Performance of the Emergency Surgery Score in Nonelective Lower-Extremity Endovascular Procedures.

INTRODUCTION: Multiple studies have validated the Emergency Surgery Score (ESS) as a tool which reliably predicts outcomes after emergency general surgery. The purpose of this study was to assess the performance of the ESS for lower-extremity endovascular procedures in nonelective setting (neLEE). METHODS: The American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was retrospectively analyzed for patients undergoing neLEE between 2015 and 2019. The performance of the ESS in predicting mortality in each procedure was assessed using receiver operating characteristic analyses. RESULTS: Four thousand five hundred and eighty three patients underwent neLEE with median age 68 (±12.3 SD), with 1802 females (39.3%). The ESS correlated with 30-day mortality (area under the curve [AUC] was 0.729), discharge to rehab (AUC 0.638), renal failure (AUC 0.667), postintervention ventilation requirement (AUC 0.680), and stroke (AUC 0.656). The predictive ability of the ESS decreased with increasing age, with the ESS performing best for patients between 60 and 69 y in age (AUC 0.735) and worst for patients above 80 y (AUC 0.650). A Cochran-Armitage test showed linear trend towards increased 30-day mortality among the quartiles with increasing ESS (P < 0.001), with patients with ESS ≥10 having 10 times odds of increased 30-day mortality compared to reference quartile of patients with ESS ≤4 on multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The ESS score is associated with 30-day mortality and other complications after neLEE procedures. It can potentially be used as a predictive tool for preoperative risk stratification and can also be used for equitably evaluating standards and outcomes after lower extremity endovascular procedures.

The Value of Fundoplication in the Treatment of Type I Achalasia.

BACKGROUND: Type I achalasia comprises 20% of achalasia and has nearly absent esophageal motor activity. Concerns that fundoplication decreases the effectiveness of Heller myotomy in these patients has increased adoption of peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM). Hence, we compared outcomes after Heller myotomy with Dor fundoplication vs POEM. METHODS: From 2005 to 2020, 150 patients with type I achalasia underwent primary surgical myotomy (117 Heller myotomy, 33 POEM). Patient demographics, prior treatments, timed barium esophagrams, Eckardt scores, and reinterventions were assessed between the 2 groups. Median follow-up was 5 years for Heller myotomy and 2.5 years for POEM. RESULTS: The Heller myotomy group was younger, had fewer comorbidities, and lower body mass index vs POEM. Risk-adjusted models demonstrated clinical success (Eckardt ≤3) in 83% of Heller myotomies and 87% of POEMs at 3 years; longitudinal complete timed barium esophagram emptying and reintervention were also similar. An abnormal pH test result was documented in 10% (6 of 60) after Heller myotomy and in 45% (10 of 22) after POEM (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Despite nearly absent esophageal contractility, Heller myotomy with Dor fundoplication and POEM result in similar long-term symptom relief, esophageal emptying, and occurrence of reintervention in patients with type I achalasia. There is decreased esophageal acid exposure with the addition of a fundoplication, without compromised esophageal drainage, allaying fears of a detrimental effect of a fundoplication. Hence, choice of procedure may be personalized based on patient characteristics and esophageal morphology and not solely on manometric subtype.

Paraconduit hernia following esophagectomy: Is it safe to watch and wait?

OBJECTIVES: We hypothesized that emergency complications related to asymptomatic paraconduit hernias may occur less often than generally believed. Therefore, we assessed the occurrence and timing of paraconduit hernia diagnosis after esophagectomy, as well as outcomes of these asymptomatic patients managed with a watch-and-wait approach. METHODS: From 2006 to 2021, 1214 patients underwent esophagectomy with reconstruction at the Cleveland Clinic. Among these patients, computed tomography scans were reviewed to identify paraconduit hernias. Medical records were reviewed for timing of hernia diagnosis, hernia characteristics, and patient symptoms, complications, and management. During this period, patients with asymptomatic paraconduit hernias were typically managed nonoperatively. RESULTS: Paraconduit hernias were identified in 37 patients. Of these, 31 (84%) had a pre-esophagectomy hiatal hernia. Twenty-one hernias (57%) contained colon, 7 hernias (19%) contained pancreas, and 9 hernias (24%) contained multiple organs. Estimated prevalence of paraconduit hernia was 3.3% at 3 years and 7.7% at 10 years. Seven patients (19%) had symptoms, 4 of whom were repaired electively, with 2 currently awaiting repairs. No patient with a paraconduit hernia experienced an acute complication that required emergency intervention. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of paraconduit hernia increases with time, suggesting that long-term symptom surveillance is reasonable. Emergency complications as a result of asymptomatic paraconduit hernias are rare. A small number of patients will experience hernia-related symptoms, sometimes years after hernia diagnosis. Our findings suggest that observation of asymptomatic paraconduit hernias (watch and wait) may be considered, with repair considered electively in patients with persistent symptoms.

Development and validation of a universal esophageal patient-reported outcome measure: The Cleveland Clinic Esophageal Questionnaire (CEQ).

OBJECTIVE: Currently, there is no validated patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) applicable to all esophageal diseases. Our objective was to create a psychometrically robust, validated universal esophageal PROM that can also objectively assess patients' quality of life (QoL). METHODS: The pilot PROM constructed based on expert opinions, literature review, and previous unpublished institutional research had 27 items covering 8 domains. It was completed by 30 patients in the outpatient clinic followed by a structured debriefing interview, which allowed for refining the PROM. The final PROM: Cleveland Clinic Esophageal Questionnaire (CEQ) included 34 items across 6 domains (Dysphagia, Eating, Pain, Reflux & Regurgitation, Dyspepsia, Dumping), each accompanied by a corresponding QoL component. Further psychometric assessment of the PROM was conducted by evaluating (1) acceptability, (2) construct validity, (3) reliability, and (4) responsiveness. RESULTS: Five hundred forty-six unique patients (median 63.7 years [54.3-71.7], 53% male [287], 86% White) completed CEQ at >90% completion within 5 minutes. Construct validity was demonstrated by differentiating scores across esophageal cancer (n = 146), achalasia (n = 170), hiatal hernia (n = 160), and other diagnoses (n = 70). Internal reliability (Cronbach alpha 0.83-0.89), and test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients 0.63-0.85) were strong. Responsiveness was demonstrated through CEQ domains improving for 53 patients who underwent surgery for achalasia or hiatal hernia (Cohen d 0.86-2.59). CONCLUSIONS: We have constructed a psychometrically robust, universal esophageal PROM that allows concise, consistent, objective quantification of symptoms and their effect on the patient. The CEQ is valuable in prognostication and tracking of longitudinal outcomes in both benign and malignant esophageal diseases.