An update on the use of an arterial closure device following femoral arterial puncture in children.

BACKGROUND: The use of arterial closure devices in achieving femoral hemostasis has been well documented in adults but insufficiently studied in the pediatric population. An earlier study from our institution of 40 Angio-Seal devices in 38 patients concluded that the arterial closure device is safe in children with only a single minor complication. Ongoing experience with this device at our institution, however, suggests a higher rate of complication. OBJECTIVE: To retrospectively evaluate the safety and efficacy of the Angio-Seal in a pediatric population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis reviewed all cases in which the Angio-Seal was deployed from June 2011 to September 2017. Peri-procedural documentation was reviewed for pre-procedure labs, clinical effectiveness in achieving hemostasis and complications related to the use of this device. Logistic regression analysis was also used to evaluate the relationship between patient demographic, vessel size and indication for angiography, and the presence or absence of complications. RESULTS: During the study period, 48 additional Angio-Seal devices were deployed in 41 consecutive patients. Five patients were excluded for being older than 18 years. The mean age of the patients was 13.3 years (range: 4-18 years) with 18 patients female. The mean common femoral artery diameter was 5.98 mm in short axis diameter (range: 4-9 mm). Complications were present in 6/43 cases (14%) including 3 minor and 3 major complications that included additional procedures. No significant relationship was identified between vessel size, age and the indication for angiography, and the rate of complication on logistic regression analysis. CONCLUSION: While percutaneous arterial closure devices can be efficacious for achieving hemostasis, our experience demonstrates a higher rate of complications in children, contrary to a previous report. The deployment of such devices should be performed with prejudice in this population.

Getting to the bottom of why children with spina bifida use the emergency department: A qualitative analysis of parent and stakeholder perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Children with Spina Bifida (SB) have considerable healthcare utilization, including Emergency Department use (EDU). We aimed to elicit reasons for EDU using qualitative analysis of interviews with both patient-caregiver dyads and stakeholders. METHODS: A cohort of children with SB followed at our institution between 2016 and 2020 was identified and patient and clinical characteristics abstracted. Purposeful sampling by age and degree of past EDU was performed. Semi-structured interviews of dyads were performed using iteratively revised interview guides. Spanish-language interviews were conducted by a native Spanish speaker and transcripts professionally translated. Supplemental interviews with stakeholders, namely knowledgeable healthcare professionals, were also conducted. A qualitative framework approach was used for analysis, including open followed by closed independent coding with calculation of inter-rater reliability. A final interpretation of coding reports assessing convergence, divergence, and variation in themes across participant characteristics. RESULTS: 116 families (4 Spanish-speaking) and 7 stakeholders were interviewed. Sampling yielded a heterogenous cohort for EDU (56% with 0-10, 44% with >10 visits) and age (25% 0-4, 44% 5-11, 31% > 11 years). IRR was optimal (κ = 0.9). Themes in perceived reasons for EDU were 1) desire for "one-stop-shop" care, 2) an emergent medical problem, 3) providers' instructions, 4) negative past healthcare experience, 5) intrinsic caregiver moderators, and 6) temporospatial influences. Themes 1, 2, and 5 predominated in dyads, whereas themes 6, 3, and 5 were most common in stakeholders. Stakeholders focused largely on negative institutional and patient characteristics. Among dyads only, theme #1 was disproportionately emphasized by Spanish-speaking patients. DISCUSSION: Families desired access to coordinated expert care, testing and imaging. The ED offers this for children with SB, regardless of clinical acuity. This may be especially valued by families with inherent challenges to navigating the healthcare system. Negative experiences in community clinical settings, healthcare provider recommendations and intrinsic parental factors were themes that seemed to contribute to seeking this "one-stop-shop" type of care. Care coordination may reduce ED reliance, but themes for the interviews suggest a systems-based efforts should weave in the community care setting. CONCLUSIONS: For both stakeholders and caregivers, the ED represented a valued form of immediate access to multispecialty, expert care and testing in the context of perceived lack of timely, coordinated outpatient care. This may be moderated by intrinsic caregiver factors and negative past experiences. Although stakeholders discussed ideas that fit into patient-caregiver themes, the also uniquely focused on systems-based and patient-caregiver limitations.

Comparative analysis of perioperative prophylactic antibiotics in prevention of surgical site infections in stented, distal hypospadias repair.

PURPOSE: There is limited evidence that prophylactic antibiotics prevent surgical site infection in stented, distal hypospadias repair. Our hypothesis is that the use of prophylactic antibiotics does not affect the rate of surgical site infection in this setting. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of consecutive patients over a 6-year period with distal penile hypospadias treated with urethral stenting. Variables analyzed include age, type of repair, usage of preoperative and/or postoperative antibiotics, and length of follow-up. Patients with a history of proximal or re-operative hypospadias repair were excluded. Surgical site infection was defined by the presence of postoperative penile erythema and/or purulent drainage treated with therapeutic antibiotics. Secondary outcome analysis included the presence of other hypospadias complications. RESULTS: 441 consecutive subjects met our inclusion criteria with a mean age of 13.3 months. Patients were categorized into groups: Group 1 - Preoperative antibiotics (n = 64), Group 2 - Both Preoperative & Postoperative antibiotics (n = 159), Group 3 - Postoperative antibiotics (n = 122), Group 4 - No Preoperative or Postoperative antibiotics (n = 96). Two surgical site infections were reported out of the 441 patients: 1 in Group 3 and 1 in Group 4 (p = 0.513). There was no significant difference in the total patients with a hypospadias complication between groups. In the table below, Groups 1-3 were combined (345 patients) for comparison to Group 4 (No antibiotics, 96 patients) for further analysis with no difference in SSIs (p = 0.388) or respective hypospadias complications. CONCLUSIONS: The use of perioperative prophylactic antibiotics, both before and after surgery for distal, stented hypospadias repair, have not been shown to reduce the rate of surgical site infections nor hypospadias complications. Consequently, the benefit of prophylactic antibiotics in this setting is unclear.

Urethral Complications While Using 26F vs 28F Resectoscope Sheaths in Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate: A Retrospective Observational Study.

Objective: To determine the rate of the urethral stricture (US) and bladder neck contracture (BNC) between patients who undergo Holmium Laser Enucleation of Prostate (HoLEP) surgery with 26F vs 28F resectoscope sheaths (RS). Studies report rates of 2.8-4.4% and 3.6-5.4% for US and BNC, respectively. To date, there are no studies that have shown the difference between RS size and urethral complications. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed charts of patients who had HoLEP surgery between August 2015 and June 2018, by a single surgeon. Those with a prior history of US or BNC were excluded. The operative set-up for an HoLEP includes Ho:YAG laser, urethral dilation, a 26F or 28F continuous flow RS, and a tissue morcellator. Primary endpoints include postoperative US or BNC. Secondary endpoints include postoperative catheterization time, success of voiding trial, and urinary incontinence. Statistical analysis was performed by using appropriate methods. Results: Out of 502 HoLEP patients, 339 consecutive patients had surgery with a 28F RS (Group A) and 163 consecutive patients had surgery with a 26F RS (Group B). Twelve patients (A) and three patients (B) had post-op US (p = 0.41). Eight (A) and zero (B) patients had post-op BNC (p = 0.0585). Stress urinary incontinence at 6 weeks, 3-6 months, and 1 year was present in 15.9% (both A & B), 6.5% (A) vs 6.1% (B) (p = 0.88), and 3.2% (A) vs 1.8% (B) (p = 0.564), respectively. Both blood loss and change in hemoglobin were higher in the 28F group with no significant difference in rate of transfusion. Conclusions: RS size had no impact on the rate of US or BNC; however, there was lower incidence in the 26F sheath cohort for both. The 28F sheath had a larger change in hemoglobin levels and estimated blood loss, but the higher rate of transfusion was not statistically significant. There was no difference in the stress incontinence rates, length of stay, and enucleation rates.