999 days). There are currently 5 (17%) patients who are still alive: 1 with an anaplastic astrocytoma and the remaining with embryonal tumors.

CONCLUSIONS

In general, malignant non-DIPG tumors of the brainstem carry a poor prognosis. However, maximal cytoreductive surgery may be an option for select patients with focal tumors. Long-term survival is possible in patients with nonmetastatic embryonal tumors after multimodal treatment, most importantly maximal resection.

Restricted access

Cody L. Nesvick, Clinton J. Thompson, Frederick A. Boop and Paul Klimo Jr.

Object

Observational studies, such as cohort and case-control studies, are valuable instruments in evidence-based medicine. Case-control studies, in particular, are becoming increasingly popular in the neurosurgical literature due to their low cost and relative ease of execution; however, no one has yet systematically assessed these types of studies for quality in methodology and reporting.

Methods

The authors performed a literature search using PubMed/MEDLINE to identify all studies that explicitly identified themselves as “case-control” and were published in the JNS Publishing Group journals (Journal of Neurosurgery, Journal of Neurosurgery: Pediatrics, Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine, and Neurosurgical Focus) or Neurosurgery. Each paper was evaluated for 22 descriptive variables and then categorized as having either met or missed the basic definition of a case-control study. All studies that evaluated risk factors for a well-defined outcome were considered true case-control studies. The authors sought to identify key features or phrases that were or were not predictive of a true case-control study. Those papers that satisfied the definition were further evaluated using the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) checklist.

Results

The search detected 67 papers that met the inclusion criteria, of which 32 (48%) represented true case-control studies. The frequency of true case-control studies has not changed with time. Use of odds ratios (ORs) and logistic regression (LR) analysis were strong positive predictors of true case-control studies (for odds ratios, OR 15.33 and 95% CI 4.52–51.97; for logistic regression analysis, OR 8.77 and 95% CI 2.69–28.56). Conversely, negative predictors included focus on a procedure/intervention (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.13–0.998) and use of the word “outcome” in the Results section (OR 0.23, 95% CI 0.082–0.65). After exclusion of nested case-control studies, the negative correlation between focus on a procedure/intervention and true case-control studies was strengthened (OR 0.053, 95% CI 0.0064–0.44). There was a trend toward a negative association between the use of survival analysis or Kaplan-Meier curves and true case-control studies (OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.015–1.12). True case-control studies were no more likely than their counterparts to use a potential study design “expert” (OR 1.50, 95% CI 0.57–3.95). The overall average STROBE score was 72% (range 50–86%). Examples of reporting deficiencies were reporting of bias (28%), missing data (55%), and funding (44%).

Conclusions

The results of this analysis show that the majority of studies in the neurosurgical literature that identify themselves as “case-control” studies are, in fact, labeled incorrectly. Positive and negative predictors were identified. The authors provide several recommendations that may reverse the incorrect and inappropriate use of the term “case-control” and improve the quality of design and reporting of true case-control studies in neurosurgery.