Abstract Objective Rotator cuff repair (RCR) is one of the most common arthroscopic procedures. Our investigation aims to quantify the impact that the COVID-19 pandemic had on RCR, specifically on patients with acute, traumatic injuries. Methods Institutional records were queried to identify patients who underwent arthroscopic RCR between March 1st to October 31st of both 2019 and 2020. Patient demographic, preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative data were collected from electronic medical records. Inferential statistics were used to analyze data. Results Totals of 72 and of 60 patients were identified in 2019 and in 2020, respectively. Patients in 2019 experienced shorter lengths of time from MRI to surgery (62.7 ± 70.5 days versus 115.7 ± 151.0 days; p = 0.01). Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans showed a smaller average degree of retraction in 2019 (2.1 ± 1.3 cm versus 2.6 ± 1.2 cm; p = 0.05) butnodifference in anterior toposterior tear size between years (1.6 ± 1.0 cm versus 1.8 ± 1.0 cm; p = 0.17). Less patients in 2019 had a tele-health postoperative consultation with their operating surgeon compared with 2020 (0.0% versus 10.0%; p = 0.009). No significant changes in complications (0.0% versus 0.0%; p > 0.999), readmission (0.0% versus 0.0%; p > 0.999), or revision rates (5.6% versus 0.0%; p = 0.13) were observed. Conclusion From 2019 to 2020, there were no significant differences in patient demographics or major comorbidities. Our data suggests that even though the time from MRI to surgery was delayed in 2020 and telemedicine appointments were necessary, RCR was still performed in a time in early complications. Level of Evidence III.

Resumo Objetivo Oreparodomanguitorotador (RMR) é um dos procedimentos artroscópi-cos maiscomuns. Nossapesquisavisaquantificar o impacto da pandemia de COVID-19 sobre o RMR, especificamente em pacientes com lesões agudas e traumáticas. Métodos Os prontuários institucionais foram consultados para identificação de pacientes submetidos ao RMR artroscópico entre 1° de março e 31 de outubro de 2019 e de 2020. Dados demográficos, pré-operatórios, perioperatórios e pós-operatórios dos pacientes foram coletados de prontuários eletrônicos. Os dados foram analisados por estatística inferencial. Resultados Totais de 72 ede60pacientes foramidentificados em 2019 e 2020, respectivamente. Os pacientes de 2019 apresentaram menor intervalo entre a ressonância magnética (RM) e a cirurgia (62,7 ± 70,5 dias versus 115,7 ± 151,0 dias; p = 0,01). Os exames de RM mostraram menor grau médio de retração em 2019 (2,1 ± 1,3 cm versus 2,6 ± 1,2 cm; p = 0,05), mas nenhuma diferença foi observada na extensão anteroposterior da laceração entre os anos (1,6 ± 1,0 cm versus 1,8 ± 1,0 cm; p = 0,17).Em 2019,o número de pacientes atendidos por seus cirurgiões em consultas pós-operatórias por telemedicina foi menor em comparação com 2020 (0,0% versus 10,0%; p = 0,009). Não foram observadas alterações significativas nas taxas de complicação (0,0% versus 0,0%; p > 0,999), de readmissão (0,0% versus 0,0%; p > 0,999) ou de revisão (5,6% versus 0,0%; p = 0,13). Conclusão Não houve diferenças significativas nos dados demográficos dos pacientes ou nas principais comorbidades entre 2019 e 2020. Nossos dados sugerem que, embora o intervalo entre a RM e a cirurgia tenha sido maior em 2020 e tenha havido necessidade de consultas por telemedicina, o RMR ainda foi realizado em tempo hábil e sem alterações significativas nas complicações precoces. Nível de Evidência III.

Abstract Objective Shoulder pain is a common presentation in the primary care setting, and shoulder pain after vaccination has a growing body of literature. The present study sought to understand how a standardized treatment protocol would aid patients experiencing shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA). Methods Patients experiencing SIRVA were retrospectively recruited between February 2017 and February 2021. All patients were treated with physical therapy and offered a cortisone injection. Post-treatment range of motion (i.e., forward elevation, external rotation, internal rotation) and patients’ reported outcomes were collected with the visual analogue scale (VAS), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), simple shoulder test (SST), and single assessment numeric evaluation (SANE) scores. Results A total of 9 patients were retrospectively examined. Among them, 6 patients presented within one month of a recent vaccination event, while 3 patients presented 67, 87, and 120 days after vaccination. Furthermore, 8 of the patients completed physical therapy, and 6 of them underwent a cortisone injection. The follow-up time averaged 8 months. At final follow-up, the mean external rotation was 61º (standard deviation, SD±3º) and the mean forward elevation was 179º (SD±45º). Internal rotation ranged between L3 and T10. The VAS pain scores were 3.5/10.0 (SD±2.4), the mean ASES score was 63.5/100.0 (SD±26.3), and the SST scores were 8.5/12.0 (SD±3.9). Finally, the SANE scores were 75.7/100.0 (SD±24.7) and 95.7/100.0 (SD±6.1) in the injured and contralateral shoulders respectively. Conclusion Shoulder pain after a vaccination treated with physical therapy and cortisone injection ultimately resulted in favorable shoulder range of motion and functional score outcomes. Level of Evidence IV

Resumo Objetivo A dor no ombro é um quadro comum na atenção primária e há cada vez mais relatos acerca de sua ocorrência após a vacinação. Este estudo buscou entender como um protocolo de tratamento padronizado ajudaria pacientes com lesão no ombro relacionada à administração de vacina (SIRVA). Métodos Os pacientes com SIRVA foram recrutados de forma retrospectiva entre fevereiro de 2017 e fevereiro de 2021. Todos os pacientes foram submetidos à fisioterapia e receberam uma prescrição de cortisona injetável. A amplitude de movimento pós-tratamento (ou seja, elevação anterior, rotação externa, rotação interna) e os desfechos relatados pelo paciente foram analisados a partir das pontuações da escala visual análoga (EVA), da American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), do teste simples do ombro (SST) e da avaliação numérica única (SANE). Resultados No total, 9 pacientes foram examinados de maneira retrospectiva. Entre eles, 6 pacientes foram atendidos no primeiro mês após a vacinação e os outros três, depois de 67, 87 e 120 dias. Ademais, 8 dos pacientes fizeram todo o tratamento fisioterápico e 6 receberam uma injeção de cortisona. O período médio de acompanhamento foi de 8 meses. À última consulta, a rotação externa média foi de 61° (desvio padrão, DP±3°)ea elevação anterior média foi de 179° (DP ± 45°). A rotação interna variou entre L3 e T10. As pontuações de dor à EVA foram de 3,5/10,0 (DP ± 2,4) e o escore médio ASES foi de 63,5/100,0 (DP ± 26,3); as pontuações de SST foram 8,5/12,0 (DP ± 3,9). Por fim, os escores de SANE foram de 75,7/100,0 (DP ± 24,7) e 95,7/100,0 (DP ± 6,1) nos ombros lesionados e contralaterais, respectivamente. Conclusão A dor no ombro após a vacinação tratada com fisioterapia e injeção de cortisona melhorou a amplitude de movimento e os escores funcionais. Nível de Evidência IV

Abstract Objective The COVID-19 pandemic led to an unprecedented pause in elective surgeries, including shoulder arthroplasty. We sought to determine whether clinical and/or demographic differences would be seen between patients who presented for shoulder arthroplasty during the pandemic compared with the previous year (2019). Methods Institutional records were queried for patients who underwent shoulder replacement between March 1 and July 1 of 2019 and 2020. Demographics, range of motion, surgical duration, hospitalization time, discharge disposition, and postoperative management were analyzed. Results The mean duration of surgery was 160 ± 50 minutes in 2020 and 179 ± 54 minutes in 2019 (p= 0.13). The mean hospitalization time was 36 ± 13 hours in 2020 and 51 ± 40 hours in 2019 (p= 0.04). In 2019, 96% of the patients participated in physical therapy, while 71% did it in 2020 (p= 0.003). A total of 100% of the 2019 patients and 86% of the 2020 patients participated in an in-person postoperative follow-up (p= 0.006). The 2019 patients reported for an office visit on average 14 ± 11 days after surgery; the 2020 patients waited 25 ± 25 days to return for a follow-up (p= 0.10). Range of motion, age, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) scores, and complication rates did not differ between the cohorts. Conclusion Patients presenting for surgery during the initial phase of the pandemic were demographically and clinically similar to 2019 patients. However, the length of stay was significantly reduced during the COVID-19 pandemic. Postoperative follow-up and physical therapy were delayed in 2020, but this did not lead to differences in complication or readmission rates compared with those of the 2019 cohort. Level of EvidenceIII.

Resumo Objetivo A pandemia de COVID-19 causou uma pausa sem precedentes em cirurgias eletivas, inclusive artroplastia de ombro. Procuramos determinar as possíveis diferenças clínicas e/ou demográficas entre os pacientes que realizaram artroplastia de ombro durante a pandemia em comparação com o ano anterior (2019). Métodos Os registros institucionais foram consultados para obtenção de informações sobre pacientes submetidos a artroplastia de ombro entre 1° de março a 1° de julho de 2019 e 2020. Dados demográficos, amplitude de movimento, duração da cirurgia, tempo de hospitalização, condições à alta e manejo pós-operatório foram analisados. Resultados O tempo médio de cirurgia foi de 160 ± 50 minutos em 2020 e de 179 ± 54 minutos em 2019 (p= 0,13). O tempo médio de internação foi de 36 ± 13 horas em 2020 e de 51 ± 40 horas em 2019 (p= 0,04). Em 2019, 96% dos pacientes fizeram fisioterapia, enquanto 71% o fizeram em 2020 (p= 0,003). Todos os pacientes de 2019 e 86% dos pacientes de 2020 participaram do acompanhamento pós-operatório presencial (p= 0,006). Os pacientes de 2019 retornaram para a consulta médica em média 14 ± 11 dias após a cirurgia; os pacientes de 2020 retornaram para o acompanhamento em 25 ± 25 dias (p= 0,10). A amplitude de movimento, a idade, a pontuação da American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA, na sigla em inglês) e as taxas de complicações não diferiram entre as coortes. Conclusão Os pacientes submetidos a cirurgia na fase inicial da pandemia eram demográfica e clinicamente semelhantes aos pacientes de 2019. No entanto, o tempo de internação diminuiu de forma significativa durante a pandemia de COVID-19. O acompanhamento pós-operatório e a fisioterapia foram adiados em 2020, mas isso não levou a diferenças nas taxas de complicações ou de reinternações em comparação às da coorte de 2019. Nível de EvidênciaIII.

PURPOSE: Cardiopulmonary bypass is known to alter propofol pharmacokinetics in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. However, few studies have evaluated the impact of these alterations on postoperative pharmacodynamics. This study was designed to test the hypothesis that changes in propofol pharmacokinetics increase hypnotic effects after cardiopulmonary bypass. METHODS: Twenty patients scheduled for on-pump coronary artery bypass graft (group, n=10) or off-pump coronary artery bypass graft (group, n=10) coronary artery bypass grafts were anesthetized with sufentanil and a propofol target controlled infusion (2.0 µg/mL). Depth of hypnosis was monitored using the bispectral index. Blood samples were collected from the induction of anesthesia up to 12 hours after the end of propofol infusion, at predetermined intervals. Plasma propofol concentrations were measured using high-performance liquid chromatography, followed by a non-compartmental propofol pharmacokinetic analysis. Data were analyzed using ANOVA, considering p<0.05 as significant. RESULTS: After cardiopulmonary bypass, despite similar plasma propofol concentrations in both groups, bispectral index values were lower in the on-pump coronary artery bypass graft group. Time to extubation after the end of propofol infusion was greater in the on-pump coronary artery bypass graft group (334 ± 117 vs. 216 ± 85 min, p = 0.04). Patients undergoing cardiopulmonary bypass had shorter biological (1.82 ± 0.5 vs. 3.67 ± 1.15h, p < 0.01) and terminal elimination (6.27 ± 1.29 vs. 10.5h ± 2.18, p < 0.01) half-life values, as well as higher total plasma clearance (28.36 ± 11.40 vs.18.29 ± 7.67 mL/kg/min, p = 0.03), compared to patients in the off-pump coronary artery bypass graft group. CONCLUSION: Aside from the increased sensitivity of the brain to anesthetics after cardiopulmonary bypass, changes in propofol pharmacokinetics may contribute to its central nervous system effects.

O Cochrane Schizophrenia Group iniciou suas atividades em 1994 e agora produz, mantém e dissemina revisões sistemáticas de qualidade sobre a eficiência dos tratamentos disponíveis para pessoas com esquizofrenia. Este grupo internacional está identificando perguntas fundamentais neste campo do conhecimento, que terão que ser respondidas por meio de testes pragmáticos randomizados.

The Cochrane Schizophrenia Group was launched in 1994 and is now producing, maintaining and disseminating high quality systematic reviews of the effectiveness of care available for those with schizophrenia. This international Group is unearthing many fundamental gaps in knowledge that will have to be answered in pragmatic randomised controlled trials.