A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Microdebrider complications in sinus surgery: Analysis of the openFDA database. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Objective: Functional endoscopic sinus surgery is a commonly performed otolaryngologic procedure that often uses the microdebrider device for tissue removal. Given the ubiquitous nature of the instrument, we sought to better define the patterns of device failure using the postmarket surveillance openFDA database.

Methods: The openFDA database was queried for all microdebrider-related adverse events from January 1, 2000 to November 1, 2020. Descriptive information on the nature of device failure and any associated patient injury was compiled. Reports not directly related to device failure were excluded from the analysis.

Results: A total of 641 events were included in the analysis. The most common device failure was overheating ( = 348, 54.3%), followed by material separation ( = 173, 27%), and inconsistent device activation ( = 52, 8.1%). Of the reported events, the vast majority did not result in patient harm ( = 579, 90.3%). On review of the remaining cases, only 24 events (3.7%) resulted in true harm to the patient, defined as a temporary or permanent injury or >30 min of additional anesthesia time. Of these cases, the need to reschedule surgical cases ( = 5, 0.8%), retained foreign body ( = 5, 0.8%), and thermal tissue injury ( = 3,0.5%) were the most common. Five patients suffered an injury due to surgeon error unrelated to device malfunction ( = 5, 0.8%).

Conclusions: Microdebrider device failures are extremely rare. When they do occur, less than 10% result in patient harm. In cases of patient harm related to microdebrider failure, preoperative testing of the device before use could prevent many of the reported malfunctions.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10696272PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/wjo2.89DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

device failure
16
patient harm
12
device
9
openfda database
8
microdebrider device
8
result patient
8
 = 5 08%
8
failure
5
patient
5
microdebrider
4

Similar Publications