Background The differential diagnosis of Fever of Unknown Origin (FUO) is very extensive, and includes infectious diseases (ID), neoplasms and noninfectious inflammatory diseases (NIID). Many FUO remain undiagnosed. Factors influencing the final diagnosis of FUO are unclear. Methods To identify factors associated with FUO diagnostic categories, we performed a systematic review of classical FUO case-series published in 2005–2015 and including patients from 2000. Moreover, to explore changing over time, we compared these case-series with those published in 1995–2004. Results Eighteen case-series, including 3164 patients, were included. ID were diagnosed in 37.8% of patients, NIID in 20.9%, and neoplasm in 11.6%, FUO were undiagnosed in 23.2%. NIIDs significantly increased over time. An association exists between study country income level and ID (increasing when the income decreases) and undiagnosed FUO (increasing when the income increases); even if not significant, the use of a pre-defined Minimal Diagnostic Work-up to qualify a fever as FUO seems to correlate with a lower prevalence of infections and a higher prevalence of undiagnosed FUO. The multivariate regression analysis shows significant association between geographic area, with ID being more frequent in Asia and Europe having the higher prevalence of undiagnosed FUO. Significant associations were found with model of study and FUO defining criteria, also. Conclusions Despite advances in diagnostics, FUO still remains a challenge, with ID still representing the first cause. The main factors influencing the diagnostic categories are the income and the geographic position of the study country.

No abstract

Background Because of poor knowledge of risks and benefits, prophylactic explantation of high BIA-ALCL risk breast implant (BI) is not indicated. Several surgical risks have been associated with BI surgery, with mortality being the most frightening. Primary aim of this study is to assess mortality rate in patients undergoing breast implant surgery for aesthetic or reconstructive indication. Materials and Methods In this retrospective observational cohort study, Breast Implant Surgery Mortality rate (BISM) was calculated as the perioperative mortality rate among 99,690 patients who underwent BI surgery for oncologic and non-oncologic indications. Mean age at first implant placement (A1P), implant lifespan (IL), and women’s life expectancy (WLE) were obtained from a literature review and population database. Results BISM rate was 0, and mean A1P was 34 years for breast augmentation, and 50 years for breast reconstruction. Regardless of indication, overall mean A1P can be presumed to be 39 years, while mean BIL was estimated as 9 years and WLE as 85 years. Conclusion This study first showed that the BISM risk is 0. This information, and the knowledge that BI patients will undergo one or more revisional procedures if not explantation during their lifetime, may help surgeons in the decision-making process of a pre-emptive substitution or explant in patients at high risk of BIA-ALCL. Our recommendation is that patients with existing macrotextured implants do have a relative indication for explantation and total capsulectomy. The final decision should be shared between patient and surgeon following an evaluation of benefits, surgical risks and comorbidities. Level of Evidence IV This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.

No abstract

Introduction: The mechanism that leads to a given fracture pattern is not understood. Heredity could act in this field through the ABO system. We investigated the relationship between ABO blood system and hip fracture pattern in a population from Southern Italy. Methods: Hip fractures were identified through a registry evaluation of the activity of a level I Hospital, and subsequently classified in 'intracapsular' or 'extracapsular' according to their anatomical location. Information on these patients' ABO blood type was collected and compared with general population data from the report on blood donors of the Salerno division of Italian Blood Volunteers Association (AVIS). Results: 590 hip fractures were included (414 extracapsular, 176 intracapsular) and compared with 709 blood donors. Fractured patients presented a blood group A more often and blood group O less often than the AVIS population (p A vs. non-A = 0.0033; p O vs. non-O = 0.0024). None of the ABO blood groups were associated with fracture pattern (p O vs. non-O = 0.5858, p A vs. non-A = 0.409; p B vs. non-B = 0.253; p AB vs. non-AB = 0.212). The rhesus factor was not associated the fracture pattern (p = 0.34). Conclusions: The ABO blood type could play a role as a risk factor for proximal femoral fractures, but in our population its relevance in influencing the fracture pattern is unclear.