Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVE:(1) Determine the pervasiveness of the belief that brain death/death by neurologic criteria (BD/DNC) is not death among rabbis. (2) Examine rabbinic beliefs about management after BD/DNC. METHODS:An electronic anonymous survey about BD/DNC determination and management after BD/DNC was created and distributed to members of the Central Conference of American Rabbis (the Reform Rabbinic leadership organization), the Rabbinic Council of America (an Orthodox organization), the Rabbinic Assembly (a Conservative organization), and the Reconstructionist Rabbinic Association. RESULTS:Ninety-nine rabbis (40 Reform, 32 Orthodox, 22 Conservative, and 5 Reconstructionist) completed the survey. Awareness of the requirements for BD/DNC was poor (median of 33% of the requirements correctly identified [interquartile range of 22-66%]), but 81% of rabbis knew that absence of heartbeat is not required for BD/DNC. Although only 5% of all rabbis believed a person who is brain dead could recover, 22% did not believe BD/DNC is death, and 18% believed mechanical ventilation should be continued after BD/DNC. There was a significant relationship between denomination and belief that: (1) a person who is brain dead can recover (p = 0.04); (2) a person who is brain dead is dead (p < 0.001); (3) mechanical ventilation should be continued after BD/DNC (p < 0.001); (4) hydration should be continued after BD/DNC (p = 0.002); (5) nutrition should be continued after BD/DNC (p < 0.001); (6) medications to support blood pressure should be continued after BD/DNC (p < 0.001); and (7) cardiopulmonary resuscitation should be performed when a brain dead person's heart stops (p = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS:Rabbinic knowledge about the intricacies of BD determination is poor. Rabbinic perspectives on management after BD/DNC vary. These empirical data on rabbinic perspectives about BD/DNC may be helpful when considering accommodation of religious objections to BD/DNC.

Background: Surgical resection of pituitary adenomas is associated with a 10 to 30% rate of temporary diabetes insipidus with ~50% resolving within 1 week and 80% resolving at 3 months.[1] Adrenal insufficiency occurs in ~ 5 % of patients and can result in an Addisonian crisis if left undiagnosed postoperatively.[1] [2] Many studies have been performed looking at readmission rates after pituitary surgery. A review of over 1,200 cases demonstrated a readmission rate of 8.5% with the most common cause being hyponatremia (29.5%).[3] To reduce the rate of readmission for hyponatremia, some groups have demonstrated the effective use of outpatient fluid restriction criteria during the first week post-op.[4] These guidelines are intended for the management of standard postoperative hormonal fluctuations which do not necessitate endocrine consultation during hospitalization.
Objective(s): Retrospectively evaluate patients undergoing endoscopic endonasal resection of pituitary adenomas to identify areas for quality improvement through the development of more standardized postoperative guidelines.
Method(s): A retrospective review of 75 patients who underwent endoscopic endonasal resection of pituitary adenomas at a single academic center from 2013 to 2018. We evaluated the average length of stay, number of laboratory studies performed, need for hormone supplementation long term and short term, rate of gross-total resection, rate of cerebrospinal fluid leak, rate of infection, and 30-day readmission rate ([Table 1]). From this, we have developed a change in guidelines aimed at reducing length of stay, redundant laboratory studies, and reduced rate of readmission.
Conclusion(s): Although our current outcomes for resection of pituitary adenoma are on par with published data, we have identified areas of possible quality improvement which have since been implemented

BACKGROUND:There have been a number of recent prominent lawsuits challenging the use of neurologic criteria to declare death in the United States. METHODS:To put these lawsuits into perspective, we conducted a search of Nexis Uni® to identify cases from the past 50 years that involved objections to the use of neurologic criteria to declare death in the United States. RESULTS:We identified lawsuits about 67 decedents (59 state and 8 federal) from 34 different regions which were filed for crime related issues (n=42), hospital related issues (n=20), insurance related issues (n=2) and other issues related to time of death (n=3). The judicial opinions about the lawsuits addressed: 1) acceptance of the use of neurologic criteria to declare death (n=55), 2) criteria to declare death (n=3), 3) management of decedents after death by neurologic criteria (n=13), 4) identification of the time of death (n=4) and 5) rights of the dead (n=3). The outcomes of these cases were heterogeneous. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Since the incorporation of neurologic criteria into the medical practice of declaration of death, there have been a number of legal objections to its use. To avoid the rendering of variable opinions by the courts, there is a need for consistent legislative modification throughout the country to address 1) the specific criteria to employ when declaring death by neurologic criteria, 2) management of religious objections to use of neurologic criteria to declare death and 3) management after declaration of death by neurologic criteria.

The American Academy of Neurology holds the following positions regarding brain death and its determination, and provides the following guidance to its members who encounter resistance to brain death, its determination, or requests for accommodation including continued use of organ support technology despite neurologic determination of death.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Patients with intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) frequently present with hypertension, but it is unclear if this is due to pre-existing hypertension (prHTN) or to the bleed itself or associated pain. We sought to assess the relationship between prHTN and admission systolic blood pressure (aBP) and bleed severity. METHODS:We retrospectively assessed the relationship between prHTN and aBP and NIHSS in patients with ICH at 3 institutions. RESULTS:Of 251 patients, 170 (68%) had prHTN based on history of hypertension/antihypertensive use. Median aBP was significantly higher in those with prHTN (155 mm Hg (IQR 135-181) versus 139 mm Hg (IQR 124-158), P < .001). Patients with left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) on electrocardiogram (ECG) or transthoracic echocardiogram (TTE) had significantly higher aBP than those without LVH (median aBP 195 mm Hg (IQR 155-216) for patients with LVH on ECG versus 147 mm Hg (IQR 129-163) for patients with no LVH on ECG, P < .001; median aBP 181 mm Hg (IQR 153-214) for patients with LVH on TTE versus 152 mm Hg (IQR 137-169) for patients with no LVH on TTE, P = .01). prHTN was associated with a higher median NIHSS (11 (IQR 3-20) for patients with history of hypertension/antihypertensive use versus 6 (IQR 1-14) for patients without this history (P = .02); 9 (IQR 3-19) versus 5 (IQR 2-13) for patients with/without LVH on ECG (P = .085); and 10 (IQR 5-18) versus 5 (IQR 1-13) for patients with/without LVH on TTE (P = .046). CONCLUSIONS:Patients with ICH who have prHTN have higher aBP and NIHSS, suggesting that prHTN may worsen reactive hypertension in the setting of ICH.