Predicting nosocomial pneumonia risk in level-1 trauma patients: An external validation study using the trauma quality improvement program.

BACKGROUND: Early identification of patients at risk of nosocomial pneumonia enables the opportunity for preventative measures, which may improve survival and reduce costs. Therefore, this study aimed to externally validate an existing prediction model (issued by Croce et al.) to predict nosocomial pneumonia in patients admitted to US level-1 trauma centers. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study including patients admitted to level-1 trauma centers and registered in the TQIP, a US nationwide trauma registry, admitted between 2013-2015 and 2017-2019. The main outcome was total nosocomial pneumonia for the first period and ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) for the second. Model discrimination and calibration were assessed before and after recalibration. RESULTS: The study comprised 902,231 trauma patients (N2013-2015 â€‹= â€‹180,601; N2017-2019 â€‹= â€‹721,630), with a median age of 52 in both periods, 64-65 â€‹% male, and approximately 90 â€‹% sustaining blunt traumatic injury. The median Injury Severity Scores were 13 (2013-2015) versus 9 (2017-2019); median Glasgow Coma Scale scores were 15. Nosocomial pneumonia incidence was 4.4 â€‹%, VAP incidence was 0.7 â€‹%. The original model demonstrated good to excellent discrimination for both periods (c-statistic2013-2015 0.84, 95%CI 0.83-0.84; c-statistic2017-2019 0.92, 95%CI 0.91-0.92). After recalibration, discriminatory capacity and calibration for the lower predicted probabilities improved. CONCLUSIONS: The Croce model can identify patients admitted to US level-1 trauma centers at risk of total nosocomial pneumonia and VAP. Implementing (modified) Croce models in route trauma clinical practice could guide judicious use of preventative measures and prescription of additional non-invasive preventative measures (e.g., increased monitoring, pulmonary physiotherapy) to decrease the occurrence of nosocomial pneumonia in at-risk patients.

Readmission after thoracic endovascular aortic repair following blunt thoracic aortic injury.

PURPOSE: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is increasingly utilized to treat blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI), but post-discharge outcomes remain underexplored. We examined 90-day readmission in patients treated with TEVAR following BTAI. METHODS: Adult patients discharged alive after TEVAR for BTAI in the Nationwide Readmissions Database between 2016 and 2019 were included. Outcomes examined were 90-day non-elective readmission, primary readmission reasons, and 90-day mortality. As a complementary analysis, 90-day outcomes following TEVAR for BTAI were compared with those following TEVAR for acute type B aortic dissection (TBAD). RESULTS: We identified 2085 patients who underwent TEVAR for BTAI. The median age was 43 years (IQR, 29-58), 65% of all patients had an ISS ≥ 25, and 13% were readmitted within 90 days. The main primary causes for readmission were sepsis (8.8%), wound complications (6.7%), and neurological complications (6.5%). Two patients developed graft thrombosis as primary readmission reasons. Compared with acute TBAD patients, BTAI patients had a significantly lower rate of readmission within 90 days (BTAI vs. TBAD; 13% vs. 29%; p < .001). CONCLUSION: We found a significant proportion of readmission in patients treated with TEVAR for BTAI. However, the 90-day readmission rate after TEVAR for BTAI was significantly lower compared with acute TBAD, and the common cause for readmission was not related to residual aortic disease or vascular devices. This represents an important distinction from other patient populations treated with TEVAR for acute vascular conditions. Elucidating differences between trauma-related TEVAR readmissions and non-traumatic indications better informs both the clinician and patients of expected post-discharge course. Level of evidence/study type: IV, Therapeutic/care management.

The impact of urgency of repair on outcomes following thoracic endovascular aortic repair for blunt thoracic aortic injury.

OBJECTIVE: Current societal recommendations regarding the timing of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) vary. Prior studies have shown that elective repair was associated with lower mortality after TEVAR for BTAI. However, these studies lacked data such as Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) aortic injury grades and TEVAR-related postoperative outcomes. Therefore, we used the Vascular Quality Initiative registry, which includes relevant anatomic and outcome data, to examine the outcomes following urgent/emergent (≤ 24 hours) vs elective TEVAR for BTAI. METHODS: Patients undergoing TEVAR for BTAI between 2013 and 2022 were included, excluding those with SVS grade 4 aortic injuries. We included covariates such as age, sex, race, transfer status, body mass index, preoperative hemoglobin, comorbidities, medication use, SVS aortic injury grade, coexisting injuries, Glasgow Coma Scale, and prior aortic surgery in a regression model to compute propensity scores for assignment to urgent/emergent or elective TEVAR. Perioperative outcomes and 5-year mortality were evaluated using inverse probability-weighted logistic regression and Cox regression, also adjusting for left subclavian artery revascularization/occlusion and annual center and physician volumes. RESULTS: Of 1016 patients, 102 (10%) underwent elective TEVAR. Patients who underwent elective repair were more likely to undergo revascularization of the left subclavian artery (31% vs 7.5%; P < .001) and receive intraoperative heparin (94% vs 82%; P = .002). After inverse probability weighting, there was no association between TEVAR timing and perioperative mortality (elective vs urgent/emergent: 3.9% vs 6.6%; odds ratio [OR], 1.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.27-4.7; P = .90) and 5-year mortality (5.8% vs 12%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.95; 95% CI, 0.21-4.3; P > .9).Compared with urgent/emergent TEVAR, elective repair was associated with lower postoperative stroke (1.0% vs 2.1%; adjusted OR [aOR], 0.12; 95% CI, 0.02-0.94; P = .044), even after adjusting for intraoperative heparin use (aOR, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.02-0.92; P = .042). Elective TEVAR was also associated with lower odds of failure of extubation immediately after surgery (39% vs 65%; aOR, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.09-0.35; P < .001) and postoperative pneumonia (4.9% vs 11%; aOR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.13-0.91; P = .031), but comparable odds of any postoperative complication as a composite outcome and reintervention during index admission. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with BTAI who underwent elective TEVAR were more likely to receive intraoperative heparin. Perioperative mortality and 5-year mortality rates were similar between the elective and emergent/urgent TEVAR groups. Postoperatively, elective TEVAR was associated with lower ischemic stroke, pulmonary complications, and prolonged hospitalization. Future modifications in society guidelines should incorporate the current evidence supporting the use of elective TEVAR for BTAI. The optimal timing of TEVAR in patients with BTAI and the factors determining it should be the subject of future study to facilitate personalized decision-making.

Missing Narrative: Examining the Impact of Disability on Post-Operative Infectious Complications.

Background: More than 20% of the population in the United States suffers from a disability, yet the impact of disability on post-operative outcomes remains understudied. This analysis aims to characterize post-operative infectious complications in patients with disability. Patients and Methods: This was a retrospective review of the National Readmission Database (2019) among patients undergoing common general surgery procedures. As per the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), disability was defined as severe hearing, visual, intellectual, or motor impairment/caregiver dependency. A propensity-matched analysis comparing patients with and without a disability was performed to compare outcomes, including post-operative septic shock, sepsis, bacteremia, pneumonia, catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI), urinary tract infection (UTI), catheter-associated blood stream infection, Clostridioides Difficile infection, and superficial, deep, and organ/space surgical site infections during index hospitalization. Patients were matched using age, gender, comorbidities, illness severity, income, neighborhood, insurance, elective procedure, and the hospital's bed size and type. Results: A total of 710,548 patients were analysed, of whom 9,451(1.3%) had at least one disability. Motor disability was the most common (3,762; 40.5%), followed by visual, intellectual, and hearing impairment. Patients with disability were older (64 vs. 57 years; p < 0.001), more often insured under Medicare (65.2% vs. 37.3% p < 0.001) and had more medical comorbidities (Elixhauser comorbidity score ≥3; 69.2% vs. 41.9%; p < 0.001). After matching, 9,292 pairs were formed. Patients with a disability had a higher incidence of pneumonia (10.1% vs. 6.5%; p < 0.001), aspiration pneumonia (5.2% vs. 1.4%; p < 0.001), CAUTI (1.0% vs. 0.4%; p < 0.001), UTI (10.4% vs. 6.2%; p < 0.001), and overall infectious complications (21.8% vs. 14.5%; p < 0.001). Conclusions: Severe intellectual, hearing, visual, or motor impairments were associated with a higher incidence of infectious complications. Further investigation is needed to develop interventions to reduce disparities among this high-risk population.

Evaluating the impact of timing to rib fixation in patients with traumatic brain injury: A nationwide analysis.

BACKGROUND: Early surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) is associated with improved inpatient outcomes in patients with multiple rib fractures. However, there is still a paucity of data examining the optimal timing of SSRF in patients with concomitant traumatic brain injury (TBI). This study aimed to assess whether earlier SSRF was associated with improved outcomes in patients with multiple rib fractures and TBI. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program 2017-2020, including adult patients with TBI and multiple rib fractures who had undergone SSRF. The outcomes were post-procedural length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, intensive care unit (ICU) LOS, in-hospital mortality, ventilator days, and tracheostomy rate. Multilevel mixed-effects regression analyses accounting for patient, injury, and hospital characteristics as well as institutional SSRF volume were used to assess the association between timing to SSRF and the outcomes of interest. As a sensitivity analysis, propensity-score matching was performed to compare patients who underwent early (<72 hours) versus late SSRF (≥72 hours). RESULTS: Of 1,041 patients included in this analysis, 430 (41.3%) underwent SSRF within the first 72 hours from admission. Delay to SSRF was associated with an increase in post-procedural LOS (partial regression coefficient (ß) = 0.011; p = 0.036; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.001-0.023), longer hospital LOS (ß = 0.053; p < 0.001; 95% CI, 0.042-0.064), prolonged ICU LOS (ß = 0.032; p < 0.001; 95% CI, 0.025-0.038), and more ventilator days (ß = 0.026, p < 0.001; 95% CI, 0.020-0.032). CONCLUSION: In patients with concurrent multiple rib fractures and TBI, a delay in SSRF is associated with an increase in postprocedural LOS, hospital LOS, ICU LOS, and ventilator days. These findings suggest that the early patient selection and implementation of SSRF may play a beneficial role in patients presenting with concomitant TBI and multiple rib fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.

Sex Related Outcomes Following Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair for Blunt Thoracic Aortic Injury.

OBJECTIVE: Current literature suggests that thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in older patients with aortic aneurysms results in higher peri-operative mortality and lower long term survival in females compared with males. However, sex related outcomes in younger patients with blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) undergoing TEVAR remain unknown. This study examined the association between sex and outcomes after TEVAR for BTAI. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed of all patients who underwent TEVAR for BTAI in the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program (ACS-TQIP) between 2016 and 2019. The primary outcome was in hospital death. Secondary outcomes were peri-operative complications. Multivariable logistic regression was used to adjust for demographics, comorbidities, injury severity score, and aortic injury grade. RESULTS: Two thousand and twenty-two patients were included; 26% were female. Compared with males, females were older (46 [IQR 30, 62] vs. 39 [IQR 28, 56] years; p < .001), more often obese (41% vs. 33%; p = .005), had lower rates of alcohol use disorder (4.1% vs. 8.9%; p < .001) and a higher prevalence of hypertension (29% vs. 22%; p = .001). The injury severity was comparable between females and males (Injury Severity Score ≥ 25; 84% vs. 80%; p = .11) and there was no difference in aortic injury grades when comparing females with males (grade 1, 33% vs. 33%; grade 2, 24% vs. 25%; grade 3, 43% vs. 40%; grade 4, 0.8% vs. 1.3%; p = .53). Multivariable logistic regression demonstrated no difference for in hospital mortality between females and males (OR 1.02; 95% CI 0.67 - 1.53, p = .93). Compared with males, females were at lower risk of acute kidney injury (AKI) (OR 0.33; 95% CI 0.17 - 0.64; p = .001) and ventilator associated pneumonia (VAP) (OR 0.50; 95% CI 0.28 - 0.91; p = .023). CONCLUSION: This study did not demonstrate a sex related in hospital mortality difference following TEVAR for BTAI. However, female sex was associated with a lower risk of AKI and VAP. Future studies should evaluate sex differences and long term outcomes following TEVAR in patients with BTAI.

Outcomes following thoracic endovascular aortic repair for blunt thoracic aortic injury stratified by Society for Vascular Surgery grade.

OBJECTIVES: Although the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) aortic injury grading system is used to depict the severity of injury in patients with blunt thoracic aortic injury, prior literature on its association with outcomes after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is limited. METHODS: We identified patients undergoing TEVAR for BTAI within the VQI between 2013 and 2022. We stratified patients based on their SVS aortic injury grade (grade 1, intimal tear; grade 2, intramural hematoma; grade 3, pseudoaneurysm; and grade 4, transection or extravasation). We assessed perioperative outcomes and 5-year mortality using multivariable logistic and Cox regression analyses. Secondarily, we assessed the proportional trends in patients undergoing TEVAR based on SVS aortic injury grade over time. RESULTS: Overall, 1311 patients were included (grade1, 8%; grade 2, 19%; grade 3, 57%; grade 4, 17%). Baseline characteristics were similar, except for a higher prevalence of renal dysfunction, severe chest injury (Abbreviated Injury Score >3), and lower Glasgow Coma Scale with increasing aortic injury grade (Ptrend < .05). Rates of perioperative mortality by aortic injury grade were as follows: grade 1, 6.6%; grade 2, 4.9%; grade 3, 7.2%; and grade 4, 14% (Ptrend = .003) and 5-year mortality rates were 11% for grade 1, 10% for grade 2, 11% for grade 3, and 19% for grade 4 (P = .004). Patients with grade 1 injury had a high rate of spinal cord ischemia (2.8% vs grade 2, 0.40% vs grade 3, 0.40% vs grade 4, 2.7%; P = .008). After risk adjustment, there was no association between aortic injury grade and perioperative mortality (grade 4 vs grade 1, odds ratio, 1.3; 95% confidence interval, 0.50-3.5; P = .65), or 5-year mortality (grade 4 vs grade 1, hazard ratio, 1.1; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-2.30; P = .82). Although there was a trend for decrease in the proportion of patients undergoing TEVAR with a grade 2 BTAI (22% to 14%; Ptrend = .084), the proportion for grade 1 injury remained unchanged over time (6.0% to 5.1%; Ptrend = .69). CONCLUSIONS: After TEVAR for BTAI, there was higher perioperative and 5-year mortality in patients with grade 4 BTAI. However, after risk adjustment, there was no association between SVS aortic injury grade and perioperative and 5-year mortality in patients undergoing TEVAR for BTAI. More than 5% of patients with BTAI who underwent TEVAR had a grade 1 injury, with a concerning rate of spinal cord ischemia potentially attributable to TEVAR, and this proportion did not decrease over time. Further efforts should focus on enabling careful selection of patients with BTAI who will experience more benefit than harm from operative repair and preventing the inadvertent use of TEVAR in low-grade injuries.

Early Versus Delayed Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair for Blunt Thoracic Aortic Injury: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: We examined early (≤24 h) versus delayed (>24 h) thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI), taking the aortic injury severity into consideration. BACKGROUND: Current trauma surgery guidelines recommend delayed TEVAR following BTAI. However, this recommendation was based on small studies, and specifics regarding recommendation strategies based on aortic injury grades are lacking. METHODS: Patients undergoing TEVAR for BTAI in the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program between 2016 and 2019 were included and then stratified into 2 groups (early: ≤24 h vs. delayed: >24 h). In-hospital outcomes were compared after creating 1:1 propensity score-matched cohorts, matching for demographics, comorbidities, concomitant injuries, additional procedures, and aortic injury severity based on the acute aortic syndrome (AAS) classification. RESULTS: Overall, 1339 patients were included, of whom 1054(79%) underwent early TEVAR. Compared with the delayed group, the early group had significantly less severe head injuries (early vs delayed; 25% vs 32%; P =0.014), fewer early interventions for AAS grade 1 occurred, and AAS grade 3 aortic injuries often were intervened upon within 24 hours (grade 1: 28% vs 47%; grade 3: 49% vs 23%; P <0.001). After matching, the final sample included 548 matched patients. Compared with the delayed group, the early group had a significantly higher in-hospital mortality (8.8% vs 4.4%, relative risk: 2.2, 95% CI: 1.1-4.4; P =0.028), alongside a shorter length of hospital stay (5.0 vs 10 days; P =0.028), a shorter intensive care unit length of stay (4.0 vs 11 days; P <0.001) and fewer days on the ventilator (4.0 vs 6.5 days; P =0.036). Furthermore, regardless of the higher risk of acute kidney injury in the delayed group (3.3% vs 7.7%, relative risk: 0.43, 95% CI: 0.20-0.92; P =0.029), no other differences in in-hospital complications were observed between the early and delayed group. CONCLUSION: In this propensity score-matched analysis, delayed TEVAR was associated with lower mortality risk, even after adjusting for aortic injury grade.

Males and females have similar mortality after thoracic endovascular aortic repair for blunt thoracic aortic injury.

OBJECTIVE: Prior literature has demonstrated worse outcomes for female patients after abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Also, prior studies in the context of thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR) for thoracic aortic aneurysms have reported conflicting results regarding sex-related outcomes. Because the influence of sex on the outcomes after TEVAR for blunt thoracic aortic injuries (BTAIs) remains understudied, we evaluated the association between sex and outcomes after TEVAR for BTAI. METHODS: We identified patients who had undergone TEVAR for BTAIs in the Vascular Quality Initiative registry from 2013 to 2022 and included those who had undergone TEVAR within zones 2 to 5 of the thoracic aorta. Patients with missing information regarding the aortic injury grade (Society for Vascular Surgery aortic injury grading system) were excluded. We performed multivariable logistic regression and Cox regression to determine the influence of sex on the perioperative outcomes and long-term mortality, respectively. RESULTS: We identified 1311 patients, of whom 27% were female. The female patients were significantly older (female, 47 years [interquartile range (IQR), 30-63 years]; male, 38 years [IQR, 28-55 years]; P < .001) with higher rates of comorbidities. Although the female patients had had higher Glasgow coma scale scores (median, 15 [IQR, 11-15]; vs 14 [IQR, 8-15]; P = .028), no differences were found in the aortic injury grade or other coexisting traumatic injuries between the sexes. Apart from the longer procedure duration for the female patients (median, 79 minutes [IQR, 52-119 minutes]; vs 69 minutes [IQR, 48-106 minutes]; P = .008), the procedural characteristics were comparable. After adjustment, no significant association was found between female sex and perioperative mortality (7.1% vs 8.1%; odds ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.43-1.3; P = .34). The male and female patients had had comparable rates of postoperative complications (26% vs 29%; odds ratio, 0.89; 95% CI: 0.52-1.5]; P = .26) including access-related complications (0.5% vs 0.8%; P=.83). However, females had a significantly higher risk for reintervention during the index admission (odds ratio, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.1-5.5; P = .024). No significant difference was found between the male and female patients with respect to 5-year mortality (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.57-1.35; P = .50). CONCLUSIONS: Unlike the sex-based outcome disparities observed after thoracic aortic aneurysm repair, we found no significant association between sex and perioperative outcomes or long-term mortality after TEVAR for BTAIs. This contrast in the sex-related outcomes after other vascular pathologies might be explained by differences in the pathology, demographics, and anatomic factors in these patients.