Surgical and procedural antibiotic prophylaxis in the surgical ICU: an American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Critical Care Committee clinical consensus document.

The use of prophylactic measures, including perioperative antibiotics, for the prevention of surgical site infections is a standard of care across surgical specialties. Unfortunately, the routine guidelines used for routine procedures do not always account for many of the factors encountered with urgent/emergent operations and critically ill or high-risk patients. This clinical consensus document created by the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Critical Care Committee is one of a three-part series and reviews surgical and procedural antibiotic prophylaxis in the surgical intensive care unit. The purpose of this clinical consensus document is to provide practical recommendations, based on expert opinion, to assist intensive care providers with decision-making for surgical prophylaxis. We specifically evaluate the current state of periprocedural antibiotic management of external ventricular drains, orthopedic operations (closed and open fractures, silver dressings, local, antimicrobial adjuncts, spine surgery, subfascial drains), abdominal operations (bowel injury and open abdomen), and bedside procedures (thoracostomy tube, gastrostomy tube, tracheostomy).

An Exploratory and Qualitative Analysis of Self-Reported Evaluations for Fever.

Background: Despite the high prevalence of post-operative fever, a variety of approaches are taken as to the components of a fever evaluation, when it should be undertaken, and when empiric antibiotic agents should be started. Hypothesis: There is a lack of consensus surrounding many common components of a post-operative fever evaluation. Patients and Methods: The Surgical Infection Society membership was surveyed to determine practices surrounding evaluation of post-operative fever. Eight scenarios were posed in febrile (38.5°C), post-operative general surgery or trauma patients, with 19 possible components of work-up (physical examination, complete blood count [CBC], fungal biomarkers, lactate and procalcitonin [PCT] concentrations, cultures, imaging) and management (antibiotic agents). Each scenario was then re-considered for intensive care unit (ICU) patients (intubated/unstable hemodynamics). Agreement on a parameter (<1/4 or >3/4 of respondents) achieved consensus, positive or negative. Parameters between had equipoise; α was set at 0.05. Results: Among the examined scenarios, only CBC and physical examination received positive consensus across most scenarios. Blood/urine cultures, imaging, lactate, inflammatory biomarkers, and the empiric administration of antibiotic agents did not reach consensus; support was variable depending on the clinical scenario, illness severity, and the individual preferences of the answering clinician. The qualitative portion of the survey identified "fever threshold and duration," "clinical suspicion," and "physiologic manifestation" as the most important factors for deciding about the initiation of a fever evaluation and the potential empiric administration of antibiotic agents. Conclusions: There is consensus only for physical and examination routine laboratory work when initiating the evaluation of febrile post-operative patients. However, there are multiple components of a fever evaluation that individual respondents would select depending on the clinical scenario and severity of illness. Parameters demonstrating equipoise are potential candidates for formal guidance or pragmatic prospective trials.

A core outcome set for acute necrotizing pancreatitis: An Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma modified Delphi method consensus study.

BACKGROUND: The management of acute necrotizing pancreatitis (ANP) has changed dramatically over the past 20 years including the use of less invasive techniques, the timing of interventions, nutritional management, and antimicrobial management. This study sought to create a core outcome set (COS) to help shape future research by establishing a minimal set of essential outcomes that will facilitate future comparisons and pooling of data while minimizing reporting bias. METHODS: A modified Delphi process was performed through involvement of ANP content experts. Each expert proposed a list of outcomes for consideration, and the panel anonymously scored the outcomes on a 9-point Likert scale. Core outcome consensus defined a priori as >70% of scores receiving 7 to 9 points and <15% of scores receiving 1 to 3 points. Feedback and aggregate data were shared between rounds with interclass correlation trends used to determine the end of the study. RESULTS: A total of 19 experts agreed to participate in the study with 16 (84%) participating through study completion. Forty-three outcomes were initially considered with 16 reaching consensuses after four rounds of the modified Delphi process. The final COS included outcomes related to mortality, organ failure, complications, interventions/management, and social factors. CONCLUSION: Through an iterative consensus process, content experts agreed on a COS for the management of ANP. This will help shape future research to generate data suitable for pooling and other statistical analyses that may guide clinical practice. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level V.

Surgical Apgar scores predict complications after emergency general surgery laparotomy.

BACKGROUND: The Surgical Apgar Score (SAS) is a 10-point validated score comprised of three intraoperative variables (blood loss, lowest heart rate, and lowest mean arterial pressure). Lower scores are worse and predict major postoperative complications. The SAS has not been applied in emergency general surgery (EGS) but may help guide postoperative disposition. We hypothesize that SAS can predict complications in EGS patients undergoing a laparotomy. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of adult patients at a single, quaternary care center who underwent an exploratory laparotomy for EGS conditions within 6 hours of surgical consultation from 2015 to 2019. Patients were grouped by whether they experienced a postoperative complication (systemic, surgical, and/or death). Multivariable regression was performed to predict complications, accounting for SAS and other statistically significant variables between groups. Using this model, predicted probabilities of a complication were generated for each SAS. RESULTS: The cohort comprised 482 patients: 32.8% (n = 158) experienced a complication, while 67.2% (n = 324) did not. Patients with complications were older, frailer, more often male, had worse SAS (6 vs. 7, p < 0.0001) and American Society of Anesthesiologists scores, and higher rates of perforated hollow viscus ( p = 0.0003) and open abdomens ( p < 0.0001). On multivariable regression, an increasing SAS independently predicted less complications (adjusted odds ratio, 0.85; 95% confidence interval, 0.75-0.96; p = 0.009). An SAS ≤4 was associated with a 49.2% predicted chance of complications, greater rates of septic shock (9.7% vs. 3%, p = 0.01), respiratory failure (20.5% vs. 10.8%, p = 0.02), and death (24.1% vs. 7.5%, p < 0.0001). An SAS ≤ 4 did not correlate with surgical complications ( p = 0.1). CONCLUSION: The SAS accurately predicts postoperative complications in EGS patients undergoing urgent laparotomy, with an SAS ≤ 4 identifying patients at risk for septic shock, respiratory failure, and mortality. This tool can aid in rapidly determining postoperative disposition and resource allocation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.

The effect of amantadine on acute cognitive disability after severe traumatic brain injury: An institutional pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Amantadine is used in the post-acute care setting to improve cognitive function after a traumatic brain injury. Its utility in the acute postinjury period is unknown. In this pilot study, we sought to examine the effect of amantadine on short-term cognitive disability among patients with a severe traumatic brain injury and hypothesized that patients receiving amantadine would have a greater improvement in disability throughout their acute hospitalization. METHODS: We performed a prospective, observational study of patients ≥18 years with severe traumatic brain injury (Glasgow Coma Scale ≤8) at a level I trauma center between 2020 and 2022. Patients with penetrating trauma, death within 48 hours of admission, and no radiographic evidence of intracranial pathology were excluded. Patients were grouped according to whether they received amantadine. Our primary outcome was the change in cognitive disability, measured by the Disability Rating Scale (DRS), over the index hospitalization. RESULTS: There were 55 patients in the cohort: 41.8% (n = 23) received amantadine and 58.2% (n = 32) did not. There were higher rates of motor vehicle collisions (65.2% vs 46.9%, P = .02), diffuse axonal injury (47.8% vs 18.8%, P = .02), intracranial pressure monitor use (73.9% vs 21.9%, P = .0001), and propranolol use (73.9% vs 21.9%, P = .0001) in the amantadine. There was a larger improvement in DRS scores among patients receiving amantadine (7.8 vs 3.6, P = .001), and amantadine independently predicted improvement in DRS scores (ß, 1.61; 95% confidence interval, 0.20-3.02, P = .03). Rates of discharge to traumatic brain injury rehabilitation were significantly higher in the amantadine group (73.9% vs 21.9%, P = .0002). CONCLUSION: Among patients with severe traumatic brain injury, amantadine use in the acute postinjury period may be associated with an improvement in cognitive disability and discharge to traumatic brain injury rehabilitation.

A core outcome set for appendicitis: A consensus approach utilizing modified Delphi methodology.

BACKGROUND: Appendicitis is one of the most common pathologies encountered by general and acute care surgeons. The current literature is inconsistent, as it is fraught with outcome heterogeneity, especially in the area of nonoperative management. We sought to develop a core outcome set (COS) for future appendicitis studies to facilitate outcome standardization and future data pooling. METHODS: A modified Delphi study was conducted after identification of content experts in the field of appendicitis using both the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (EAST) landmark appendicitis articles and consensus from the EAST ad hoc COS taskforce on appendicitis. The study incorporated three rounds. Round 1 utilized free text outcome suggestions, then in rounds 2 and 3 the suggests were scored using a Likert scale of 1 to 9 with 1 to 3 denoting a less important outcome, 4 to 6 denoting an important but noncritical outcome, and 7 to 9 denoting a critically important outcome. Core outcome status consensus was defined a priori as >70% of scores 7 to 9 and <15% of scores 1 to 3. RESULTS: Seventeen panelists initially agreed to participate in the study with 16 completing the process (94%). Thirty-two unique potential outcomes were initially suggested in round 1 and 10 (31%) met consensus with one outcome meeting exclusion at the end of round 2. At completion of round 3, a total of 17 (53%) outcomes achieved COS consensus. CONCLUSION: An international panel of 16 appendicitis experts achieved consensus on 17 core outcomes that should be incorporated into future appendicitis studies as a minimum set of standardized outcomes to help frame future cohort-based studies on appendicitis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic Test or Criteria; Level V.

Self-Reported Diagnosis and Management of Surgical Site Infection Highlights Lack of Objective Measures and Treatment Guidance.

Background: There is little guidance regarding empiric therapy for superficial surgical site infections (SSIs). Management of incisions with signs of SSI lacks consensus and management is variable among individual surgeons. Methods: The Surgical Infection Society was surveyed regarding management of SSIs. Cases were provided with varying wound descriptions, initial wound class (WC), post-operative day, and presence of a prosthesis. Responses were in multiple-choice format; statistics: χ2; α = 0.05. Results: Seventy-eight members responded. For appearance scenarios, respondents believed that both mild erythema (55%) and clear drainage (64%) could be observed, whereas substantial (>3 cm) erythema or purulence should be treated with complete (22% and 50%) or partial (55% and 40%) opening of the incision. Degree of erythema did not influence administration of antibiotic agents, but purulence was more likely than clear drainage to be treated with antibiotics (38% vs. 6%; p < 0.001). There were no differences based on WC, except that clean cases were more likely than higher WC scenarios to be treated with gram-positive coverage alone (WC 1 [26%] vs. 2 [10%] vs. 3 [13%] vs. 4 [4%]; p < 0.001). Post-operative day (POD) three appeared to be an inflection point for more aggressive treatment of suspected incisional SSI, with fewer (POD 0 [86%] vs. POD day 3 [54%]; p < 0.001) reporting observation. Respondents were more likely to obtain imaging, start broad-spectrum antibiotic agents, and return to the operating room for purulence in the presence of a mesh. Conclusions: Presented with escalating possibility of SSI, respondents reported lower rates of observation, increased use of antibiotic agents, and increased surgical drainage. Many scenarios lack consensus regarding appropriate therapy. The complete elimination of SSIs is unlikely to be accomplished soon, and this study provides a framework for understanding how surgeons approach SSIs, and potential areas for further research or pragmatic guidance.

Effect of Frailty on the Management of Suspected Choledocholithiasis.

INTRODUCTION: The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and The Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (ASGE-SAGES) guidelines for managing choledocholithiasis (CDL) omit patient-specific factors like frailty. We evaluated how frail patients with CDL undergoing same-admission cholecystectomy were managed within ASGE-SAGES guidelines. METHODS: We analyzed patients undergoing same-admission cholecystectomy for CDL and/or acute biliary pancreatitis (ABP) from 2016 to 2019 at 12 US academic medical centers. Patients were grouped by Charlson comorbidity index into non-frail (NF), moderately frail (MF), and severely frail (SF). ASGE-SAGES guidelines stratified likelihood of CDL and were used to compare actual to suggested management. Rate of guideline deviation was our primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included rates of surgical site infections (SSIs), biliary leaks, and 30-day surgical readmissions. Rates are presented as NF, MF, and SF. RESULTS: Among 844 patients, 43.3% (n = 365) were NF, 25.4% (n = 214) were MF, and 31.4% (n = 265) were SF. Frail patients were older (33y vs 56.7y vs 73.5y, P < .0001) and more likely to have ABP (32.6% vs 47.7% vs 43.8%, P = .0005). As frailty increased, guideline deviation increased (41.1% vs 43.5% vs 53.6%, P < .006). Severe frailty was predictive of guideline deviation compared to MF (aOR 1.47, 95% CI 1.02-2.12, P = .04) and NF (aOR 1.46, 95% CI 1.01-2.12, P = .04). There was no difference in SSIs (P = .2), biliary leaks (P = .7), or 30-day surgical readmission (P = .7). CONCLUSION: Frail patients with common bile duct stones had more management deviating from guidelines yet no difference in complications. Future guidelines should consider including frailty to optimize detection and management of CDL in this population.

Different Surgeon, Different Closure: Lack of Consensus on Appropriate Closure Technique for Various Case Scenarios.

Background: Many techniques for closure of surgical incisions are available to the surgeon, but there is minimal guidance regarding which technique(s) should be utilized at the conclusion of surgery and under what circumstances. Hypothesis: Management of incisions at the conclusion of surgery lacks consensus and varies among individual surgeons. Methods: The Surgical Infection Society membership was surveyed on the management of incisions at the conclusion of surgery. Several case scenarios were provided to test the influences of operation type, intra-operative contamination, and hemodynamic stability on incision management (e.g., close fascia or skin, use of incision/wound vacuum-assisted closure [VAC] device). Responses by two-thirds of participants were required to achieve consensus. Data analysis by χ2 test and logistic regression, a = 0.05. Response heterogeneity was quantified by the Shannon index (SI). Results: Among 78 respondents, consensus was achieved for elective splenectomy (91% close skin/dry dressing). Open appendectomy and left colectomy/end-colostomy had the greatest heterogeneity (SI, 1.68 and 1.63, respectively). During trauma laparotomy, the majority used damage control for hemodynamic instability (53%-67%) but not for hemodynamically stable patients (0%-1.3%; p < 0.001). Additional consensus was achieved for close skin/dry dressing for hemodynamically stable trauma splenectomy patients (87%) and fascia open/wound VAC for hemodynamically unstable colon resection/anastomosis (67%). Fecal diversion for rectal injury and colon resection/anastomosis (both when hemodynamically stable) had high heterogeneity (SI, 1.56 and 1.48, respectively). In penetrating trauma, sentiment was for more use of wet-to-dry dressings and incision/wound VAC with increased contamination in hemodynamically stable patients. Conclusions: Damage control was favored in hemodynamically unstable trauma patients, with use of wet-to-dry dressings and incision/wound VAC with spillage after penetrating trauma. However, most scenarios did not achieve consensus. High variability of practices regarding incision management at the conclusion of surgery was confirmed. Prospective studies and evidence-based guidance are needed to guide decision making at end-operation.

Establishing a core outcome set for blunt cerebrovascular injury: an EAST modified Delphi method consensus study.

Objectives: Our understanding of blunt cerebrovascular injury (BCVI) has changed significantly in recent decades, resulting in a heterogeneous description of diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes in the literature which is not suitable for data pooling. Therefore, we endeavored to develop a core outcome set (COS) to help guide future BCVI research and overcome the challenge of heterogeneous outcomes reporting. Methods: After a review of landmark BCVI publications, content experts were invited to participate in a modified Delphi study. For round 1, participants submitted a list of proposed core outcomes. In subsequent rounds, panelists used a 9-point Likert scale to score the proposed outcomes for importance. Core outcomes consensus was defined as >70% of scores receiving 7 to 9 and <15% of scores receiving 1 to 3. Feedback and aggregate data were shared between rounds, and four rounds of deliberation were performed to re-evaluate the variables not achieving predefined consensus criteria. Results: From an initial panel of 15 experts, 12 (80%) completed all rounds. A total of 22 items were considered, with 9 items achieving consensus for inclusion as core outcomes: incidence of postadmission symptom onset, overall stroke incidence, stroke incidence stratified by type and by treatment category, stroke incidence prior to treatment initiation, time to stroke, overall mortality, bleeding complications, and injury progression on radiographic follow-up. The panel further identified four non-outcome items of high importance for reporting: time to BCVI diagnosis, use of standardized screening tool, duration of treatment, and type of therapy used. Conclusion: Through a well-accepted iterative survey consensus process, content experts have defined a COS to guide future research on BCVI. This COS will be a valuable tool for researchers seeking to perform new BCVI research and will allow future projects to generate data suitable for pooled statistical analysis with enhanced statistical power. Level of evidence: Level IV.

A random forest model using flow cytometry data identifies pulmonary infection after thoracic injury.

BACKGROUND: Thoracic injury can cause impairment of lung function leading to respiratory complications such as pneumonia (PNA). There is increasing evidence that central memory T cells of the adaptive immune system play a key role in pulmonary immunity. We sought to explore whether assessment of cell phenotypes using flow cytometry (FCM) could be used to identify pulmonary infection after thoracic trauma. METHODS: We prospectively studied trauma patients with thoracic injuries who survived >48 hours at a Level 1 trauma center from 2014 to 2020. Clinical and FCM data from serum samples collected within 24 hours of admission were considered as potential variables. Random forest and logistic regression models were developed to estimate the risk of hospital-acquired and ventilator-associated PNA. Variables were selected using backwards elimination, and models were internally validated with leave-one-out. RESULTS: Seventy patients with thoracic injuries were included (median age, 35 years [interquartile range (IQR), 25.25-51 years]; 62.9% [44 of 70] male, 61.4% [42 of 70] blunt trauma). The most common injuries included rib fractures (52 of 70 [74.3%]) and pulmonary contusions (26 of 70 [37%]). The incidence of PNA was 14 of 70 (20%). Median Injury Severity Score was similar for patients with and without PNA (30.5 [IQR, 22.6-39.3] vs. 26.5 [IQR, 21.6-33.3]). The final random forest model selected three variables (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation score, highest pulse rate in first 24 hours, and frequency of CD4 + central memory cells) that identified PNA with an area under the curve of 0.93, sensitivity of 0.91, and specificity of 0.88. A logistic regression with the same features had an area under the curve of 0.86, sensitivity of 0.76, and specificity of 0.85. CONCLUSION: Clinical and FCM data have diagnostic utility in the early identification of patients at risk of nosocomial PNA following thoracic injury. Signs of physiologic stress and lower frequency of central memory cells appear to be associated with higher rates of PNA after thoracic trauma. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic Test/Criteria; Level IV.

The females have spoken: A patient-centered national survey on the administration of emergent transfusions with the potential for future fetal harm.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic hemorrhage is the leading cause of preventable death. Early in the resuscitation, only RhD-positive red blood cells are likely to be available, which poses a small risk of causing harm to a future fetus if transfused to an RhD-negative females of childbearing age (CBA), that is, 15 to 49 years old. We sought to characterize how the population, in particular females of CBA, felt about emergency blood administration vis-a-vis potential future fetal harm. METHODS: A national survey was performed using Facebook advertisements in three waves from January 2021 to January 2022. The advertisements directed users to the survey site with seven demographic questions and four questions on accepting transfusion with differing probabilities for future fetal harm (none/any/1:100/1:10,000). Acceptance of transfusion questions were scored on 3-point Likert scale (likely/neutral/unlikely). Only completed responses by females were analyzed. RESULTS: Advertisements were viewed 16,600,430 times by 2,169,805 people with 15,396 advertisement clicks and 2,873 surveys initiated. Most (2,256 of 2,873 [79%]) were fully completed. Majority (2,049 of 2,256 [90%]) of respondents were female. Eighty percent of females (1,645 of 2,049) were of CBA. Most females responded "likely" or "neutral" when asked whether they would accept a lifesaving transfusion if the following risk of fetal harm were present: no risk (99%), any risk (83%), 1:100 risk (85%), and 1:10,000 risk (92%). There were no differences between females of CBA versus non-CBA with respect to the likelihood of accepting lifesaving transfusion with any potential for future fetal harm ( p = 0.24). CONCLUSION: This national survey suggests that most females would accept lifesaving transfusion even with the potential low risk of future fetal harm. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level IV.

Establishing a core outcomes set for massive transfusion: An Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma modified Delphi method consensus study.

BACKGROUND: The management of severe hemorrhage has changed significantly over recent decades, resulting in a heterogeneous description of diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes in the literature, which is not suitable for data pooling. Therefore, we sought to develop a core outcome set (COS) to help guide future massive transfusion (MT) research and overcome the challenge of heterogeneous outcomes reporting. METHODS: Massive transfusion content experts were invited to participate in a modified Delphi study. For Round 1, participants submitted a list of proposed core outcomes. In subsequent rounds, panelists used a 9-point Likert scale to score proposed outcomes for importance. Core outcomes consensus was defined as >85% of scores receiving 7 to 9 and <15% of scores receiving 1 to 3. Feedback and aggregate data were shared between rounds. RESULTS: From an initial panel of 16 experts, 12 (75%) completed three rounds of deliberation to reevaluate variables not achieving predefined consensus criteria. A total of 64 items were considered, with 4 items achieving consensus for inclusion as core outcomes: blood products received in the first 6 hours, 6-hour mortality, time to mortality, and 24-hour mortality. CONCLUSION: Through an iterative survey consensus process, content experts have defined a COS to guide future MT research. This COS will be a valuable tool for researchers seeking to perform new MT research and will allow future trials to generate data that can be used in pooled analyses with enhanced statistical power. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic Test or Criteria; Level V.

And Miles to Go Before We Sleep: EAST Diversity and Inclusivity Progress and Remaining Challenges.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the diversity, equity, and inclusion landscape in academic trauma surgery and the EAST organization. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: In 2019, the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (EAST) surveyed its members on equity and inclusion in the #EAST4ALL survey and assessed leadership representation. We hypothesized that women and surgeons of color (SOC) are underrepresented as EAST members and leaders. METHODS: Survey responses were analyzed post-hoc for representation of females and SOC in academic appointments and leadership, EAST committees, and the EAST board, and compared to the overall respondent cohort. EAST membership and board demographics were compared to demographic data from the Association of American Medical Colleges. RESULTS: Of 306 respondents, 37.4% identified as female and 23.5% as SOC. There were no significant differences in female and SOC representation in academic appointments and EAST committees compared to their male and white counterparts. In academic leadership, females were underrepresented ( P < 0.0001), whereas SOC were not ( P = 0.08). Both females and SOC were underrepresented in EAST board membership ( P = 0.002 and P = 0.043, respectively). Of EAST's 33 presidents, 3 have been white women (9%), 2 have been Black, non-African American men (6%), and 28 (85%) have been white men. When compared to 2017 AAMC data, women are well-represented in EAST's 2020 membership ( P < 0.0001) and proportionally represented on EAST's 2019-2020 board ( P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The #EAST4ALL survey suggests that women and SOC may be underrepresented as leaders in academic trauma surgery. However, lack of high-quality demographic data makes evaluating representation of structurally marginalized groups challenging. National trauma organizations should elicit data from their members to re-assess and promote the diversity landscape in trauma surgery.

Rectal Contrast CT Scans of Limited Utility in Diagnosing Colonic Injuries in Penetrating Trauma: A Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Using rectal contrast computed tomography (CT) to identify traumatic colorectal injuries has become commonplace; however, these injuries remain relatively infrequent findings on CTs obtained for penetrating back and flank trauma. We conducted a meta-analysis to ascertain the efficacy of rectal contrast CT in identifying such injuries in victims penetrating injuries. METHODS: PubMed and Embase were queried for relevant articles between 1974 and 2022. Review articles, case studies, and non-English manuscripts were excluded. Studies without descriptive CT and operative findings were excluded. Positive scans refer to rectal contrast extravasation. Sensitivity and specificity of rectal contrast CT scans were calculated with aggregated CT findings that were cross-referenced with laparotomy findings. RESULTS: Only 8 manuscripts representing 506 patients quantified colorectal injuries and specified patients with rectal contrast extravasation. Seven patients with true colorectal injuries had no contrast extravasation on CT. There was one true positive scan. Another scan identified contrast extravasation, but laparotomy revealed no colorectal injury. Rectal contrast had sensitivity of 12.5%, specificity 99.8%, positive predictive value (PPV) 50%, negative predictive value (NPV) 99%, and a false negative rate of 88% in identifying colonic injuries. DISCUSSION: The summation of 8 manuscripts suggest that the addition of rectal contrast in identifying colonic and rectal injuries may be of limited utility given its poor sensitivity and may be unnecessary. In its absence, subtle clues such as hematomas, extraluminal air, IV-dye extravasation, and trajectory may be additional indicators of injury. Further investigations are required to demonstrate a true benefit for the addition of rectal contrast.

The Effect of Physiatry Involvement for Patients With Acute Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury at a Level 1 Trauma Center.

Objective: To explore the impact of physiatry on acute traumatic spinal cord injury (ATSCI) outcomes using a propensity score matching (PSM) analysis. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed all patients with ATSCI at a level 1 trauma center from 2018 to 2019. In a 1:1 fashion, we matched patients who were evaluated by physiatry to those who were not. Our PSM analysis controlled for patient demographics, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score, Injury Severity Score (ISS), comorbidities, mechanism, and presence of a traumatic brain injury (TBI). Outcomes included complications, discharge disposition, and 30-day mortality. Survival analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier plots. Results: A total of 102 patients (physiatry 51; no physiatry 51) were matched. Median age was 38 (28-55) years, and median ISS was 25.5 (17-35); 82.4% (n = 84) were male, and 77.5% (n = 79) were bluntly injured. Rates of in-hospital complications were similar between groups. Physiatry involvement was associated with increased odds of discharge to inpatient rehabilitation (odds ratio, 4.6; 95% CI, 2-11.6; p < .001). There was a significant survival benefit seen with physiatry involvement at 30 days (92.6% vs. 78.6%, p = .004) that correlated with a decreased risk of mortality (hazard ratio, 0.2; 95% CI, 0.03-0.7; p = .01). Conclusion: Incorporating physiatry into the management of patients with ATSCI is associated with improved survival and greater odds of discharge to rehabilitation. In this population, physiatry should be incorporated into the trauma care team to optimize patient outcomes.

Racial and ethnic variation in emergent surgical care and outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic: post hoc analysis of an EAST MCT.

Objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted concerns regarding the equity of medical care. We evaluated associations between race/ethnicity, timing of hospital presentation and outcomes of acute appendicitis (AP) and acute cholecystitis (AC) during the initial pandemic peak. Methods: Analysis was performed on a prospective, observational, multicenter study of adults with AP or AC. Patients were categorized as pre-pandemic (pre-CoV: October 2019-January 2020) or during the first pandemic peak (CoV: April 2020 through 4 months following the end of local pandemic restrictions). Patient demographics, American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) imaging/pathology grade, duration of symptoms before triage, time from triage to intervention and hospital length of stay were collected. Results: A total of 2165 patients (1496 pre-CoV, 669 CoV) were included from 19 centers. Asian and Hispanic patients with AC had a longer duration of symptoms prior to presentation during CoV than pre-CoV (100.6 hours vs 37.5 hours, p<0.01 and 85.7 hours vs 52.5 hours, p<0.05, respectively) and presented later during CoV than Black or White patients (34.3 and 37.9 hours, p<0.01). During CoV, Asian patients presented with higher AAST pathology grade for AP compared with pre-CoV (1.90 vs 1.26, p<0.01). Asian and Hispanic patients presented with higher AAST pathology grade for AC during CoV versus pre-CoV (2.57 vs 1.45, p<0.01, and 1.57 vs 1.20, p<0.05, respectively). Patients with AC and an AAST pathology grade of ≥3 were at higher odds of postoperative complications (OR 4.4, 95% CI 1.0 to 18.4) and AP (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.3 to 6.0). Asian and Hispanic patients with AC had a higher risk of postoperative complications compared to White patients (Asian: OR 3.9, 95% CI 1.2 to 12.7; Hispanic: OR 3.3, 95% CI 1.2 to 8.9). Conclusion: Asian and Hispanic patients had a longer duration of symptoms before hospital presentation during the initial COVID-19 peak, had higher odds of postoperative complications and more advanced pathologic disease. Level of evidence: III, Prognostic/epidemiological.

Academic Medical Centers Experienced Higher Rates of Post-Operative Health-Care-Associated Infections during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Post Hoc Analysis of an Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma Multicenter Trial.

Background: We sought to examine health-care-associated infections (HAIs) among patients undergoing an appendectomy at academic medical centers (AMCs) and non-AMCs during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) peri-pandemic. We hypothesized that AMCs would have higher rates of post-operative HAIs during the first wave of the pandemic. Patients and Methods: We performed a post hoc analysis of a prospective, observational, multi-center study of patients aged >18 years who underwent an appendectomy for acute appendicitis before (pre-CoV), during (CoV), and after pandemic restrictions were lifted (post-CoV). Patients were grouped according to hospital type (AMC vs. non-AMC). Our primary outcome was the incidence of post-operative HAIs. Results: There were 1,003 patients; 69.5% (n = 697) were treated at AMCs and 30.5% (n = 306) at non-AMCs. Patients at AMCs had greater rates of concomitant COVID-19 infections (5.5% vs. 0.7%; p < 0.0001) and worse operative appendicitis severity (p = 0.01). Greater rates of HAIs were seen at AMCs compared with non-AMCs (4.9% vs. 2%; p = 0.03). Surgical site infections were the most common HAI and occurred more often at AMCs (4.3% vs. 1.6%; p = 0.04). Only during CoV were there more HAIs at AMCs (5.1% vs. 0.3%; p = 0.02). Undergoing surgery at an AMC during CoV was a risk factor for HAIs (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 8.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-71.03; p = 0.04). Conclusions: During the COVID-19 pandemic, appendectomies performed at AMCs were an independent risk factor for post-operative HAIs. Our findings stress the importance of adherence to standard infection prevention efforts during future healthcare crises.

Broad vs Narrow Spectrum Antibiotics in Common Bile Duct Stones: A Post Hoc Analysis of an Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial guidance for common bile duct stones during the perioperative period is limited. We sought to examine the effect of broad-spectrum (BS) vs narrow-spectrum (NS) antibiotics on surgical site infections (SSIs) in patients with common bile duct stones undergoing same-admission cholecystectomy. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a post hoc analysis of a prospective, observational, multicenter study of patients undergoing same-admission cholecystectomy for choledocholithiasis and/or acute biliary pancreatitis between 2016 and 2019. We excluded patients with cholangitis, perforated cholecystitis, and nonbiliary infections on admission. Patients were divided based on receipt of BS or NS antibiotics. Our primary outcome was the incidence of SSIs, and secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay, acute kidney injury (AKI), and 30-day readmission for SSI. RESULTS: The cohort had 891 patients: 51.7% (n= 461) received BS antibiotics and 48.3% (n = 430) received NS antibiotics. Overall antibiotic duration was longer in the BS group than in the NS group (6 vs 4 d, p = 0.01); however, there was no difference in rates of SSI (0.9% vs 0.5%, p = 0.7) or 30-day readmission for SSI (1.1% vs 1.2%, p = 1.0). Hospital length of stay was significantly longer in the BS group (p < 0.001) as were rates of AKI (5% vs 1.4%, p = 0.001). On multivariable regression, BS antibiotic use was a risk factor for AKI (adjusted odds ratio 2.8, 95% CI 1.16 to 7.82, p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: The incidence of SSI and 30-day readmission for SSI was similar between antibiotic groups. However, BS antibiotic use was associated with a longer hospitalization and greater likelihood of AKI.