Robotic Evaluation and Repair of Penetrating Injury of the Abdominal Wall.

This case demonstrated the feasibility of robotic-assisted exploratory laparoscopy in a hemodynamically stable trauma patient and abdominal wall repair with a favorable outcome. The patient presented with a stab wound at the left middle posterior flank. A computer tomography scan of the abdomen and pelvis demonstrated penetrating soft tissue injury to the left lateral abdominal wall with herniation of the omentum. A robotic-assisted laparoscopic approach was implemented to evaluate for visceral injury and to repair the abdominal wall. Diagnostic laparoscopy ruled out visceral and diaphragmatic injuries, and robotic primary tissue repair of the abdominal wall was performed. The patient was discharged home the following day. Laparoscopy for hemodynamically stable trauma patients has shown the benefit of decreased morbidity and decreased hospital stay compared to laparotomy. In turn, the robotic surgical approach has all the benefits of laparoscopy while bringing additional benefits of improved surgical dexterity, visualization, range of motion, and ergonomics.

Audience Response System (ARS) Use in the SCORE (Surgical Council on Resident Education) Surgery Training Curriculum: A Mixed Methodology Study.

Background Audience Response Systems (ARS) could help overcome the limitations of traditional lectures by providing interactivity, engagement, and assessment. The perception of ARS use in surgical education is not well documented. Objective Examine the use of an ARS in teaching This Week In SCORE (Surgical Council on Resident Education)sessions to general surgery residents and medical students. Methods  ARS was used at weekly SCORE question sessions in a new general surgery residency program by four residents, 97 medical students, and 20 faculty. The study employed a mixed quantitative and qualitative method: two separate 10-question surveys for faculty and trainees (49% response rate) and a focus group discussion that included one faculty member, two residents, and two students. Results In 85 (85%) responses, the faculty favored the use of ARS in SCORE. Among the total of 510 responses from 51 residents and students, 57% agreed with the favorable use of ARS, while 28% were neutral and, in 14% of cases, negative. A greater proportion of faculty and learners preferred ARS over traditional lectures. The focus group content analysis showed a positive effect and preference from learners and faculty. Engagement, thinking stimulation, and group participation were the most common positive comments. No significant negative influence on ARS use was reported. Conclusions The use of an ARS in This Week In SCORE â€‹â€‹â€‹sessions were preferred by most of the faculty and a majority of learners. The benefits are ease of use and stimulation of discussion. ARS has the potential for more widespread utilization in additional educational settings.

Is There a Role for Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy for cT4bM0 Colon Cancer? A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of the National Cancer Database.

BACKGROUND: Nonmetastatic T4b colon cancer has been traditionally treated with upfront surgery, often requiring technically challenging multiorgan resection. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy can potentially downsize these tumors and improve their resectability. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore trends and outcomes of neoadjuvant chemotherapy use compared to upfront surgery in patients with nonmetastatic T4b colon cancer. This study also sought to determine factors associated with increased neoadjuvant chemotherapy use and with overall survival. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTINGS: Conducted using the National Cancer Database. PATIENTS: Patients with nonmetastatic T4b colon cancer who underwent colectomy (2006-2016) were included in the study. Patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy were propensity-matched (1:2) to those who underwent upfront surgery in either clinically node-negative or node-positive disease. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Postoperative outcomes (length of stay, 30-d readmission, 30/90-d mortality), oncologic resection adequacy (R0 rate, number of resected/positive nodes), and overall survival were the main outcome measures. RESULTS: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was used in 7.7% of the patients. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy use increased over the study period from 4% to 16% in the entire cohort, from 3% to 21% in patients with clinically node-positive disease, and from 6% to 12% in patients with clinically node-negative disease. Factors associated with increased use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy included younger age (OR 0.97; 95% CI, 0.96-0.98; p < 0.001), male sex (OR 1.35; 95% CI, 1.11-1.64; p = 0.002), recent diagnosis year (OR 1.16; 95% CI, 1.12-1.20; p < 0.001), academic centers (OR 2.65; 95% CI, 2.19-3.22; p < 0.001), clinically node-positive (OR 1.23; 95% CI, 1.01-1.49; p = 0.037), and tumor located in the sigmoid colon (OR 2.44; 95% CI, 1.97-3.02; p < 0.001). Patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy had significantly higher R0 resection compared with upfront surgery (87% vs 77%; p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, neoadjuvant chemotherapy was associated with higher overall survival (HR 0.76; 95% CI, 0.64-0.91; p = 0.002). On propensity-matched analyses, neoadjuvant chemotherapy was associated with a higher 5-year overall survival compared to upfront surgery in patients with clinically node-positive disease (57% vs 43%; p = 0.003) but not in patients with clinically node-negative disease (61% vs 56%; p = 0.090). LIMITATIONS: Retrospective design. CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy use for nonmetastatic T4b has increased significantly on the national level, more so in patients with clinically node-positive disease. Patients with node-positive disease treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy had higher overall survival compared to those who underwent upfront surgery. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/C228 . EXISTE LUGAR PARA LA TERAPIA SISTMICA NEOADYUVANTE PARA EL CNCER DE COLON CTBM UN ANLISIS EMPAREJADO DE PUNTAJE DE PROPENSIN DE LA BASE DE DATOS NACIONAL DEL CNCER: ANTECEDENTES:El cáncer de colon T4b no metastásico se ha tratado tradicionalmente con cirugía inicial, que frecuentemente requiere de una resección multiorgánica técnicamente desafiante. La quimioterapia neoadyuvante puede potencialmente reducir el tamaño y mejorar la resecabilidad de esos tumores.OBJETIVO:Explorar las tendencias y los resultados del uso de quimioterapia neoadyuvante en pacientes con cáncer de colon T4b no metastásico, en comparación con la cirugía inicial. Determinar los factores asociados con el aumento del uso de quimioterapia neoadyuvante y con la supervivencia general.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.AJUSTES:Utilizando de la Base de Datos Nacional del Cáncer.PACIENTES:Pacientes con cáncer de colon T4b no metastásico sometidos a colectomía (2006-2016). Los pacientes que recibieron quimioterapia neoadyuvante fueron emparejados por propensión (1:2) con aquellos sometidos a cirugía inicial, ya sea en enfermedad clínica con ganglios negativos o ganglios positivos.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Resultados posoperatorios (duración de la hospitalización, reingreso a los 30 días, mortalidad a los 30/90 días), adecuación de la resección oncológica (tasa R0, número de ganglios resecados/positivos) y supervivencia general.RESULTADOS:La quimioterapia neoadyuvante se utilizó en el 7,7% de los pacientes. El uso de quimioterapia neoadyuvante aumentó durante el período de estudio del 4% al 16% en toda la cohorte; del 3% al 21% en pacientes con enfermedad clínica y ganglios positivos; y del 6% al 12% en pacientes con enfermedad clínica y ganglios negativos. Los factores asociados con un mayor uso de quimioterapia neoadyuvante incluyeron, edad más joven (OR 0,97, IC del 95 %: 0,96-0,98, p < 0,001), sexo masculino (OR 1,35, IC del 95 %: 1,11-1,64, p = 0,002), año de diagnóstico mas reciente (OR 1,16, 95% IC: 1,12-1,20, p < 0,001), centros académicos (OR 2,65, 95% IC: 2,19-3,22, p < 0,001), enfermedad clínica con ganglios positivos (OR 1,23, 95% IC: 1,01-1,49, p = 0,037), y tumor localizado en colon sigmoide (OR 2,44, 95% IC: 1,97-3,02, p < 0,001). Los pacientes que recibieron quimioterapia neoadyuvante tuvieron una resección R0 significativamente mayor en comparación con la cirugía inicial (87 % frente a 77 %, p < 0,001). En análisis multivariable, la quimioterapia neoadyuvante se asoció con una mayor supervivencia global (HR 0,76, IC del 95%: 0,64-0,91, p = 0,002). En los análisis de propensión pareada, la quimioterapia neoadyuvante se asoció con una mayor supervivencia general a los 5 años en comparación con la cirugía inicial en pacientes con enfermedad clínica con ganglios positivos (57% frente a 43%, p = 0,003), pero no en pacientes con enfermedad clínica y ganglios negativos (61% vs 56%, p = 0,090).LIMITACIONES:Diseño retrospectivo.CONCLUSIÓN:El uso de quimioterapia neoadyuvante para T4b no metastásico ha aumentado significativamente a nivel nacional, más aún en pacientes con enfermedad clínica y ganglios positivos. Los pacientes con enfermedad y ganglios positivos tratados con quimioterapia neoadyuvante tuvieron una mayor supervivencia general en comparación con la cirugía inicial. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/C228 . (Traducción-Dr. Fidel Ruiz Healy ).

Robotic Approach is Associated With a Lower Conversion Rate Compared to Laparoscopic Approach for Patients Undergoing Colectomy for T4b Colon Cancer. An Analysis of the National Cancer Database.

INTRODUCTION: We examined the perioperative outcomes of patients undergoing open, laparoscopic, or robotic colectomy for T4b colon cancer, as well as the clinical factors associated with conversion to an open approach and its consequences on perioperative and oncologic outcomes. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for patients undergoing colectomy for cT4b colon cancer (2010-2016). Patients undergoing laparoscopic or robotic colectomy were matched using Propensity-Score analysis. Factors associated with conversion to an open approach were assessed using Logistic-regression multivariable-analysis (MVA). RESULTS: Colectomy for cT4b colon cancer was performed in 9030 patients (open: n = 6,543, robotic: n = 157, laparoscopic: n = 2330). In the propensity-matched groups, robotic approach had lower rate of conversion (12% vs 37%, P < .001), shorter hospital stays (5 vs 7-days, P = .02), and similar overall-survival (5-yr: 49% vs 39%, P = .16), compared to laparoscopic approach. Conversion to an open approach was noted in 801(32%) of the patients undergoing minimally invasive surgical colectomy (robotic n = 23(15%), laparoscopic n = 778(33%). Factors associated with lower rate of conversion on multivariable-analysis included recent year of surgery (95% CI: 0.88-.97), robotic approach (95% CI: 0.22-.56), and surgeries performed in Academic hospitals (95% CI: 0.65-.96). Conversion to an open approach was associated with higher rate of positive parenchymal margin (31% vs 25%, P = .001), higher rate of 30-day readmission (12% vs 9.5%, P = .04), and similar overall survival (5-yr: 32% vs 35%, P = .19), compared to those who had no conversion. CONCLUSION: At the National level, patients undergoing colectomy for T4b colon cancer via a robotic approach had more favorable perioperative outcomes compared to laparoscopic approach. Conversion to an open approach did not compromise long term survival, despite being associated with higher rate of positive margins and readmissions rate.

The Effect of Organ System Surgery on Intensive Care Unit Mortality in a Cohort of Critically Ill Surgical Patients.

BACKGROUND: The critical illness burden in the United States is growing with an aging population obtaining surgical intervention despite age-related comorbidities. The effect of organ system surgical intervention on intensive care units (ICUs) mortality is unknown. METHODS: We performed an 8-year retrospective analysis of surgical ICU patients. Poisson regression analysis was performed assessing the relative risk of in-hospital mortality based on surgical intervention. RESULTS: Of 468 000 ICU patients included, 97 968 (20.9%) were surgical admissions and 97 859 (99.9%) had complete outcomes data. Nonsurvivors were older (68.8 ± 15.4 vs. 62.7 ± 15.8 years, P < .001) with higher Acute Physiology, Age, Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) III Scores (81.4 ± 33.6 vs. 46.7 ± 20.1, P < .001. Patients with gastrointestinal (GI) (n = 1,558, 7.8%), musculoskeletal (n = 277, 5.5%), and neurological (n = 884, 4.6%) system operations had the highest mortality. Upon Poisson regression model, patients undergoing emergent operative interventions on the neurologic system (RR 1.86, 95% CI 1.67-2.07, P < .001) had increased relative risk of mortality when compared to emergent operative interventions on the cardiovascular system after controlling for pertinent covariates. Elective operative interventions on the respiratory (RR 2.39, 95% CI 2.03-2.80, P < .001), GI (RR 2.34, 95% CI 2.10-2.61, P < .001), and skin and soft tissue (RR 2.26, 95% CI 1.77-2.89, P < .001) systems had increased risk of mortality when compared to elective cardiovascular system surgery after controlling for pertinent covariates. CONCLUSION: We found significant differences in the risk of mortality based on organ system of operative intervention. The prognostication of critically ill patients undergoing surgical intervention is currently not accounted for in prognostic scoring systems.

The Utility of the Alvarado Score in the Diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis in the Elderly.

Clinical scores determining the likelihood of acute appendicitis (AA), including the Alvarado score, were devised using a younger population, and their efficacy in predicting AA in elderly patients is not well documented. This study's purpose is to evaluate the utility of Alvarado scores in this population. A retrospective chart review of patients >65 years old presenting with pathologically diagnosed AA from 2000 to 2010 was performed. Ninety-six patients met inclusion criteria. The average age was 73.7 ± 1.5 years and our cohort was 41.7 per cent male. The average Alvarado score was 6.9 ± 0.33. The distribution of scores was 1 to 4 in 3.7 per cent, 5 to 6 in 37.8 per cent, and 7 to 10 in 58.5 per cent of cases. There was a statistically significant increase in patients scoring 5 or 6 in our cohort versus the original Alvarado cohort (P < 0.01). Right lower quadrant tenderness (97.6%), left shift of neutrophils (91.5%), and leukocytosis (84.1%) were the most common symptoms on presentation. In conclusion, our data suggest that altering our interpretation of the Alvarado score to classify elderly patients presenting with a score of ≥5 as high risk may lead to earlier diagnosis of AA. Physicians should have a higher clinical suspicion of AA in elderly patients presenting with right lower quadrant tenderness, left shift, or leukocytosis.