Background Total en bloc spondylectomy (TES) is a widely accepted surgical technique for primary spinal bone tumours but is frequently accompanied by substantial peri-operative blood loss. Prior studies have reported estimated blood loss (EBL) can reach up to 3,200 mL. The aim of this study is to estimate the blood loss during TES procedures performed in the last ten years at our tertiary referral centre and compare EBL with actual blood loss (ABL). Methods We performed a retrospective review of all cases managed surgically with TES referred to our centre between 2005 and 2015. We recorded the oncological characteristics of each tumour and surgical management in terms of resection margins, operative duration and instrumentation. Data relating to peri-operative blood loss was also recorded including an estimation of total blood loss, the use of cell salvage where applicable and transfusion rates. Results A total of 21 patients were found to meet our inclusion criteria. There were 11 men and 10 women, with a median age of 40 years. The mean total ABL was 3,310 mL. Total operation time ranged from 6.53 to 19.7 h. Compared to ABL, in 59% of cases EBL had been underestimated by an average of 78% by volume. The EBL of the remaining 41% cases had been overestimated by 43%. This was not statistically significant (P=0.373). Cell salvage was used in 62% patients with a mean blood loss of 2,845 mL (884–4,939 mL) and transfusion of 3.8 units (0–12 units) versus 4,069 mL (297–8,335 mL) and 9.3 units (0–18 units) in those not managed with cell salvage. There was no significant difference in ABL between the cell salvage and non-cell salvage groups. Conclusions We report one of the largest case series in TES for primary bone tumours. EBL is not a reliable predictor for ABL. A large blood loss should be anticipated and use of cell salvage is recommended.

Securing stable housing to prevent the spread of infection during the COVID-19 pandemic remains a concern among policymakers in the US. In this article, we provide a descriptive analysis of the association between COVID-19-related eviction moratoriums and eviction filings in New Orleans, Louisiana. Beginning in March 2020, four separate moratoriums were implemented at the local, state, and federal levels that sought to restrict eviction filings in New Orleans. We collected data on evictions filed from January 2017 through November 2020 in the First City Court of Orleans Parish, the entity responsible for adjudicating the majority of eviction filings in New Orleans. We then examined the association between the various eviction moratoriums, the number of evictions filed, the estimated number of evictions temporarily averted, and the average suit dollar amount for filed evictions. Our results indicate that local and state moratoriums were effective at temporarily halting eviction filings. Federal moratoriums offering fewer protections reduced eviction filings by approximately 50%. We estimate that COVID-19-related eviction moratoriums temporarily averted 2,492 eviction filings in New Orleans between March and November 2020. The average suit amount for eviction filings that resumed following the expiration of local and state moratoriums doubled from pre-COVID-19 filing amounts.

upon discharge (p-value: <0.001). For overall experience, median was 18 with the mean score of 16.88 (SD:1.56). Conclusion Our study was suspended prematurely as per local pandemic control guideline. Knowing about the benefit of KMC to both mother and infants, we suggest that it should be encouraged and continued with adaptation and modification of the procedure during COVID-19 pandemic.

No abstract

No abstract