Because most community hospitals in Japan do not maintain 24-h availability of in-house anesthesiologists, surgeons, and interventional radiologists, staffing dramatically declines during off hours. It is unclear whether, in such under-resourced hospitals, trauma patients presenting during off hours and requiring subspecialty intervention have worse outcomes than those who present during business hours. This was a retrospective cohort study at a community hospital in Japan. Participants were all injured patients requiring emergency trauma surgery or transarterial embolization who presented from January 2002 to December 2013. We investigated whether outcomes of these patients differed between business hours (8:01 AM to 6:00 PM weekdays) and off hours (6:01 PM to 8:00 AM weekdays plus all weekend hours). The primary outcome measure was mortality rate, and the secondary outcome measures were duration of emergency room (ER) stay; unexpected death (death/probability of survival > 0.5); and adverse events occurring in the ER. We adjusted for potential confounders of age, sex, Injury Severity Score (ISS), Revised Trauma Score, presentation phase (2002–2005, 2006–2009, and 2010–2013), Charlson Comorbidity Index, and injury type (blunt or penetrating) using logistic regression models. Of the 805 patients included, 379 (47.1%) presented during business hours and 426 (52.9%) during off hours. Off-hours presentation was associated with longer ER stays for patients with systolic blood pressure < 90 mmHg on admission (p = 0.021), ISS >15 (p = 0.047), and pelvic fracture requiring transarterial embolization (p < 0.001). Off-hours presentation was also associated with increased risk of adverse events in the ER (odds ratio [OR] 1.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1–2.7, p = 0.020). After adjustment for confounders, an increased risk of adverse events (OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.1–2.7, p = 0.049) persisted, but no differences were detected in mortality (p = 0.80) and unexpected death (p = 0.44) between off hours and business hours. At a community hospital in Japan, presentation during off hours was associated with a longer ER stay for severely injured patients and increased risk of adverse events in the ER. However, these disadvantages did not impact mortality or unexpected outcome.

The genus Chromobacterium consists of 7 recognized species. Among those, only C. violaceum, commonly found in the soil and water of tropical and subtropical regions, has been shown to cause human infection. Although human infection is rare, C. violaceum can cause life-threatening sepsis, with metastatic abscesses, most frequently infecting those who are young and healthy.

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is associated with persistent renal dysfunction, the receipt of dialysis, dialysis dependence, and mortality. Accordingly, the concept of major adverse kidney events (MAKE) has been adopted as an endpoint for assessing the impact of AKI. However, applied criteria or observation periods for operationalizing MAKE appear to vary across studies. To evaluate this heterogeneity for MAKE evaluation, we performed a systematic scoping review of studies that employed MAKE as an AKI endpoint. Four major academic databases were searched, and we identified 122 studies with increasing numbers over time. We found marked heterogeneity in applied criteria and observation periods for MAKE across these studies, with some even lacking a description of criteria. Moreover, 13 different observation periods were employed, with 30 days and 90 days as the most common. Persistent renal dysfunction was evaluated by estimated glomerular filtration rate (34%) or serum creatinine concentration (48%); however, 37 different definitions for this component were employed in terms of parameters, cut-off criteria, and assessment periods. The definition for the dialysis component also showed significant heterogeneity regarding assessment periods and duration of dialysis requirement (chronic vs temporary). Finally, MAKE rates could vary by 7% [interquartile range: 1.7-16.7%] with different observation periods or by 36.4% with different dialysis component definitions. Our findings revealed marked heterogeneity in MAKE definitions, particularly regarding component assessment and observation periods. Dedicated discussion is needed to establish uniform and acceptable standards to operationalize MAKE in terms of selection and applied criteria of components, observation period, and reporting criteria for future trials on AKI and related conditions.

Integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into medical practice has increased recently. Numerous AI models have been developed in the field of anesthesiology; however, their use in clinical settings remains limited. This study aimed to identify the gap between AI research and its implementation in anesthesiology via a systematic review of randomized controlled trials with meta-analysis (CRD42022353727). We searched the databases of Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Excerpta Medica Database (Embase), Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Xplore (IEEE), and Google Scholar and retrieved randomized controlled trials comparing conventional and AI-assisted anesthetic management published between the date of inception of the database and August 31, 2023. Eight randomized controlled trials were included in this systematic review (n = 568 patients), including 286 and 282 patients who underwent anesthetic management with and without AI-assisted interventions, respectively. AI-assisted interventions used in the studies included fuzzy logic control for gas concentrations (one study) and the Hypotension Prediction Index (seven studies; adding only one indicator). Seven studies had small sample sizes (n = 30 to 68, except for the largest), and meta-analysis including the study with the largest sample size (n = 213) showed no difference in a hypotension-related outcome (mean difference of the time-weighted average of the area under the threshold 0.22, 95% confidence interval -0.03 to 0.48, P = 0.215, I2 93.8%). This systematic review and meta-analysis revealed that randomized controlled trials on AI-assisted interventions in anesthesiology are in their infancy, and approaches that take into account complex clinical practice should be investigated in the future. This study was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO ID: CRD42022353727).