Implementation of an enhanced recovery program for lower extremity bypass.

OBJECTIVE: Enhanced recovery programs (ERPs) have gained wide acceptance across multiple surgical disciplines to improve postoperative outcomes and to decrease hospital length of stay (LOS). However, there is limited information in the existing literature for vascular patients. We describe the implementation and early results of an ERP and barriers to its implementation for lower extremity bypass surgery. Our intention is to provide a framework to assist with implementation of similar ERPs. METHODS: Using the plan, do, check, adjust methodology, a multidisciplinary team was assembled. A database was used to collect information on patient-, procedure-, and ERP-specific metrics. We then retrospectively analyzed patients' demographics and outcomes. RESULTS: During 9 months, an ERP (n = 57) was successfully developed and implemented spanning preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative phases. ERP and non-ERP patient demographics were statistically similar. Early successes include 97% use of fascia iliaca block and multimodal analgesia administration in 81%. Barriers included only 47% of patients achieving day of surgery mobilization and 19% receiving celecoxib preoperatively. ERP patients had decreased total and postoperative LOS compared with non-ERP patients (n = 190) with a mean (standard deviation) total LOS of 8.32 (8.4) days vs 11.14 (10.1) days (P = .056) and postoperative LOS of 6.12 (6.02) days vs 7.98 (7.52) days (P = .089). There was significant decrease in observed to expected postoperative LOS (1.28 [0.66] vs 1.82 [1.38]; P = .005). Variable and total costs for ERP patients were significantly reduced ($13,208 [$9930] vs $18,777 [$19,118; P < .01] and $29,865 [$22,110] vs $40,328 [$37,820; P = .01], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Successful implementation of ERP for lower extremity bypass carries notable challenges but can have a significant impact on practice patterns. Further adjustment of our current protocol is anticipated, but early results are promising. Implementation of a vascular surgery ERP reduced variable and total costs and decreased total and postoperative LOS. We believe this protocol can easily be implemented at other institutions using the pathway outlined.

Screw versus pin fixation with open reduction of pediatric lateral condyle fractures.

Good results have been described for lateral condyle fractures treated by open reduction and fixation using Kirschner wires or screws. We, in our level III retrospective comparison clinical research study, retrospectively reviewed 84 patients (43 K-wire, 41 screw fixation; average age 5.6 years, average follow-up 6.8 months). With K-wires there were three nonunions (average time to union 9.6 weeks). With screws, all fractures healed (average of 7.8 weeks). Screw fixation patients spent fewer days in a cast and had a greater range of motion at the last follow-up. Screw fixation is associated with fewer nonunions and faster time to union, but a secondary procedure for removal is required.

Biomechanical Analysis of Screws Versus K-Wires for Lateral Humeral Condyle Fractures.

BACKGROUND: Good outcomes have been described for pediatric lateral condyle fractures treated by open reduction and fixation using either screws or Kirschner wires (K-wires). No studies have compared the biomechanical properties of the 2 fixation methods. We hypothesized that screw fixation would be more biomechanically stable than K-wire fixation. METHODS: Synthetic humerus models were used for biomechanical testing, following a previously published protocol. A miter saw was used to make an oblique cut to simulate a Milch type II fracture. Fractures were anatomically reduced and fixed with either 2 divergent 0.062-inch K-wires placed bicortically or a 4.0-mm lag screw placed obliquely (perpendicular to the fracture line). Specimens were then embedded in polymethyl methacrylate bone cement for testing. Mechanical testing using displacement control was performed applying compression or distraction from 0 to 1.5 mm at a rate of 0.5 mm/s for 10 cycles. The maximum force was calculated based on the maximum force averaged over the 10 cycles. Stiffness was calculated based on the slope of the force-displacement curve of the 10th cycle. A 2-sample t test was used to determine significant differences between the stiffness and maximum force comparing the K-wire and screw groups. A P-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Stiffness and maximum force in tension testing were significantly greater with screw fixation compared with K-wire fixation. Testing in compression revealed statistically significant increased maximum force and a trend towards increased stiffness. CONCLUSION: Screw fixation in a synthetic bone model of pediatric lateral condyle fractures (Milch type II) provides increased biomechanical stability of the construct as compared with K-wires. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: If similar effects were seen in vivo, increased biomechanical stability with screw fixation could decrease the occurrence of complications such as loss of reduction and nonunion.