Background: Nonlife-threatening headaches account for 3% of emergency department (ED) admissions, with social and economic negative consequences. We aim to investigate clinical features and risk factors of nonlife-threatening headache patients referring to ED versus those referring to headache outpatient clinics. Methods: During 6 months, we promptly reevaluated in our headache unit (HU) patients discharged from ED. We compared the clinical characteristics of patients who referred to ED with those of HU outpatients visited in the same time interval. Discriminant Function Analysis and Correspondence Analysis were used to determine risk factors for ED referral. Results: We recruited 49 post-ED patients and 126 outpatients. The main reasons for ED admission were poor response to acute treatment and aurarelated symptoms. Headache diagnoses made in ED were generally not confirmed later (overall concordance of 47%), except for cluster headache (CH) and migraine with aura (MA). ED patients complained higher headache intensity, longer duration, and prolonged aura compared to outpatients. Aura was the main risk factor associated with ED admission on statistical models, while less prominent risk factors were sex, age, and years from migraine onset. Conclusions: ED patients presented a more severe headache clinical phenotype compared with outpatients. Headache diagnosis remains difficult in the emergency setting and is more easily achieved for the headache forms with standout features, such as MA or CH. According to statistical models, the aura is the most important risk factor for ED admissions.
PurposeThe aim of this study was to compare the postoperative clinical and radiological data of patients with vestibular schwannomas who were initially managed by near total resection (NTR) or subtotal resection (STR). The Ki-67 analysis results were compared with tumor regrowth to determine the presence of a correlation between this proliferative index and postoperative tumor regrowth.Study DesignSeventeen adult patients (7 male, 10 female) were retrospectively reviewed. Nine (52.9%) and eight (47.1%) patients underwent NTR and STR, respectively. Postoperative clinical and radiological data associated with vestibular schwannoma growth were compared with the Ki-67 immunohistochemical analysis results.ResultsEvidence of clinically significant regrowth was observed in four (23.5%) patients. Patients who underwent NTR had a lower rate/incidence of tumor regrowth than did patients who underwent STR. Patients with a higher Ki-67 index had the highest tumor regrowth rates.ConclusionsOur study indicates that assessment of the Ki-67 index may be useful for determining the probability of regrowth of vestibular schwannomas when only partial removal is accomplished.
Petrous bone cholesteatomas (PBCs) are epidermoid cysts, which have developed in the petrous portion of the temporal bone and may be congenital or acquired. Cholesteatomas arising in this region have a tendency to invade bone and functional structures and the middle and posterior fossae reaching an extensive size. Traditionally, surgery of a giant PBC contemplates lateral transtemporal or middle fossa microscopic surgery; however, in recent years, endoscopic surgical techniques (primary or complementary endoscopic approach) are starting to receive a greater consensus for middle ear and mastoid surgeries. We report the rare case of an 83-year-old Caucasian male affected by a giant cholesteatoma that eroded the labyrinth and the posterior fossa dura and extended to the infralabyrinthine region, going beyond the theca and reaching the first cervical vertebra. The giant cholesteatoma was managed through a combined approach (microscopic and, subsequently, complementary endoscopic approach). In this case report, we illustrate some advantages of this surgical choice.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.