Testing of a risk-stratified patient decision aid to facilitate shared decision-making for extended postoperative thromboprophylaxis after major abdominal surgery for cancer.

BACKGROUND: Use of extended pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis after major abdominopelvic cancer surgery should depend on best-available scientific evidence and patients' informed preferences. We developed a risk-stratified patient decision aid to facilitate shared decision-making and sought to evaluate its effect on decision-making quality regarding use of extended thromboprophylaxis. METHODS: We enrolled patients undergoing major abdominopelvic cancer surgery at an academic tertiary care centre in this pre-post study. We evaluated change in decisional conflict, readiness to decide, decision-making confidence, and change in patient knowledge. Participants were provided the appropriate risk-stratified decision aid (according to their Caprini score) in either the preoperative or postoperative setting. A sample size calculation determined that we required 17 patients to demonstrate whether the decision aid meaningfully reduced decisional conflict. We used the Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed ranks test for interval scaled measures. RESULTS: We included 17 participants. The decision aid significantly reduced decisional conflict (median decisional conflict score 2.37 [range 1.00-3.81] v. 1.3 [range 1.00-3.25], p < 0.01). With the decision aid, participants had high confidence (median 86.4 [range 15.91-100]) and felt highly prepared to make a decision (median 90 [range 55-100]). Median knowledge scores increased from 50% (range 0%-100%) to 75% (range 25%-100%). CONCLUSION: Our risk-stratified, evidence-based decision aid on extended thromboprophylaxis after major abdominopelvic surgery significantly improved decision-making quality. Further research is needed to evaluate the usability and feasibility of this decision aid in the perioperative setting.

Hepatopancreaticobiliary Resection Arginine Immunomodulation (PRIMe) trial: protocol for a randomised phase II trial of the impact of perioperative immunomodulation on immune function following resection for hepatopancreaticobiliary malignancy.

INTRODUCTION: Surgical stress results in immune dysfunction, predisposing patients to infections in the postoperative period and potentially increasing the risk of cancer recurrence. Perioperative immunonutrition with arginine-enhanced diets has been found to potentially improve short-term and cancer outcomes. This study seeks to measure the impact of perioperative immunomodulation on biomarkers of the immune response and perioperative outcomes following hepatopancreaticobiliary surgery. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a 1:1:1 randomised, controlled and blinded superiority trial of 45 patients. Baseline and perioperative variables were collected to evaluate immune function, clinical outcomes and feasibility outcomes. The primary outcome is a reduction in natural killer cell killing as measured on postoperative day 1 compared with baseline between the control and experimental cohorts. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This trial has been approved by the research ethics boards at participating sites and Health Canada (parent control number: 223646). Results will be distributed widely through local and international meetings, presentation, publication and ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT04549662). Any modifications to the protocol will be communicated via publications and ClinicalTrials.gov. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04549662.

Feasibility and Safety of a "Shared Care" Model in Complex Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery: A 5-year Observational Study of Outcomes in Pancreaticoduodenectomy.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the safety of a fully functioning shared care model (SCM) in hepatopancreatobiliary surgery through evaluating outcomes in pancreaticoduodenectomy. BACKGROUND: SCMs, where a team of surgeons share in care delivery and resource utilization, represent a surgeon-level opportunity to improve system efficiency and peer support, but concerns around clinical safety remain, especially in complex elective surgery. METHODS: Patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy between 2016 and 2020 were included. Adoption of shared care was demonstrated by analyzing shared care measures, including the number of surgeons encountered by patients during their care cycle, the proportion of patients with different consenting versus primary operating surgeon (POS), and the proportion of patients who met their POS on the day of surgery. Outcomes, including 30-day mortality, readmission, unplanned reoperation, sepsis, and length of stay, were collected from the institution's National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database and compared with peer hospitals contributing to the pancreatectomy-specific NSQIP collaborative. RESULTS: Of the 174 patients included, a median of 3 surgeons was involved throughout the patients' care cycle, 69.0% of patients had different consenting versus POS and 57.5% met their POS on the day of surgery. Major outcomes, including mortality (1.1%), sepsis (5.2%), and reoperation (7.5%), were comparable between the study group and NSQIP peer hospitals. Length of stay (10 day) was higher in place of lower readmission (13.2%) in the study group compared with peer hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: SCMs are feasible in complex elective surgery without compromising patient outcomes, and wider adoption may be encouraged.

Phlebotomy resulting in controlled hypovolemia to prevent blood loss in major hepatic resections (PRICE-2): study protocol for a phase 3 randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Blood loss and red blood cell (RBC) transfusion in liver surgery are areas of concern for surgeons, anesthesiologists, and patients alike. While various methods are employed to reduce surgical blood loss, the evidence base surrounding each intervention is limited. Hypovolemic phlebotomy, the removal of whole blood from the patient without volume replacement during liver transection, has been strongly associated with decreased bleeding and RBC transfusion in observational studies. This trial aims to investigate whether hypovolemic phlebotomy is superior to usual care in reducing RBC transfusions in liver resection. METHODS: This study is a double-blind multicenter randomized controlled trial. Adult patients undergoing major hepatic resections for any indication will be randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to either hypovolemic phlebotomy and usual care or usual care alone. Exclusion criteria will be minor resections, preoperative hemoglobin <100g/L, renal insufficiency, and other contraindication to hypovolemic phlebotomy. The primary outcome will be the proportion of patients receiving at least one allogeneic RBC transfusion unit within 30 days of the onset of surgery. Secondary outcomes will include transfusion of other allogeneic blood products, blood loss, morbidity, mortality, and intraoperative physiologic parameters. The surgical team will be blinded to the intervention. Randomization will occur on the morning of surgery. The sample size will comprise 440 patients. Enrolment will occur at four Canadian academic liver surgery centers over a 4-year period. Ethics approval will be obtained at participating sites before enrolment. DISCUSSION: The results of this randomized control trial will provide high-quality evidence regarding the use of hypovolemic phlebotomy in major liver resection and its effects on RBC transfusion. If proven to be effective, this intervention could become standard of care in liver operations internationally and become incorporated within perioperative patient blood management programs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03651154 . Registered on August 29 2018.

Should Cell Salvage Be Used in Liver Resection and Transplantation? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of intraoperative blood cell salvage and autotransfusion (IBSA) use on red blood cell (RBC) transfusion and postoperative outcomes in liver surgery. BACKGROUND: Intraoperative RBC transfusions are common in liver surgery and associated with increased morbidity. IBSA can be utilized to minimize allogeneic transfusion. A theoretical risk of cancer dissemination has limited IBSA adoption in oncologic surgery. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched from inception until May 2021. All studies comparing IBSA use with control in liver surgery were included. Screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were conducted independently, in duplicate. The primary outcome was intraoperative allogeneic RBC transfusion (proportion of patients and volume of blood transfused). Core secondary outcomes included: overall survival and disease-free survival, transfusion-related complications, length of hospital stay, and hospitalization costs. Data from transplant and resection studies were analyzed separately. Random effects models were used for meta-analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-one observational studies were included (16 transplant, 5 resection, n=3433 patients). Seventeen studies incorporated oncologic indications. In transplant, IBSA was associated with decreased allogeneic RBC transfusion [mean difference -1.81, 95% confidence interval (-3.22, -0.40), P =0.01, I 2 =86%, very-low certainty]. Few resection studies reported on transfusion for meta-analysis. No significant difference existed in overall survival or disease-free survival in liver transplant [hazard ratio (HR)=1.12 (0.75, 1.68), P =0.59, I 2 =0%; HR=0.93 (0.57, 1.48), P =0.75, I 2 =0%] and liver resection [HR=0.69 (0.45, 1.05), P =0.08, I 2 =0%; HR=0.93 (0.59, 1.45), P =0.74, I 2 =0%]. CONCLUSION: IBSA may reduce intraoperative allogeneic RBC transfusion without compromising oncologic outcomes. The current evidence base is limited in size and quality, and high-quality randomized controlled trials are needed.

The impact of prophylactic negative pressure wound therapy on surgical site infections in pancreatic resection: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infections (SSI) cause significant morbidity. Prophylactic negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) may promote wound healing and decrease SSI. The objective is to evaluate the effect of prophylactic NPWT on SSI in patients undergoing pancreatectomy. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched from inception until April 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing prophylactic NPWT to standard dressings in patients undergoing pancreatectomy were included. The primary outcome was the risk of SSI. Secondary outcomes included the risk of superficial and deep SSI and organ space infection (OSI). Random effects models were used for meta-analysis. RESULTS: Four single-centre RCTs including 309 patients were identified. Three studies were industry-sponsored, and two were at high risk of bias. There was no significant difference in the risk of SSI in patients receiving NPWT vs. control (14% vs. 21%, RR = 0.72, 95%CI = 0.32-1.60, p = 0.42, I2 = 53%). Likewise, there was no significant difference in the risk of superficial and deep SSI or OSI. No significant difference was found on subgroup analysis of patients at high risk of wound infection or on sensitivity analysis of studies at low risk of bias. CONCLUSION: Prophylactic NPWT does not significantly decrease the risk of SSI among patients undergoing pancreatectomy. Insufficient evidence exists to justify the routine use of NPWT.

Prevention of postoperative pancreatic fistula after pancreatectomy: results of a Canadian RAND/UCLA appropriateness expert panel.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to define the appropriateness of interventions for the prevention of postoperative pancreatic fistulas (POPF) after pancreatectomy, given the lack of consistent data on this topic. METHODS: Using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method, we assembled an expert panel to rate clinical scenarios for interventions to prevent POPF after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) and distal pancreatectomy (DP). RESULTS: The following interventions were rated appropriate: individualized risk prediction for all patients; perioperative pasireotide administration for patients undergoing PD who have a soft pancreatic gland and a pancreatic duct size of less 3 mm and for patients undergoing DP; pancreaticogastrostomy for patients undergoing PD who have a soft pancreatic gland and pancreaticojejunostomy for PD for patients with a pancreatic duct size of 6 mm or greater regardless of pancreatic gland texture; duct-to-mucosa anastomosis for all patients undergoing PD and dunking anastomosis for patients undergoing PD who have a pancreatic duct size of less than 3 mm with a firm pancreatic gland; simple stapled and reinforced stapled transection for all DP; surgical drains for PD and DP in patients with a soft pancreatic gland; and open and minimally invasive surgery for DP and open surgery for PD. The following were rated inappropriate: gastrointestinal anastomosis for stump closure in all DP and omission of surgical drain in PD for patients with a pancreatic duct diameter less than 3 mm and a soft pancreatic gland. CONCLUSION: The expert panel identified appropriate and inappropriate scenarios for POPF prevention following pancreatectomy, to provide guidance to clinicians. However, the appropriateness of the interventions in the majority of the clinical scenarios was rated as uncertain, demonstrating equipoise.

Exploring human factors in the operating room: scoping review of training offerings for healthcare professionals.

BACKGROUND: Human factors (HF) integration can improve patient safety in the operating room (OR), but the depth of current knowledge remains unknown. This study aimed to explore the content of HF training for the operative environment. METHODS: We searched six bibliographic databases for studies describing HF interventions for the OR. Skills taught were classified using the Chartered Institute of Ergonomics and Human Factors (CIEHF) framework, consisting of 67 knowledge areas belonging to five categories: psychology; people and systems; methods and tools; anatomy and physiology; and work environment. RESULTS: Of 1851 results, 28 studies were included, representing 27 unique interventions. HF training was mostly delivered to interdisciplinary groups (n = 19; 70 per cent) of surgeons (n = 16; 59 per cent), nurses (n = 15; 56 per cent), and postgraduate surgical trainees (n = 11; 41 per cent). Interactive methods (multimedia, simulation) were used for teaching in all studies. Of the CIEHF knowledge areas, all 27 interventions taught 'behaviours and attitudes' (psychology) and 'team work' (people and systems). Other skills included 'communication' (n = 25; 93 per cent), 'situation awareness' (n = 23; 85 per cent), and 'leadership' (n = 20; 74 per cent). Anatomy and physiology were taught by one intervention, while none taught knowledge areas under work environment. CONCLUSION: Expanding HF education requires a broader inclusion of the entirety of sociotechnical factors such as contributions of the work environment, technology, and broader organizational culture on OR safety to a wider range of stakeholders.

Exploring human factors in the operating room: a protocol for a scoping review of training offerings for healthcare professionals.

INTRODUCTION: Applying human factors principles in surgical care has potential benefits for patient safety and care delivery. Although different theoretical frameworks of human factors exist, how providers are being trained in human factors and how human factors are being understood in vivo in the operating room (OR) remain unknown. The aim of this scoping review is to evaluate the application of human factors for the OR environment as described by education and training offerings for healthcare professionals. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This scoping review will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Health and Psychosocial Instruments and ERIC databases were searched on August 2020 from inception to identify relevant studies that describe the content, application and impact of human factors training for healthcare professionals or trainees who work in or interface with the OR environment. Titles, abstracts and full texts will be independently screened by two authors for eligible studies. Any disagreements will be resolved by discussion or by a third author when disagreement persists. Study information and training characteristics, such as the training tool used and type of learners and teachers, will be charted and summarised, and key themes in human factors training will be identified. Each training offering will be classified under the appropriate knowledge area(s) of human factors described by the Chartered Institute of Ergonomics & Human Factors (CIEHF). Themes that are not captured by the CIEHF framework will be independently recorded by two authors and included based on group discussion and consensus. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Research ethics board approval is not required for this scoping review. The findings of this study will be disseminated at local and national conferences and will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.

Passive Versus Active Intra-Abdominal Drainage Following Pancreatic Resection: Does A Superior Drainage System Exist? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is a major source of morbidity following pancreatic resection. Surgically placed drains under suction or gravity are routinely used to help mitigate the complications associated with POPF. Controversy exists as to whether one of these drain management strategies is superior. The objective was to identify and compare the incidence of POPF, adverse events, and resource utilization associated with passive gravity (PG) versus active suction (AS) drainage following pancreatic resection. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to May 18, 2020. Outcomes of interest included POPF, post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), surgical site infection (SSI), other major morbidity, and resource utilization. Descriptive qualitative and pooled quantitative meta-analyses were performed. One randomized control trial and five cohort studies involving 10 663 patients were included. Meta-analysis found no difference in the odds of developing POPF between AS and PG (p = 0.78). There were no differences in other endpoints including PPH (p = 0.58), SSI (wound p = 0.21, organ space p = 0.05), major morbidity (p = 0.71), or resource utilization (p = 0.72). The risk of POPF or other adverse outcomes is not impacted by drain management following pancreatic resection. Based on current evidence, a suggestion cannot be made to support the use of one drain over another at this time. There is a trend toward increased intra-abdominal wound infections with AS drains (p = 0.05) that merits further investigation.

Use of Propensity Score Methodology in Contemporary High-Impact Surgical Literature.

BACKGROUND: Propensity score (PS) analysis is a statistical method commonly used in observational trials to account for confounding. Improper use of PS analysis can bias the effect estimate. The aim of this study is to review the use and reporting of PS methods in high-impact surgical journals with a focus on propensity score matching (PSM). STUDY DESIGN: The 10 surgical journals with the highest impact factors were searched to identify studies using PS analysis from January 1, 2016 to December 14, 2018. We selected evaluation criteria for the conduct of PS analysis based on previous reports. Two authors systematically appraised the quality of reporting of PS analyses. Univariate and multivariate regression was performed to determine the relationship between appropriate use of PSM and study conclusion. RESULTS: Three hundred and three studies using PS analysis were included. Ninety-one percent (n = 275) of studies included the covariates used to generate the PS and 79% (n = 239) included the type of regression model used. Ninety percent (n = 272) of studies did not justify the covariates included in their PS. Eighty-four percent of studies used PSM (n = 254), with 48% (n = 123) failing to assess covariate balance between groups. We found that justification of the selection of covariates included in the PS and the characterization of unmatched patients were both associated with lower odds of the study finding a significant result (odds ratio 0.37; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.87; p = 0.02 and odds ratio 0.35; 95% CI 0.17 to 0.75; p = 0.007, respectively, at multivariate logistic regression). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that even in research published in high-quality surgical journals, several studies report their PS methodology inadequately. The inadequate conduct of PS analysis can impact a study's conclusion.

The safety and efficacy of hypovolemic phlebotomy on blood loss and transfusion in liver surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Hypovolemic phlebotomy (HP) is a novel intervention that involves intraoperative removal of whole blood (7-10 mL/kg) without volume replacement. The subsequent central venous pressure (CVP) reduction is hypothesized to decrease blood loss and the need for blood transfusion. The objective was to conduct a systematic assessment of the safety and efficacy of HP on blood loss and transfusion in the liver surgery literature. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched. Outcomes of interest included blood loss, allogenic red blood cell transfusion, postoperative adverse events, and CVP change. A qualitative synthesis and meta-analysis were performed as appropriate. RESULTS: Four cohort studies, one case series, and three randomized controlled trials involving 2255 patients were included. Meta-analysis of studies involving liver resections for any indication (n = 6) found no difference in transfusion (OR 0.38, p = 0.12) or incidence of adverse events with HP compared to non-use. Pooling of studies involving liver resections for an underlying pathology (n = 4) revealed HP was associated with significant reduction in transfusion (OR 0.25, p = 0.03) but no differences in blood loss (-173 mL, p = 0.17). CONCLUSION: This review suggests HP is safe and associated with decreased transfusion in patients undergoing liver surgery. It supports further investigation.

Standardization of early drain removal following pancreatic resection: proposal of the "Ottawa pancreatic drain algorithm".

BACKGROUND: Early drain removal after pancreatic resection is encouraged for individuals with low postoperative day 1 drain amylase levels (POD1 DA) to mitigate associated morbidity. Although various protocols for drain management have been published, there is a need to assess the implementation of a standardized protocol. METHODS: The Ottawa pancreatic drain algorithm (OPDA), based on POD1 DA and effluent volume, was developed and implemented at our institution. A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted of all patients undergoing pancreatic resection January 1, 2016-October 30, 2017, excluding November and December 2016 (one month before and after OPDA implementation). RESULTS: 42 patients pre-implementation and 53 patients post-implementation were included in the analysis. The median day of drain removal was significantly reduced after implementation of the OPDA (8 vs. 5 days; p = 0.01). Early drain removal appeared safe with no difference in reoperation or readmission rate after protocol implementation (p = 0.39; p = 0.76). On subgroup analysis, median length of stay was significantly shorter following OPDA implementation for patients who underwent DP and did not develop a postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) (6 vs 10 days, p = 0.03). Although the incidence of both surgical site infection and POPF were reduced following the intervention, neither reached statistical significance (38.1 to 28.3%, p = 0.31; and 38.1 to 28.3%, p = 0.31 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Implementing the OPDA was associated with earlier drain removal and decreased length of stay in patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy who did not develop POPF, without increased morbidity. Standardizing drain removal may help facilitate early drain removal after pancreatic resection at other institutions.

Passive versus active intra-abdominal drainage following pancreatic resection: does a superior drainage system exist? A protocol for systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) is the most common cause of major morbidity following pancreatic resection. Intra-abdominal drains are frequently positioned adjacent to the pancreatic anastomosis or transection margin at the time of surgery to aid in detection and management of CR-POPF. Drains can either evacuate fluid by passive gravity (PG) or be attached to a closed suction (CS) system using negative pressure. There is controversy as to whether one of these two systems is superior. The objective of this review is to identify and compare the incidence of adverse events (AEs) and resource utilisation associated with PG and CS drainage following pancreatic resections. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials will be searched from inception to April 2019, to identify interventional and observational studies comparing PG and CS drains following pancreatic resection. The primary outcome is POPF as defined by the International Study Group for Pancreatic Fistula in 2017. Secondary outcomes include postoperative AE, resource utilisation (length of stay, return to emergency department, readmission and reintervention), time to drain removal and quality of life. Study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment will be performed independently, by two reviewers. A meta-analysis will be conducted if deemed statistically appropriate. Subgroup analysis by study design will be performed. Study heterogeneity will be calculated with the χ2 test and reported as I2 statistics. Statistical analyses will be conducted and displayed using RevMan V.5.3 ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required. The results of this study will be submitted to relevant conferences for presentation and peer-reviewed journals for publication. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019123647.

Immunosuppressed Patients with Crohn's Disease Are at Increased Risk of Postoperative Complications: Results from the ACS-NSQIP Database.

BACKGROUND: The impact of immunosuppressants on postoperative complications following colon resections for Crohn's disease remains controversial. This study aimed to compare postoperative outcomes between immunosuppressed and immunocompetent patients with Crohn's disease undergoing elective colon resection. METHODS: Analysis of 30-day outcomes using a cohort from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program colectomy-specific database was performed. The database is populated by trained clinical reviewers who collect 30-day postoperative outcomes for patients treated at participating North-American institutions. Adult patients who underwent an elective colectomy between 2011 and 2015 were included. Immunosuppression for Crohn's disease was predefined as use of regular corticosteroids or immunosuppressants within 30 days of the operation. Patients who received chemotherapy within 90 days of surgery, and patients who had disseminated cancer, preoperative shock, or emergency surgery were excluded. Primary outcome was infectious complications. RESULTS: Three thousand eight hundred sixty patients with Crohn's disease required elective colon resection and met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 2483 were immunosuppressed and 1377 were immunocompetent. On multivariate analysis, the odds of infectious complications [OR 1.25; 95% CI (1.033-1.523)], overall surgical site infection [1.40; (1.128-1.742)], organ space surgical site infection [1.47; (1.094-1.984)], and anastomotic leak [1.51; (1.018-2.250)] were significantly higher for immunosuppressed compared to immunocompetent patients with Crohn's disease. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with Crohn's disease who were on immunosuppressant medications within 30 days of elective colectomy had significantly increased rates of infectious complications, overall surgical site infection, organ space surgical site infection, and anastomotic leak compared to patients who were not on immunosuppressive agents.

Embryology, Anatomy, and Imaging of the Biliary Tree.

"The anatomy of the biliary tree is notoriously variable. This variation is the bane of the hepatobiliary surgeon, to whom an understanding of biliary anatomic variation is key to the planning and safe conduct of liver surgery, from oncological resections to split-liver transplantation. The hepatic diverticulum, also termed "the liver bud," is the first semblance of the biliary system in the human embryo. A variety of techniques used in the mid twentieth century for imaging the biliary tree have since been abandoned in favor of more practical, safer, less invasive, and more sensitive and specific contemporary methods."

Hypovolemic phlebotomy in liver surgery is associated with decreased red blood cell transfusion.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative red blood cell (RBC) transfusion is associated with poor outcomes in liver surgery. Hypovolemic phlebotomy (HP) is a novel intervention hypothesized to decrease transfusion requirements. The objective of this study was to examine this hypothesis. METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent liver resection at one institution (2010-2016) were included. Factors found to be predictive of transfusion on univariate analysis and those previously published were modeled using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 361 patients underwent liver resection (50% major). HP was performed in 45 patients. Phlebotomized patients had a greater proportion of primary malignancy (31% vs 18%) and major resection (84% vs 45%). Blood loss was significantly lower with phlebotomy in major resections (400 vs 700 mL). Nadir central venous pressure was significantly lower with HP (2.5 vs 5 cm H2O). On multivariate logistic regression, HP (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.068-0.57, p = 0.0029), major liver resection (OR 2.91, 95% CI 1.64-5.18, p = 0.0003), preoperative hemoglobin < 125 g/L (OR 6.02, 95% CI 3.44-10.56, p < 0.0001), and underlying liver disease (OR 2.24, 95% CI 1.27-3.95, p = 0.0051) were significantly associated with perioperative RBC transfusion. CONCLUSION: Hypovolemic phlebotomy appears to be strongly associated with a reduction in RBC transfusion requirements in liver resection, independent of other known risk factors.

Laparoscopic retrieval of a sewing needle from the liver: A case report.

INTRODUCTION: Less than 1% of ingested foreign bodies will require surgical management. An uncommon complication of ingested foreign body is migration to the liver. We present a case of laparoscopic removal of an intrahepatic foreign body. PRESENTATION OF CASE: 32-year-old female presented with a four month history of epigastric abdominal pain following suspected foreign body ingestion. CT scan demonstrated a metallic object lying in the left lateral segment of the liver. The patient was brought to the operating room where the object was removed laparoscopically and was found to be a sewing needle. DISCUSSION: Hepatic foreign bodies are an uncommon entity and typically result from a transcutaneous or ingested (e.g., gastrointestinal) source. Symptoms are often vague and can develop remote from the time of ingestion. Surgical management is warranted for symptomatic intrahepatic foreign bodies. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopy is an effective surgical method for removal of intrahepatic foreign bodies in some cases.

Is There a Role for Oral Antibiotic Preparation Alone Before Colorectal Surgery? ACS-NSQIP Analysis by Coarsened Exact Matching.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies demonstrated reduced postoperative complications using combined mechanical bowel and oral antibiotic preparation before elective colorectal surgery. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the impact of these 2 interventions on surgical site infections, anastomotic leak, ileus, major morbidity, and 30-day mortality in a large cohort of elective colectomies. DESIGN: This is a retrospective comparison of 30-day outcomes using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program colectomy-targeted database with coarsened exact matching. SETTINGS: Interventions were performed in hospitals participating in the national surgical database. PATIENTS: Adult patients who underwent elective colectomy from 2012 to 2014 were included. INTERVENTIONS: Preoperative bowel preparations were evaluated. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes measured were surgical site infections, anastomotic leak, postoperative ileus, major morbidity, and 30-day mortality. RESULTS: A total of 40,446 patients were analyzed: 13,219 (32.7%), 13,935 (34.5%), and 1572 (3.9%) in the no-preparation, mechanical bowel preparation alone, and oral antibiotic preparation alone groups, and 11,720 (29.0%) in the combined preparation group. After matching, 9800, 1461, and 8819 patients remained in the mechanical preparation, oral antibiotic preparation, and combined preparation groups for comparison with patients without preparation. On conditional logistic regression of matched patients, oral antibiotic preparation alone was protective of surgical site infection (OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.45-0.87), anastomotic leak (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.34-0.97), ileus (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.59-0.98), and major morbidity (OR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.55-0.96), but not mortality (OR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.08-1.18), whereas a regimen of combined oral antibiotics and mechanical bowel preparation was protective for all 5 major outcomes. When directly compared with oral antibiotic preparation alone, the combined regimen was not associated with any difference in any of the 5 postoperative outcomes. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its retrospective design with heterogeneous data. CONCLUSIONS: Oral antibiotic preparation alone significantly reduced surgical site infection, anastomotic leak, postoperative ileus, and major morbidity after elective colorectal surgery. A combined regimen of oral antibiotics and mechanical bowel preparation offered no superiority when compared with oral antibiotics alone for these outcomes. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A358.