No abstract

Automatic Particle Image Velocimetry Uncertainty Quantification

Objective Hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia (HHT) is an autosomal dominant vascular dysplasia whose hallmark symptom is spontaneous recurrent epistaxis. Two major genetic sub-types of this syndrome are HHT1 and HHT2. Severity of epistaxis ranges from occasional low-volume bleeding to frequent large-volume hemorrhage. This study evaluated the severity and progression of epistaxis in HHT1 vs. HHT2. Study Design Retrospective cohort study Methods Retrospective chart review was performed for 183 genotyped HHT patients seen at our Center from 2010-2013. Data collected included epistaxis severity score (ESS), age of epistaxis onset, number and type of treatments, age at which treatments were sought, complete blood count values, ferritin, number of telangiectases, blood transfusions, iron therapy history, and patient demographics. Results 115 subjects with HHT2 were compared to 68 with HHT1. Subjects with HHT2 had a higher ESS compared to HHT1 (p=0.043) and a later age of onset of epistaxis (p=0.005). HHT2 subjects were more likely to use oral iron (p=0.032) and were more likely to seek interventions to control their epistaxis (p= 0.029). Conclusion HHT2 is associated with more severe epistaxis and a subsequent higher rate of interventions, requiring more aggressive therapy as compared to HHT1.

Background Nasal closure has been shown to effectively manage severe epistaxis refractory to other treatments in patients with hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia (HHT). The nasal closure procedure may be underutilized due to its surgical complexity and flap breakdown. Methods Retrospective review of thirteen HHT patients treated for severe epistaxis with nasal closure between 2005 and 2013. Operating room (OR) time, need for revision surgery, pre- and post-procedure epistaxis severity score (ESS), complete blood count values, and Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI) questionnaire results were collected for each patient. The technique is described. We characterize a typical nasal closure patient and compare outcomes based on our experience with the traditional three-flap closure and a simplified two-flap nasal closure procedure. Results The average candidate for nasal closure in this series had an ESS of 7.88, Hgb of 8.3 g/dL, and received multiple transfusions, iron therapy, and cautery/coagulation procedures. Average ESS subsequent to nasal closure using the two flap method is 0.92 and mean GBI score is 56.3. Comparison of five patients who underwent the traditional three-flap nasal closure procedure and eight patients receiving the two flap nasal closure showed no significant difference in post-op ESS or GBI metrics. Mean operating room times of the traditional and simplified methods were 3.12 hours and 1.44 hours (p=0.0001). Mean time to first revision for eight nasal closure patients is 21.5 months. Conclusion In short-term follow-up, the two-flap procedure has shown comparable effectiveness with significantly reduced complexity and operative time compared to the traditional nasal closure method.

No abstract