Initial Outcomes of a Novel Irrigating Wound Protector for Reducing the Risk of Surgical Site Infection in Elective Colectomies.

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infection (SSI) rates in elective colorectal surgery remain high due to intraoperative exposure of colonic bacteria at the surgical site. We aimed to evaluate 30-day SSI outcomes of a novel wound retractor that combines barrier protection with continuous wound irrigation in elective colorectal resection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective single-center cohort-matched analysis included all patients undergoing elective colorectal resection utilizing the novel irrigating wound protector (IWP) from April 2015 to July 2019. A control cohort of patients who underwent the same procedures with a standard wound protector over the same time period were also identified. Patients from both groups were matched for procedure type, procedure approach, pathology requiring operation, age, sex, race, body mass index, diabetes, smoker status, hypertension, presence of disseminated cancer, current steroid or immunosuppressant use, wound classification, and American Society of Anesthesiologist classification. SSI frequency, SSI subtype (superficial, deep, or organ space), hospital length of stay (LOS) and associated procedure were tabulated through 30 postoperative days. Fisher's exact test and number needed to treat (NNT) were used to compare SSI rates and estimate cost between both groups. RESULTS: The IWP group had 41 patients. The control group had 82 patients. Control-matched variables were similar for both groups. 30-day SSI rates were significantly lower in the IWP group (P=0.0298). length of stay was significantly shorter in the IWP group (P=0.0150). The NNT for the IWP to prevent one episode of SSI was 8.2 patients. CONCLUSIONS: The novel IWP device shows promise to reducing the risk of SSI in elective colorectal surgery.

Infectious Complication in Relation to the Prophylactic Mesh Position: The PRIMA Trial Revisited.

BACKGROUND: Prophylactic mesh reinforcement has proven to reduce the incidence of incisional hernia (IH). Fear of infectious complications may withhold the widespread implementation of prophylactic mesh reinforcement, particularly in the onlay position. STUDY DESIGN: Patients scheduled for elective midline surgery were randomly assigned to a suture closure group, onlay mesh group, or sublay mesh group. The incidence, treatment, and outcomes of patients with infectious complications were assessed through examining the adverse event forms. Data were collected prospectively for 2 years after the index procedure. RESULTS: Overall, infectious complications occurred in 14/107 (13.3%) patients in the suture group and in 52/373 (13.9%) patients with prophylactic mesh reinforcement (p = 0.821). Infectious complications occurred in 17.6% of the onlay group and 10.3% of the sublay group (p = 0.042). Excluding anastomotic leakage as a cause, these incidences were 16% (onlay) and 9.7% (sublay), p = 0.073. The mesh could remain in-situ in 40/52 (77%) patients with an infectious complication. The 2-year IH incidence after onlay mesh reinforcement was 10 in 33 (30.3%) with infectious complications and 15 in 140 (9.7%) without infectious complications (p = 0.003). This difference was not statistically significant for the sublay group. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic mesh placement was not associated with increased incidence, severity, or need for invasive treatment of infectious complications compared with suture closure. Patients with onlay mesh reinforcement and an infectious complication had a significantly higher risk of developing an incisional hernia, compared with those in the sublay group.

Laparoscopic anterior resection with or without transanal tube for rectal cancer patients - A multicenter randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: In rectal cancer surgery, insertion of transanal tube has been shown to have efficacy to prevent anastomotic leakage. This randomized controlled study aims to clarify the incidence of anastomotic leakage with or without transanal tube in patients with rectal cancer. METHODS: Patients who underwent elective low anterior resection were randomly allocated to either have transanal tube insertion or not for five days after surgery. We examined the incidence of anastomotic leakage, postoperative 30-day morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: 157 patients were randomized to the transanal tube group or the no-transanal tube group. Symptomatic anastomotic leakage occurred in six patients (7.6%) of the former group and eight patients (10.3%) in the latter group, without significant difference (p = 0.559). There was also no significant difference in morbidity between groups (p = 0.633) and no mortality was detected. CONCLUSIONS: Transanal tube insertion had no significant benefit towards prevention of anastomotic leakage in rectal cancer surgery.

Society for Vascular Surgery clinical practice guidelines of thoracic endovascular aortic repair for descending thoracic aortic aneurysms.

Thoracic aortic diseases, including disease of the descending thoracic aorta (DTA), are significant causes of death in the United States. Open repair of the DTA is a physiologically impactful operation with relatively high rates of mortality, paraplegia, and renal failure. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has revolutionized treatment of the DTA and has largely supplanted open repair because of lower morbidity and mortality. These Society for Vascular Surgery Practice Guidelines are applicable to the use of TEVAR for descending thoracic aortic aneurysm (TAA) as well as for other rarer pathologic processes of the DTA. Management of aortic dissections and traumatic injuries will be discussed in separate Society for Vascular Surgery documents. In general, there is a lack of high-quality evidence across all TAA diseases, highlighting the need for better comparative effectiveness research. Yet, large single-center experiences, administrative databases, and meta-analyses have consistently reported beneficial effects of TEVAR over open repair, especially in the setting of rupture. Many of the strongest recommendations from this guideline focus on imaging before, during, or after TEVAR and include the following: In patients considered at high risk for symptomatic TAA or acute aortic syndrome, we recommend urgent imaging, usually computed tomography angiography (CTA) because of its speed and ease of use for preoperative planning. Level of recommendation: Grade 1 (Strong), Quality of Evidence: B (Moderate). If TEVAR is being considered, we recommend fine-cut (≤0.25 mm) CTA of the entire aorta as well as of the iliac and femoral arteries. CTA of the head and neck is also needed to determine the anatomy of the vertebral arteries. Level of recommendation: Grade 1 (Strong), Quality of Evidence: A (High). We recommend routine use of three-dimensional centerline reconstruction software for accurate case planning and execution in TEVAR. Level of recommendation: Grade 1 (Strong), Quality of Evidence: B (Moderate). We recommend contrast-enhanced computed tomography scanning at 1 month and 12 months after TEVAR and then yearly for life, with consideration of more frequent imaging if an endoleak or other abnormality of concern is detected at 1 month. Level of recommendation: Grade 1 (Strong), Quality of Evidence: B (Moderate). Finally, based on our review, in patients who could undergo either technique (within the criteria of the device's instructions for use), we recommend TEVAR as the preferred approach to treat elective DTA aneurysms, given its reduced morbidity and length of stay as well as short-term mortality. Level of recommendation: Grade 1 (Strong), Quality of Evidence: A (High). Given the benefits of TEVAR, treatment using a minimally invasive approach is largely based on anatomic eligibility rather than on patient-specific factors, as is the case in open TAA repair. Thus, for isolated lesions of the DTA, TEVAR should be the primary method of repair in both the elective and emergent setting based on improved short-term and midterm mortality as well as decreased morbidity.

Aneurysm Growth After Endovascular Sealing of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms (EVAS) with the Nellix Endoprosthesis.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to measure the incidence of post endovascular aneurysm sealing (EVAS) abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) growth, and its association with stent migration, in a cohort of patients with differing compliance to old and new Instructions For Use (IFU). METHODS: A retrospective single centre study was conducted to review the computed tomography (CT) and clinical data of elective, infrarenal EVAS cases, performed as a primary intervention, between December 2013 and March 2018. All included patients had a baseline post-operative CT scan at one month and at least one year follow up. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of AAA growth and its association with stent migration. AAA growth was defined as a ≥5% increase in aortic volume between the lowermost renal artery and the aortic bifurcation post EVAS at any time during follow up, in comparison to the baseline CT scan. Migration was defined according to the ESVS guidelines, as > 10 mm downward movement of either Nellix stent frame in the proximal zone. RESULTS: Seventy-six patients were eligible for inclusion in the study (mean age 76 ± 7.4 years; 58 men). AAA growth was identified in 50 of 76 patients (66%); adherence to IFU did not affect its incidence (mean growth within IFU-2016 compliant cohort vs. non-compliant: 16% vs. 13%, p = .33). Over time, the incidence of AAA growth increased, from 32% at one year to 100% at four years. AAA growth by volume was progressive (p < .001), as its extent increased over time. Migration was detected in 16 patients and there was a statistically significant association with AAA growth (13 patients displayed migration and AAA growth, p = .036). CONCLUSION: Patients treated with EVAS are prone to AAA growth, irrespective of whether their aortic anatomy is IFU compliant. AAA growth by volume is associated with stent migration. Clinicians should continue close surveillance post EVAS, regardless of whether patients are treated within IFU.

Editor's Choice - A Systemic Evaluation of the Costs of Elective EVAR and Open Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair Implies Cost Equivalence.

OBJECTIVE: The suggested high costs of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) hamper the choice of insurance companies and financial regulators for EVAR as the primary option for elective abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. However, arguments used in this debate are impeded by time related aspects such as effect modification and the introduction of confounding by indication, and by asymmetric evaluation of outcomes. Therefore, a re-evaluation minimising the impact of these interferences was considered. METHODS: A comparative analysis was performed evaluating a period of exclusive open repair (OR; 1998-2000) and a period of established EVAR (2010-2012). Data from four hospitals in The Netherlands were collected to estimate resource use. Actual costs were estimated by benchmark cost prices and a literature review. Costs are reported at 2019 prices. A break even approach, defining the costs for an endovascular device at which cost equivalence for EVAR and OR is achieved, was applied to cope with the large variation in endovascular device costs. RESULTS: One hundred and eighty-six patients who underwent elective AAA repair between 1998 and 2000 (OR period) and 195 patients between 2010 and 2012 (EVAR period) were compared. Cost equivalence for OR and EVAR was reached at a break even price for an endovascular device of €13 190. The main cost difference reflected the longer duration of hospital stay (ward and Intensive Care Unit) of OR (€11 644). Re-intervention rates were similar for OR (24.2%) and EVAR (24.6%) (p = .92). CONCLUSION: Cost equivalence for EVAR and OR occurs at a device cost of €13 000 for EVAR. Hence, for most routine repairs, EVAR is not costlier than OR until at least the five year follow up.

Coronavírus: COVID-19: existem vacinas? Qual a influência do clima? (parte 2/3)

Jorge Kalil, Marcos Buckeridge e Edécio Cunha Neto, discutem o que se sabe, até o momento, a respeito de futuras vacinas e da influência do clima na transmissão do coronavírus (COVID-19).

Coronavírus: como estão os atendimentos de outras doenças nos hospitais?

Saiba mais em www.saopaulo.sp.gov.br/coronavirus

Long-term outcomes of the Ovation Stent Graft System investigational device exemption trial for endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to report the 5-year outcomes of the Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption clinical trial of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) with the Ovation stent graft (Endologix, Irvine, Calif) for elective treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). METHODS: The study comprised 161 patients who underwent EVAR as part of the prospective, international, multicenter pivotal Ovation stent graft trial. The main inclusion criteria were AAA diameter ≥5 cm, proximal neck length ≥7 mm, neck angulation ≤60 degrees, and bilateral iliac fixation length ≥10 mm. The primary end point was a composite outcome of primary clinical success at 5 years. Primary clinical success was defined in accordance with the Society for Vascular Surgery guidelines as successful aneurysm exclusion without aneurysm-related death, type I or type III endoleak, graft infection or thrombosis, aneurysm expansion, aneurysm rupture, graft migration, or conversion to open repair. Secondary end points included freedom from reintervention, all-cause mortality, and aneurysm-related mortality. RESULTS: Patients were predominantly male (87.6%) and elderly with a mean age of 73 ± 7.7 years; 66 patients (41%) had challenging anatomy and would be considered outside the instructions for use with other stent grafts, 26 (16.2%) had a proximal neck length <10 mm, and 53 (33%) had a minimum access vessel diameter <6 mm. Technical success was 100%. Of 126 surviving patients, 84 (66.7%) completed 5-year follow-up. The 5-year primary clinical success rate was 78%, aneurysm-related mortality was 1% (one patient), and all-cause mortality was 25%. The AAA-related death resulted from AAA post-EVAR rupture at 49 months in a patient who refused treatment for a type IB endoleak. Freedom from type I or type III endoleak was 95.1%. Freedom from secondary interventions was 80.2%. Most of the reinterventions were performed for type II endoleak (24 [63.1%]) or for limb thrombosis or stenosis (7 [18.4%]). There was no graft migration. None of the patients required open conversion. CONCLUSIONS: Five-year results from the Ovation pivotal and continued access investigational device exemption trials demonstrate excellent long-term durability of this endograft despite that 41% of patients had anatomy unfit for other stent grafts. There were no migrations or conversions to open repair and 99% freedom from aneurysm-related mortality. These results suggest a less invasive on-label endovascular option for patients with challenging anatomy who may otherwise require hybrid or open repair.

Surgeon experience association with patient selection and outcomes after open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

BACKGROUND: Growing calls for guidelines advocating minimum annual case volumes for surgeon credentialing remain controversial. Although most attention to date has focused on the impact of obligatory case volume, less attention has been devoted to the more complex association between surgeon years of independent practice experience and procedure outcomes after open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (OAR). Therefore, the purpose of this study was to explore the association of surgeon experience with case selection and real-world outcomes after OAR. METHODS: All Society for Vascular Surgery-Vascular Quality Initiative infrarenal and juxtarenal OARs (n = 11,900; 71% elective; 29% nonelective) from 2003 to 2019 were examined. Surgeon experience was defined by years in practice after training completion. Experience level at time of repair was categorized (≤5 years, n = 1048; 6-10 years, n = 1309; 11-15 years, n = 1244; and ≥16 years, n = 4772) and intergroup univariate comparisons were made. Logistic regression identified independent predictors of complications, 30-day death, and 1-year mortality. Models were constructed with or without surgeon experience strata to determine association with outcomes. RESULTS: Increasing surgeon experience was associated with performing greater proportions of elective procedures, whereas less experienced surgeons had disproportionate exposure to nonelective operations (elective, 73% ≥16 years vs 62% ≤5 years [P < .0001]; nonelective, ≤5 years, 38% vs 27%, ≥16-years [P < .0001]). Among surgeons who perform five or fewer cases per year, the risk of any aggregate major complication after elective OAR decreased significantly as experience increased (P = .0004), although no differences were detected in nonelective cases or among higher volume surgeons. Similarly, the risk of in-hospital death decreased with increasing experience (P = .004), but only among low-volume surgeons performing elective procedures. Comorbidities were similar across all experience strata for both elective and nonelective presentations; however, more experienced surgeons operated on higher proportions of nonelective patients with coronary disease (P = .04). Early career surgeons more frequently operated on patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists IV designation, larger abdominal aortic aneurysm diameters and used suprarenal/celiac cross-clamps more frequently than later career surgeons. The 1-year survival after elective and nonelective OAR was not impacted by surgeon experience (Ptrend > .15 for all comparisons). CONCLUSIONS: Increasing surgeon years of practice experience correlated significantly with a reduced risk of developing multiple postoperative complications, including postoperative death in the elective setting. Surgeons within their first 5 years of practice are exposed to greater proportions of nonelective cases but seem to have similar outcomes after these repairs compared with surgeons with more experience. Notably, surgeons in their first 5 years of practice operate on more complex elective patients as underscored by higher aggregate comorbidity scores, larger aneurysm diameters, and need for suprarenal aortic cross-clamping. These data have important implications on training paradigms, faculty recruitment, and the organization of mentorship when on boarding new surgeons.

Early versus delayed removal of indwelling catheters in patients after elective cesarean section: a prospective randomized trial.

Purpose: We conducted a prospective randomized controlled trial to compare postoperative urinary catheter removal 2 versus 12 h after elective cesarean section in terms of irritative symptoms, first void time, incidence of urinary tract infection, postoperative mobilization time, and hospitalization time.Methods: A total of 134 women admitted to Duzce University Hospital for primary or recurrent elective cesarean section were randomized into two groups. A total of 62 women were enrolled in the early group, with indwelling catheter removal 2 h after cesarean section; 74 women were enrolled in the delayed group, with catheter removal 12 h after the cesarean section. The groups were prospectively compared in terms of irritative urinary symptoms, bacteriuria, hematuria, length of hospital stay, and mobilization time.Results: Urinary frequency (p = .04), microscopic hematuria incidence (p = .04), postoperative mobilization time (p = .01), and length of hospital stay (p = .009) were significantly lower in the early group than in the delayed group. There were no significant differences in terms of bacteruria, urinary retention, dysuria, and first postoperative voiding time.Conclusions: Early removal of urinary catheters after elective cesarean section is associated with reduced mobilization time and hospital stay.

Retrospective analysis of central venous catheters in elective intracranial surgery - Is there any benefit?

BACKGROUND: It remains unclear whether the use of central venous catheters (CVC) improves a patient's clinical outcome after elective intracranial supratentorial procedures. METHODS: This two-armed, single-center retrospective study sought to compare patients undergoing elective intracranial surgery with and without CVCs. Standard anaesthesia procedures were modified during the study period resulting in the termination of obligatory CVC instrumentation for supratentorial procedures. Peri-operative adverse events (AEs) were evaluated as primary endpoint. RESULTS: The data of 621 patients in total was analysed in this study (301 with and 320 without CVC). Patient characteristics and surgical procedures were comparable between both study groups. A total of 132 peri-operative AEs (81 in the group with CVC vs. 51 in the group without CVC) regarding neurological, neurosurgical, cardiovascular events and death were observed. CVC patients suffer from AEs almost twice as often as non CVC patients (ORadjusted = 1.98; 95%CI[1.28-3.06]; p = 0.002). Complications related to catheter placement (pneumothorax and arterial malpuncture) were observed in 1.0% of the cases. The ICU treatment period in patients with CVC was 22 (19;24) vs. 21 (19;24) hours (p = 0.413). The duration of hospital stay was also similar between groups (9 (7;13) vs. 8 (7;11) days, p = 0.210). The total time of ventilation (350 (300;440) vs. 335 (281;405) min, p = 0.003) and induction time (40 (35;50) vs. 30 (25;35) min, p<0.001) was found to be prolonged significantly in the group with CVCs. There were no differences found in post-operative inflammatory markers as well as antibiotic treatment. CONCLUSION: The data of our retrospective study suggests that patients undergoing elective neurosurgical procedures with CVCs do not demonstrate any additional benefits in comparison to patients without a CVC.

Glottic visibility for laryngeal surgery: Tritube vs. microlaryngeal tube: A randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Good visibility is essential for successful laryngeal surgery. A Tritube with outer diameter 4.4 mm, combined with flow-controlled ventilation (FCV), enables ventilation by active expiration with a sealed trachea and may improve laryngeal visibility. OBJECTIVES: We hypothesised that a Tritube with FCV would provide better laryngeal visibility and surgical conditions for laryngeal surgery than a conventional microlaryngeal tube (MLT) with volume-controlled ventilation (VCV). DESIGN: Randomised, controlled trial. SETTING: University Medical Centre. PATIENTS: A total of 55 consecutive patients (>18 years) undergoing elective laryngeal surgery were assessed for participation, providing 40 evaluable data sets with 20 per group. INTERVENTIONS: Random allocation to intubation with Tritube and ventilation with FCV (Tritube-FCV group) or intubation with MLT 6.0 and ventilation with VCV (MLT-VCV) as control. Tidal volumes of 7 ml kg predicted body weight, and positive end-expiratory pressure of 7 cmH2O were standardised between groups. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary endpoint was the tube-related concealment of laryngeal structures, measured on videolaryngoscopic photographs by appropriate software. Secondary endpoints were surgical conditions (categorical four-point rating scale), respiratory variables and change of end-expiratory lung volume from atmospheric airway pressure to ventilation with positive end-expiratory pressure. Data are presented as median [IQR]. RESULTS: There was less concealment of laryngeal structures with the Tritube than with the MLT; 7 [6 to 9] vs. 22 [18 to 27] %, (P < 0.001). Surgical conditions were rated comparably (P = 0.06). A subgroup of residents in training perceived surgical conditions to be better with the Tritube compared with the MLT (P = 0.006). Respiratory system compliance with the Tritube was higher at 61 [52 to 71] vs. 46 [41 to 51] ml cmH2O (P < 0.001), plateau pressure was lower at 14 [13 to 15] vs. 17 [16 to 18] cmH2O (P < 0.001), and change of end-expiratory lung volume was higher at 681 [463 to 849] vs. 414 [194 to 604] ml, (P = 0.023) for Tritube-FCV compared with MLT-VCV. CONCLUSION: During laryngeal surgery a Tritube improves visibility of the surgical site but not surgical conditions when compared with a MLT 6.0. FCV improves lung aeration and respiratory system compliance compared with VCV. TRIAL REGISTRY NUMBER: DRKS00013097.

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after elective hip, knee and shoulder arthroplasty: protocol for a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The number of hip, knee and shoulder arthroplasties continues to rise worldwide. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development has launched an initiative (called PaRIS Initiative) for the systematic collection of Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in patients undergoing elective hip and knee arthroplasty. The Rizzoli Orthopedic Institute (IOR) was selected as a pilot center for the launch of the Initiative in Italy given that IOR hosts the Registry of Orthopedic Prosthetic Implants (RIPO), a region-wide registry which collects joint implant data from all the hospitals in the Emilia-Romagna Region. In this specific geographic area information related to PROMs after joint replacement is unknown. This paper describes the protocol of a study (PaRIS-IOR) that aims to implement the collection of a set of PROMs within an existing implant registry in Italy. The study will also investigate the temporal trend of PROMs in relation to the type of prosthesis and the type of surgical intervention. METHODS: The PaRIS-IOR study is a prospective, single site, cohort study that consists of the administration of PROMs questionnaires to patients on the list for elective arthroplasty. The questionnaires will be administered to the study population within 30 days before surgery, and then at 6 and 12 months following surgery. The study population will consist of consecutive adult patients undergoing either hip, knee or shoulder arthroplasty. The collected data will be linked with those routinely collected by the RIPO in order to assess the temporal trend of PROMs in relation to the type of prosthesis and the type of surgical intervention. DISCUSSION: The PaRIS-IOR study could have important implications in targeting the factors influencing functional outcomes and quality of life reported by patients after hip, knee and shoulder arthroplasty, and will also represent the first systematic collection of PROMs related to arthroplasty in Italy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Protocol version (1.0) and trial registration data are available on the platform www.clinicaltrial.gov with the identifier NCT03790267 , first posted on December 31, 2018.

Multibranched endovascular aortic aneurysm repair in patients with and without chronic aortic dissections.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare multibranched endovascular aneurysm repair (MBEVAR) of postdissection thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) and pararenal aortic aneurysms (PRAAs) with MBEVAR of degenerative TAAAs and PRAAs and to assess the role played by the preoperative correction of potential complicating factors, such as true lumen compression and false lumen origin of vital branches, using adjunctive maneuvers. METHODS: From July 2005 to July 2017, there were 162 patients who underwent elective MBEVAR of TAAAs and PRAAs. Data on demographics, procedural details, and outcomes were collected prospectively. RESULTS: The mean age was 73 ± 8 years, and 119 of 162 (74%) were men; 19 of 162 (12%) had prior aortic dissections. Patients with dissections were younger (65 ± 11 years vs 74 ± 7 years; P = .002) and were less likely to have smoked (13/19 [68%] vs 135/143 [94%]; P = .002) or to have peripheral artery disease (0/19 [0%] vs 35/143 [24%]; P = .01) compared with those without dissections. Patients with prior dissections were more likely to have Crawford type II (10/19 [53%] vs 22/143 [15%]; P = .001) and type III (6/19 [32%] vs 16/143 [11%]; P = .03) TAAAs and were more likely to require at least one pre-MBEVAR adjunctive procedure (14/19 [74%] vs 55/143 [38%]; P = .006) compared with those without dissection. There was no difference in perioperative death, stroke, or paraplegia rates between the two groups. Median follow-up was 2.4 years (interquartile range, 0.8-4.7) and did not differ significantly between the two groups. There were no significant differences in branch vessel occlusion, endoleak rate, or aneurysm-related death between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with chronic type B aortic dissection are more likely to have extensive aneurysms and more likely to require adjunctive procedures to provide the appropriate anatomic substrate for MBEVAR, but this does not appear to affect the conduct of MBEVAR or its outcomes.

Prolonged Post-surgical Drain Retention Increases Risk for Deep Wound Infection After Spine Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Surgical site infections (SSIs) complicate 1% to 9% of elective spine surgeries. Previously identified risk factors include diabetes mellitus type 2, obesity, and chronic kidney disease. We sought to determine whether the use of postoperative surgical site drains is associated with deep SSIs. METHODS: We retrospectively identified patients operated for deep SSIs after surgery for degenerative spine pathologies between July 2016 and December 2018. Patients were excluded if the reason for operation was other than deep SSI or if their primary operation was for infection or tumor. Using their index procedure and the electronic medical record, patients were matched to controls based on age, surgical invasiveness, International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification code, race, and sex. Our main outcome of interest was whether drain retention time, total output, or daily output differed significantly between cases and controls. RESULTS: We identified 38 patients who met inclusion criteria. Infected patients had a higher body mass index (34.2 vs. 29.9 kg/m2; P = 0.001), higher odds of having diabetes mellitus type 2 (55.3% vs. 18.4%; P = 0.002), longer drain retention time (5.5 vs. 3.5 days; P = 0.02), and longer inpatient stay (9.5 vs. 4.3 days; P = 0.005). Multivariable logistic regression demonstrated that even after controlling for the other risk factors, drain retention time independently predicted postoperative surgical site infection (odds ratio: 1.36; P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Prolonged surgical drain retention correlates with risk of deep SSI after surgery for degenerative spine disease independent of surgical invasiveness, diabetes mellitus type 2 status, and total drain output. Our data suggest early postoperative drain removal may potentially decrease the risk of SSI and shorten duration of hospital stay.

Impact of a Dual-Ring Wound Protector on Outcome After Elective Surgery for Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The impact of dual-ring wound protectors (DRWPs) on the long-term outcomes of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) undergoing elective surgery remains unclear. The aim of this cohort study was to compare short- and long-term outcomes after CRC resection with or without use of a DRWP. METHODS: This study enrolled 625 patients with stage I-III CRC undergoing curative resection and divided them into DRWP (n = 348) and control (n = 277) groups. Primary endpoints were postoperative short- and long-term complications. Secondary endpoints were oncological outcomes including wound recurrence, disease-free survival, and overall survival. RESULTS: Rates of postoperative complications (P = 0.004) and laparotomy wound infection (LWI) (P < 0.001) were markedly lower in the DRWP group. Operation quality, as per the number of lymph nodes harvested and rate of R0 resection, did not differ between the groups (all P > 0.05). The DRWP group exhibited significantly lower rates of incisional hernia occurrence (5.3% versus 9.5%, P = 0.045) compared with the control group. Multivariable analyses demonstrated an increased risk of LWI with no wound protector in colorectal surgery (odds ratio, 3.778; P = 0.001), and patients who developed LWI after surgery were more than 4 times more likely to develop an incisional hernia during outpatient follow-up (odds ratio, 4.333; P = 0.001). One patient in the control group (0.36%) had isolated wound recurrence at 12 mo postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: Fewer postoperative and late complications, comparable oncological safety, and similar long-term clinical outcomes confirmed the benefits of DRWP use for patients with CRC undergoing elective surgery. Therefore, the use of DRWP may be considered in curative CRC resection.

Late graft failure is rare after endovascular aneurysm repair using the Zenith stent graft in a cohort of high-risk patients.

OBJECTIVE: Device-specific data on the long-term efficacy of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) are limited by the constant evolution of stent graft design. Whereas some modifications, such as barb-mediated fixation, probably enhance durability, others, such as thin-walled fabric, are of less certain benefit. The purpose of this study was to examine 15 years of a single-center experience of EVAR using the Zenith stent graft (Cook Medical, Bloomington, Ind). METHODS: Retrospective analysis was conducted of 325 high-risk patients who underwent elective EVAR with Zenith stent grafts between October 1998 and December 2005 under a physician-sponsored investigational device exemption. Patients' charts and death registries were reviewed to identify late stent graft failures and causes of death. Late stent graft failures were defined as type I or type III endoleaks; enlarging aneurysm sac requiring revision; and limb kinking or occlusion, stent graft infection, renal artery occlusion, or aneurysm rupture occurring >30 days after the index procedure. RESULTS: The mean age at treatment was 75.9 ± 7.4 years, and 300 of 325 (92%) were men. The mean aneurysm diameter was 60 ± 9 mm, and the median main body stent graft diameter was 28 mm (range, 22-32 mm). During a median follow-up time of 5.6 years (interquartile range, 2.6-8.7 years), there were six (2%) aneurysm-related deaths caused by the following: one stent graft infection, one infection of a femoral-femoral bypass graft placed after limb occlusion, one infection of a stent graft placed to treat a type IB endoleak, and three aneurysm ruptures. There were 19 (6%) late stent graft failures occurring at a median time of 4.0 years (range, 39 days-14.6 years) after the procedure. Patients with late stent graft failure were more likely to have had impaired renal function (creatinine concentration ≥2 mg/dL; 21% vs 6%; P = .03) and less likely to have had cardiac disease (42% vs 67%; P = .04) at the time of the index procedure. There was no significant association between late stent graft failure and age, sex, aneurysm size, stent graft diameter, diabetes, smoking, or lung disease. Kaplan-Meier estimated overall survival was 60% at 5 years, 29% at 10 years, and 12% at 15 years. Kaplan-Meier estimated freedom from aneurysm-related mortality was 98% at 5 years, 97% at 10 years, and 97% at 15 years. CONCLUSIONS: Late-occurring stent graft failures and aneurysm-related death are rare after EVAR using the Zenith stent graft, especially in high-risk patients whose comorbidities diminish life expectancy.

Intubation of non-difficult airways using video laryngoscope versus direct laryngoscope: a randomized, parallel-group study.

BACKGROUND: The video laryngoscope is recommended for intubating difficult airways. The present study aimed to determine whether the video laryngoscope can further improve intubation success rates compared with the direct laryngoscope in patients with non-difficult airways. METHODS: In total, 360 patients scheduled for elective abdominal surgeries were randomly assigned to undergo intubation using either a video laryngoscope (n = 179) or a direct laryngoscope (n = 181). The following parameters were measured: mouth opening; thyromental distance; sternomental distance; shape angle of the tracheal catheter; and glottic exposure grade. RESULTS: The percentage of patients with level I-II of total glottic exposure in the video laryngoscope group was 100% versus 63.5% in the direct laryngoscope group (P < 0.001). The one-attempt success rate of intubation was 96.1% using a video laryngoscope versus 90.1% using a direct laryngoscope (P = 0.024). The intubation success rate using a video laryngoscope was 100% versus 94.5% using a direct laryngoscope (P = 0.004). Immediate oropharyngeal injury occurred in 5.1% of patients intubated using a direct laryngoscope versus 1.1% using a video laryngoscope (P = 0.033). On postoperative day 1, obvious hoarseness was exhibited by 7.9% of patients intubated using a direct laryngoscope versus 2.8% using a video laryngoscope (P = 0.035). The grade of glottic exposure and catheter shape angle were independent risk factors for tracheal intubation failure. Thyromental distance, shape angle, glottic exposure time, and surgical position were independent risk factors for postoperative complications. Thyromental distance and glottic exposure time were independent risk factors for complications lasting > 2 days. CONCLUSIONS: Intubation using a video laryngoscope yielded significantly higher intubation success rates and significantly fewer postoperative complications than direct laryngoscopy in patients with non-difficult airways. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry. No: ChiCTR-IOR-16009023 . Prospective registration.