Colorectal Anastomosis Versus Colostomy Creation in High MELD Patients: An ACS-NSQIP Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Liver failure patients are at increased risk of surgical complications. The decision to perform a colonic anastomosis vs a colostomy in urgent colorectal surgery remains unclear. METHODS: The ACS-NSQIP database was queried for patients undergoing nonelective colorectal surgery between 2016 and 2018. MELD score was calculated and stratified into 3 groups. Subgroup analysis of the high-MELD group was performed. RESULTS: Higher MELD scores were associated with significantly higher mortality. Colostomy formation was consistent between intermediate and high-MELD groups. In high-MELD patients, colonic anastomosis was associated with higher mortality than those receiving colostomy (41.1% vs 28.4%, P < .001). Patients receiving colostomy had higher rates of wound complications, but lower rates of return to OR and non-wound complications. Regression analysis revealed that colostomy formation remained an independent predictor of survival (mortality OR = .594, P < .001). DISCUSSION: High-MELD patients undergoing nonelective colorectal surgery have increased risk of complications such as mortality. Patients in this group receiving an anastomosis have increased complications and mortality, and may benefit from colostomy formation.

Socially vulnerable patients are more likely to fail outpatient management of symptomatic cholelithiasis.

BACKGROUND: Symptomatic cholelithiasis is a common surgical problem, with many patients requiring multiple gallstone-related emergency department (ED) visits before cholecystectomy. The Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) identifies vulnerable patient populations. This study aimed to assess the association between social vulnerability and outpatient management of symptomatic cholelithiasis. METHODS: Patients with symptomatic cholelithiasis-related ED visits were identified within our health system from 2016 to 2022. Clinical outcomes data were merged with SVI census track data, which consist of 4 SVI subthemes (socioeconomic status, household characteristics, racial and ethnic minority status, and housing type and transportation). Multivariate analysis was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: A total of 47,292 patients presented to the ED with symptomatic cholelithiasis, of which 6103 patients (13.3 %) resided in vulnerable census tract regions. Of these patients, 13,795 (29.2 %) underwent immediate cholecystectomy with a mean time to surgery of 35.1 h, 8250 (17.4 %) underwent elective cholecystectomy at a mean of 40.6 days from the initial ED visit, and 2924 (6.2 %) failed outpatient management and returned 1.26 times (range, 1-11) to the ED with recurrent biliary-related pain. Multivariate analysis found social vulnerability subthemes of socioeconomic status (odds ratio [OR], 1.29; 95 % CI, 1.09-1.52) and racial and ethnic minority status (OR, 2.41; 95 % CI, 2.05-2.83) to be associated with failure of outpatient management of symptomatic cholelithiasis. CONCLUSION: Socially vulnerable patients are more likely to return to the ED with symptomatic cholelithiasis. Policies to support this vulnerable population in the outpatient setting with timely follow-up and elective cholecystectomy can help reduce delays in care and overutilization of ED resources.

To close or not to close? Wound management in emergent colorectal surgery, an EAST Multicenter prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: To determine the clinical impact of wound management technique on surgical site infection (SSI), hospital length of stay (LOS) and mortality in emergent colorectal surgery. METHODS: A prospective observational study (2021-2023) of urgent or emergent colorectal surgery patients at 15 institutions was conducted. Pediatric patients and traumatic colorectal injuries were excluded. Patients were classified by wound closure technique: skin closed (SC), skin loosely closed (SLC), or skin open (SO). Primary outcomes were SSI, hospital LOS and in-hospital mortality rates. Multivariable regression was used to assess the effect of wound closure on outcomes after controlling for demographics, patient characteristics, ICU admission, vasopressor use, procedure details and wound class. A priori power analysis indicated that 138 patients per group were required to detect a 10% difference in mortality rates. RESULTS: In total, 557 patients were included (SC n = 262, SLC n = 124, SO n = 171). Statistically significant differences in BMI, race/ethnicity, ASA scores, EBL, ICU admission, vasopressor therapy, procedure details, and wound class were observed across groups (Table 1). Overall, average LOS was 16.9 ± 16.4 days, and rates of in-hospital mortality and SSI were 7.9% and 18.5%, respectively, with the lowest rates observed in the SC group (Table 2). After risk adjustment, SO was associated with increased risk of mortality (OR = 3.003, p = 0.028 in comparison to the SC group. SLC was associated with increased risk of superficial SSI (OR = 3.439, p = 0.014), after risk adjustment. CONCLUSION: When compared to the SC group, the SO group was associated with mortality, but comparable when considering all other outcomes, while the SLC was associated with increased superficial SSI. Complete skin closure may be a viable wound management technique in emergent colorectal surgery. STUDY TYPE: Level III Therapeutic/Care Management.

Anticoagulation in emergency general surgery: Who bleeds more? The EAST multicenter trials ACES study.

BACKGROUND: While direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) use is increasing in the Emergency General Surgery (EGS) patient population, our understanding of their bleeding risk in the acute setting remains limited. Therefore, the objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of perioperative bleeding complications in patients using DOACs versus warfarin and AP therapy requiring urgent/emergent EGS procedures (EGSPs). METHODS: This was a prospective observational trial, conducted between 2019 and 2022, across 21 centers. Inclusion criteria were 18 years or older, DOAC, warfarin/AP use within 24 hours of requiring an urgent/emergent EGSP. Demographics, preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative data were collected. ANOVA, χ 2 , and multivariable regression models were used to conduct the analysis. RESULTS: Of the 413 patients enrolled in the study, 261 (63%) reported warfarin/AP use and 152 (37%) reported DOAC use. Appendicitis and cholecystitis were the most frequent indication for operative intervention in the warfarin/AP group (43.4% vs. 25%, p = 0.001). Small bowel obstruction/abdominal wall hernias were the main indication for operative intervention in the DOAC group (44.7% vs. 23.8%, p = 0.001). Intraoperative, postoperative, and perioperative bleeding complications and in-hospital mortality were similar between the two groups. After adjusting for confounders, a history of chemotherapy (odds ratio [OR], 4.3; p = 0.015) and indication for operative intervention including occlusive mesenteric ischemia (OR, 4.27; p = 0.016), nonocclusive mesenteric ischemia (OR, 3.13; p = 0.001), and diverticulitis (OR, 3.72; p = 0.019) were associated with increased perioperative bleeding complications. The need for an intraoperative transfusion (OR, 4.87; p < 0.001), and intraoperative vasopressors (OR, 4.35; p = 0.003) were associated with increased in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSION: Perioperative bleeding complications and mortality are impacted by the indication for EGSPs and patient's severity of illness rather than a history of DOAC or warfarin/AP use. Therefore, perioperative management should be guided by patient physiology and indication for surgery rather than the concern for recent antiplatelet or anticoagulant use. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiologic; Level III.

Open and Closed Approaches to Skin Closure After Nonelective Open Colorectal Operations.

INTRODUCTION: Optimal wound management strategies to reduce surgical site infections (SSIs) in nonelective open colorectal surgery (NOCS) remain controversial and variable. Our aim is to describe SSI and other 30-day outcome measures among patients with varying wound management techniques undergoing NOCS. METHODS: All NOCS patients were extracted from the 2016 to 2018 ACS-NSQIP database. Outcomes of patients managed with all layers closed (ALC) were compared to patients managed with skin open (SO), using propensity score matching (PSM) to control for significant confounding risk factors for SSI. RESULTS: A total of 40,820 patients were included; 4622 patients managed with SO and 36,198 managed with ALC. Patients in the SO group were more likely to have a history of hypertension, renal failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, smoking, obesity, and sepsis on presentation (P < .001). After PSM, no differences in risk factors remained; 4622 and 4344 patients were included in the SO and ALC cohorts, respectively. While ALC patients experienced a higher rate of superficial SSI (1.4% vs 7.3%, P < .001) and any wound complications (6.8% vs 10.8%, P < .001), the SO group had higher wound dehiscence (4.4% vs 2.8%, P < .001). There were no significant differences in deep wound infection. The SO group had longer average length of stay (14.7 vs 13.1 days, P < .001), higher non-wound-related complications, discharge to SNF, and in-hospital mortality. DISCUSSION: Significant differences in SSI rates among NOCS patients with differing wound management techniques were observed. More notably, other important quality measures, such as length of stay, disposition, mortality, and non-wound-related complications were also significantly impacted by wound management strategy.

Interfacility Transfer for Nonelective Cholecystectomy in High MELD Patients: An ACS-NSQIP Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Interfacility transfer to a referral center is often considered for patients with liver disease undergoing nonelective cholecystectomy given management complexities and perioperative risk. We sought to determine the association between the Model for End Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score, transfer frequency, and outcomes in those patients using a national database. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The ACS-NSQIP participant use files were queried for nonelective open or laparoscopic cholecystectomy from 2016 to 2018. Patients were grouped according to low (6-11), intermediate (12-18), or high (>18) MELD. In the high MELD group, patient characteristics and outcomes were compared between transferred and nontransferred patients and multivariate regression was performed to evaluate independent predictors of outcomes. Outcomes included in-hospital mortality, complications, length-of-stay (LOS), and 30-d reoperation and readmission. RESULTS: 30,171 subjects were included. Transfer was more likely as MELD increased (19.5% high versus 12.1% low, P < 0.001). High MELD patients had increased LOS, reoperation, readmission, and mortality rates compared to low MELD. In high MELD patients (n = 1016), those transferred were more likely older, white, obese, and septic. Transferred patients had increased mortality (7.6% versus 4.2%, P = 0.044), LOS, reoperation, and complications. After controlling for differences between transferred and nontransferred patients, transfer status was not independently associated with mortality (OR = 1.593, P = 0.177), postoperative complications or LOS, but was associated with increased risk for reoperation. Sepsis and laparoscopic surgery were independently associated with higher and lower mortality, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Transfer status is not independently associated with mortality, postoperative complications, or prolonged LOS, suggesting patients with advanced liver disease undergoing acute cholecystectomy may not benefit from interfacility transfer.

Does Wound Management Technique Impact Surgical Site Infection in Open Emergency Colon Procedures?

BACKGROUND: Emergency open large bowel procedures have higher rates of intraoperative contamination and increased risk of surgical site infection (SSI) than elective colon surgeries. Several wound management strategies have been proposed, such as vacuum-assisted closure (VAC) therapy and delayed primary closure to improve results. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the relationship between wound management technique and SSI and other quality measures. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of patients undergoing open emergency colon surgery from January 2017 to December 2018 by our acute care surgery service. The primary outcome measure was incidence of SSI. Secondary outcome measures included length of stay, reoperation, and 30-day readmission. RESULTS: A total of 118 patients were included in the study, with a mean age of 62.8 years and mean BMI of 28.8. Overall incidence of SSI was 19.5%. There was no significant difference in incidence of SSI, reoperation, or 30-day readmission when stratifying by wound management technique or procedure type after controlling for confounding variables. Notably, patients managed with VAC therapy had a statistically significant longer average length of stay and higher total postoperative antibiotic days (both P = .001) than other techniques. DISCUSSION: We conclude from our data that wound management technique does not seem to influence rate of SSI, but wound management may influence length of stay or antibiotic duration. These findings suggest that there may not be an advantage to alternative methods of wound management in this high-risk population. Further prospective evaluation should be performed to confirm these findings.

Does routine postoperative contrast radiography improve outcomes for patients with perforated peptic ulcer? A multicenter retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Perforated peptic ulcer is a morbid emergency general surgery condition. Best practices for postoperative care remain undefined. Surgical dogma preaches practices such as peritoneal drain placement, prolonged nil per os, and routine postoperative enteral contrast imaging despite a lack of evidence. We aimed to evaluate the role of postoperative enteral contrast imaging in postoperative perforated peptic ulcer care. Our primary objective was to assess effects of routine postoperative enteral contrast imaging on early detection of clinically significant leaks. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent repair of perforated peptic ulcer between July 2016 and June 2018. We compared outcomes between those who underwent routine postoperative enteral contrast imaging and those who did not. RESULTS: Our analysis included 95 patients who underwent primary/omental patch repair. The mean age was 60 years, and 54% were male. Thirteen (14%) had a leak. Eighty percent of patients had a drain placed. Nine patients had leaks diagnosed based on bilious drain output without routine postoperative enteral contrast imaging. Use of routine postoperative enteral contrast imaging varied significantly between institutions (30%-87%). Two late leaks after initial normal postoperative enteral contrast imaging were confirmed by imaging after a clinical change triggered the second study. Two patients had contained leaks identified by routine postoperative enteral contrast imaging but remained clinically well. Duration of hospital stay was longer in those who received routine postoperative enteral contrast imaging (12 vs 6 days, median; P = .000). CONCLUSION: Routine postoperative enteral contrast imaging after perforated peptic ulcer repair likely does not improve the detection of clinically significant leaks and is associated with increased duration of hospital stay.

Outcomes of Laparoscopic vs Open Repair of Perforated Peptic Ulcers: An ACS-NSQIP Study.

BACKGROUND: Perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) is a surgical emergency needing swift operative resolution. While laparoscopic and open approaches are viable options, it remains unclear whether laparoscopic repair has significantly improved outcomes. We use a national surgical database to compare perioperative and 30-d postoperative (30POP) outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The 2016-2018 ACS-NSQIP database was used to create the patient cohort, using ICD-10 and CPT codes. An unmatched analysis identified factors that likely contributed to the laparoscopic versus open treatment allocation. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to identify outcomes that were not explained by underlying differences in the patient cohorts. RESULTS: A total of 3475 patients were included: 3135 in open group (OG), 340 (~10%) in laparoscopic group (LG). After PSM to control for comorbidities and illness severity that differed between groups on univariate analysis, 288 patients remained in each group. Analysis of the matched cohorts revealed no statistically significant difference in mortality (5.9% OG versus 3.8% LG, P = 0.245). The LG had significantly longer operative times (92 versus 79 min, P = 0.003), shorter hospital stays (8.2 versus 9.4 d, P = 0.044) and higher probability of being discharged home (81% versus 73%, P = 0.017). 30POP outcomes were largely equivalent, except that OG had higher risk for bleeding (14.6% versus 8%, P = 0.012) and pneumonia (8.7% versus 4.5%, P = 0.044). CONCLUSIONS: While laparoscopic repairs take longer, they lead to shorter hospital stays and higher likelihood of discharge home. Further study to identify patients that are candidates for this technique is warranted.

Indocyanine green does not decrease the need for bail-out operation in an acute care surgery population.

BACKGROUND: The use of indocyanine green during laparoscopic cholecystectomy has been postulated to help to define anatomy. Studies have not specifically evaluated patients with acute cholecystitis. We sought to assess whether use of indocyanine green can decrease the rate of bail-out operation (subtotal cholecystectomy or conversion to an open operation) in an acute care surgery population where acute cholecystitis is more frequent. METHODS: Using a retrospective cohort design, we examined all inpatient cholecystectomies performed by the acute care surgery service under urgent or semiurgent (biliary colic as the presentation in the emergency room) conditions at a single institution from 7/1/18 to 6/30/19 during which indocyanine green was available for use at the surgeon's discretion. RESULTS: A total of 198 patients were included in the analysis. Demographic variables were similar in groups receiving indocyanine green versus not. Pathology confirmed acute cholecystitis was present in 96 of 198 (48.5%) patients; of those, 55 (57.2%) received indocyanine green. Indocyanine green did not change the rate of bail-out operation between patients who received indocyanine green and those who did not (6.7% vs 4.3%, P = .468). No significant differences in complications were observed. Bail-out operation was more likely in cases of acute cholecystitis (9.4%) versus nonacute cholecystitis (2.0%) (odds ratio = 5.172, P = .039). In patients with acute cholecystitis, indocyanine green did not change the rate of bail-out operation (indocyanine green: 12.7% vs no indocyanine green: 4.9%, P = .293). CONCLUSION: This is the first series looking at the use of indocyanine green specifically in an acute care surgery population. Indocyanine green did not decrease operative time or need for a bail-out operation in acute cholecystitis. Further study is needed to determine whether indocyanine green use is justified in this population.

How Does a New General Surgery Residency Program's Junior Residents Impact Hospital Efficiency and Productivity?

OBJECTIVE: The general surgery workforce deficit is projected to grow to 15% to 21% by 2050. An estimated 6.6% increase to existing general surgery residency (GSR) programs is needed to meet this shortfall. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of a new GSR program on efficiency and productivity at a regional healthcare center. STUDY DESIGN: An institutional database was retrospectively queried for all GSR related procedures between July 2015 and June 2018. Procedures done prior to GSR initiation (pre-GSR) were compared to those done after (post-GSR). Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. RESULTS: We reviewed 10,617 procedures (6365 pre-GSR vs. 4252 post-GSR). Patients had lower preoperative Hierarchical Condition Category scores in the post-GSR group (0.71 vs. 0.58, p < 0.01). Operative times increased post-GSR (101.7 vs. 109.1 minutes, p < 0.01), but length of stay decreased (6.4 vs. 5.5 days, p = 0.01). Thirty-day readmissions (4.0% vs. 3.4%, p = 0.11) were comparable, but reoperations significantly decreased post-GSR (10.1% vs. 8.6%, p = 0.01). Average hospital costs remained unchanged ($10,765 vs. $10,140, p = 0.12). Multivariate analysis revealed no statistical difference in operative times, length of stay, 30-day readmissions and reoperations, and hospital costs between the 2 groups. Subset analysis based on surgical service also showed no statistical difference. Productivity increased on the general surgery service post-GSR (7.1 vs. 7.8 cases per day, p = 0.02). Patient satisfaction increased post-GSR (76% vs. 81%, p = 0.31), but without statistical significance. CONCLUSION: The initiation of a new GSR program did not negatively impact operative times, length of stay, 30-day readmissions and reoperations, hospital costs, case volume, or patient satisfaction.

Is Opioid Prescribing Driving Trauma Recidivism or Is Trauma Driving Opioid Use?

In the past 30 years, opioid prescription rates have quadrupled and hospital admissions for overdose are rising. Previous studies have focused on alcohol use and trauma recidivism, however rarely evaluating recidivism and opioid use. We hypothesized there is an association between opioid use and trauma recidivism. This is a retrospective review of patients with multiple admissions for traumatic injury. Demographics, opioid toxicology screen (TS) results, and injury characteristics were collected. Statistical analysis was performed with chi-squared and Poisson regression models. One thousand six hundred forty-nine patients (age ≥18 years) had multiple trauma admissions. Seven hundred nine patients had TS data for both admissions. Thirty-one per cent (218) were TS positive on the 1st admission compared with 34 per cent (244) on their 2nd admission. Fifty-five per cent of patients who were TS positive on the 1st admission were positive on their 2nd admission, whereas 25 per cent who were TS negative on the 1st admission were subsequently positive on their 2nd admission (P < 0.0001). Patients who were TS positive on the subsequent admission were less severely injured than TS negative patients (Injury Severity Score > 15, 26.3% vs 22.3%, P = 0.04). The only significant risk factor for being TS positive on the 2nd admission was being TS positive on the 1st admission (relative risk = 2.18, P < 0.001). A previous history of opioid use is the strongest predictor of recurrent use in recidivists.

Traumatic Brain Injury Advances.

There have been many recent advances in the management of traumatic brain injury (TBI). Research regarding established and novel therapies is ongoing. Future research must not only focus on development of new strategies but determine the long-term benefits or disadvantages of current strategies. In addition, the impact of these advances on varying severities of brain injury must not be ignored. It is hoped that future research strategies in TBI will prioritize large-scale trials using common data elements to develop large registries and databases, and leverage international collaborations.

Just one drop: the significance of a single hypotensive blood pressure reading during trauma resuscitations.

BACKGROUND: Single, isolated hypotensive blood pressure (BP) measurements frequently are ignored or considered "erroneous." Although their clinical significance remains unknown, we hypothesized that single, isolated hypotensive BP readings during trauma resuscitations signify the presence of severe injuries that often warrant immediate intervention. METHODS: A prospective observational study was performed on all trauma patients admitted from June 2008 to January 2009. Patients with a single systolic blood pressure (SBP) reading <110 mm Hg during their trauma resuscitation were evaluated, and demographics, hemodynamics, resuscitation (fluids, blood products, and duration), injuries, and operative or endovascular management were analyzed. Single and multiple variable logistic regression analyses were performed. Cutpoint analysis of the entire range of lowest single SBP measurements determined which SBP value best predicted the need for immediate therapeutic intervention. RESULTS: Patients (n = 145) were predominantly male (77.2%) but age (mean, 35.1 +/- 15.3 years) and injury mechanisms varied (penetrating, 46.2%; blunt, 53.8%). Cutpoint analysis determined that a single SBP reading <105 mm Hg best predicted the need for immediate therapeutic intervention. Although 38.1% patients with isolated SBP <105 mm Hg measurements underwent immediate therapeutic operative or endovascular procedures, only 10.4% (p < 0.001) with isolated SBP >or=105 mm Hg required these procedures. Patients were 12.4 times (confidence interval: 2.6-59.2; p = 0.002) more likely to undergo immediate therapeutic intervention than those with a single SBP >or=105 mm Hg. CONCLUSIONS: Single, isolated hypotensive BP measurements during trauma resuscitations should not be ignored or dismissed. Instead, our results suggest that a single SBP reading <105 mm Hg is associated with severe injuries that often require immediate operative or endovascular treatment and surgical intensive care unit admission.