Validation of Tokyo guidelines 2018 for safety and mortality benefit from urgent ERCP in acute cholangitis across different age groups.

BACKGROUND: The 2018 Tokyo Guidelines (TG18) recommend urgent endoscopic biliary drainage based on acute cholangitis (AC) severity. Therefore, we evaluated the safety and mortality benefits of urgent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in different age groups. METHODS: Using International Classification of Diseases-10 (ICD-10) codes, we sampled adult AC patients from National Inpatient Sample. TG18 definition of cholangitis severity was used to identify patients with severe and nonsevere (mild or moderate) AC. Age categories were 18-64, 65-79, and 80 and above. Multivariate linear or logistic regression was used as appropriate. We used Stata, version 14.2, to perform analyses considering two-sided p < .05 as statistically significant. RESULTS: Among 137 100 patients, there were 93 365 (68.09%) patients with nonsevere cholangitis and 43 735 (31.91%) patients with severe cholangitis. Urgent ERCP (within 24 h) resulted in decreased mortality in all age groups for both severe and nonsevere AC. Post-sphincterotomy bleeding was more common in patients ≥80 years of age, whereas post-ERCP acute cholecystitis was more common in patients 65-79 years. The rates of post-ERCP pancreatitis, bile duct perforation, and duodenal perforation did not differ among the age groups. In addition, there were no differences in the rate of sedation-related complications between different age groups who underwent urgent ERCP. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the mortality benefit from urgent ERCP for AC in different age groups and describes the safety of performing urgent ERCP in patients of various ages. Therefore, we recommend that urgent ERCP be performed according to the TG18 guidelines regardless of age.

Retraction: Phase 2 Assessment of a New Functional Pain Scale by Comparing It to Traditional Pain Scales.

[This retracts the article DOI: 10.7759/cureus.24522.].

Phase 2 Assessment of a New Functional Pain Scale by Comparing It to Traditional Pain Scales.

Background Assessment of pain has always been subjective and is commonly assessed using a numeric pain scale (NPS) or Wong-Baker faces scale. The pain intensity score is not standardized and relies on individuals' past experiences. The disadvantage of using such pain assessment scales and treating the numbers can lead to overdosing on analgesics leading to unwanted side effects. The Robert Packer Hospital/Functional Pain Scale (RPH/FPS) was developed as a tool for the objective assessment of pain and its impact on a patient's function.  Aim The study aimed to validate the RPH/FPS scale against NPS and Wong-Baker faces scale in medical, surgical, and trauma patients. The patients' were also asked to rank the scales as one (1) being the most preferred to three (3) being the least preferred. Design This prospective, observational cohort study compares the two most common pain scales, the NPS and the Wong-Baker Faces, to the RPH/FPS. Methods Spearman correlation was used to test for correlation between the three scales, and Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare means between the RPH/FPS and NPS. The study participants were also asked to rate their preferences for the scales by rating the most preferred of the three scales as one (1) and the least preferred number three (3).  Results The RPH/FPS had a strong correlation with both the NPS and Wong-Baker Faces scales (RPH/FPS vs. NPS R=0.69, p<0.001: RPH-FPS vs. Wong-Baker Faces R=0.69, P<0.001). As for preferences, the RPH/FPS was ranked first on 36.9% of the surveys followed by NPS on 35.9%, and the Wong-Baker Faces on 22.3%. There were 4.9% of the surveys missing the preference rankings. Conclusion The results validate the RPH/FPS scale against the NPS and Wong-Baker Faces scales. This gives the clinicians a tool for objective assessment of pain and its effect on the recovery process, thereby minimizing the observed disconnect that sometimes happens between the reported pain intensity level and the providers' observation of the patient.

Does the Route of Cocaine Use Affect the Mortality and Outcomes of Cocaine-Induced Intestinal Ischemia? A Systematic Review.

Intestinal ischemia results from diminished perfusion of the colon resulting in tissue hypoxia. Anecdotal reports suggest that cocaine-induced intestinal ischemia has the highest mortality and longer length of stay among the vasoconstrictors. The present study aimed to summarize the available studies in the literature to assess the effect of routes of consumption on the outcomes of cocaine-induced intestinal ischemia. We conducted a systematic search of MEDLINE from inception through October 2019. Studies of cocaine-induced intestinal ischemia were included if data were available on comorbidities, mortality, and hospital length of stay (LOS). The study's primary outcomes were mortality and need for surgery, while secondary outcomes included the hospital length of stay, LACE index, and hospital score. Statistical tests used included linear and binary logistic regression. STATA 2015 was used, and P < 0.05 was statistically significant. Of the 304 studies, 8 case series and 45 case reports (n = 69 patients) met the inclusion criteria. Different routes of cocaine use had similar mortality odds and the need for surgery for intestinal ischemia. Hospital LOS showed significant difference among the subgroups. Readmission scores (LACE and hospital score) were higher for intravenous and smoking than ingestion and intranasal use (P < 0.05). In conclusion, different routes of cocaine use appear to have similar mortality odds for intestinal ischemia, which vary significantly among the different routes of cocaine consumption for the length of stay and readmission scores. Prompt recognition of the route of cocaine use is vital to improve the outcome. Large-scale and well-designed observational studies are needed to investigate this topic further.

Neutropenic Enterocolitis and Rapid Spontaneous Resolution of Portal Venous Gas: A Non-Respiratory Manifestation of COVID-19.

The COVID-19 pandemic is affecting millions across the globe. The population of immunosuppressed individuals are at greatest risk of morbidity and mortality. Data on COVID-19 induced illness in the immunocompromised host are sparse. We aim to highlight the possibility of atypical and non-respiratory presentations of COVID-19 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, SARS-CoV-2) in immunosuppressed individuals as our case reveals a rare COVID-19 associated GI presentation of neutropenic enterocolitis with bloody diarrhea.

Atypical Manifestation of COVID-19-Induced Myocarditis.

We present a case of a 39-year-old male who presented with chest pain without fever or respiratory symptoms. Troponins were elevated and electrocardiogram (ECG) was inconclusive for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Angiography revealed normal coronaries and the patient was found to be coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) positive; he was diagnosed with COVID-19 myocarditis. With the global pandemic, more cases are emerging regarding myocardial injury induced by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus. Although COVID-19 manifests primarily as respiratory disease, few cases of cardiac injury without respiratory involvement or febrile illness have been reported. This case illustrates that COVID-19 can present atypically and affect an isolated non-respiratory organ system.

Preoperative Endoscopic and Radiologic Evaluation of Bariatric Patients: What Do They Add?

BACKGROUND: Preoperative esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and barium swallow (BS) are commonly performed for evaluation in bariatric surgery patients. The routine use of these modalities has been controversial. METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database was performed to include primary bariatric surgery patients between March 2013 and August 2016. RESULTS: Two hundred nine patients were included. All the patients underwent preoperative EGD and BS. The mean age was 43.12 years and BMI 46.4 kg/m2. Reflux symptoms were present in 58.5% of patients. Preoperative EGD revealed abnormalities in 87.5% of patients: esophagitis (54.5%), Barrett's esophagus (5.3%), dysplasia (1%), and gastritis (51%). Endoscopic evidence of HH was documented in 52.2% of patients while only 34% of patients had evidence of HH in their BS. Of the asymptomatic patients, 80.2% had abnormal EGD. Helicobacter pylori on biopsy was found in 17.2% patients, out of which 47.2% were asymptomatic. Based on EGD findings, the choice of surgical procedure was changed in 3.34% of patients. Repair of HH was performed in 107 patients, with 68.2% (n = 73) symptomatic patients and 31.8% (n = 34) asymptomatic patients. On ROC analysis, EGD was better predictive of the presence of HH (AUC = 0.802, OR 5.20, p  =   < 0.0001) and symptoms were a poor indicator for GERD. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative EGD is abnormal in the majority of patients regardless of their symptoms. EGD is the only modality that can provide tissue sample, which can potentially determine the type of bariatric surgery. Given the low diagnostic accuracy of BS, its routine use can be eliminated.

A frailty index and the impact of frailty on postoperative outcomes in older patients after bariatric surgery.

BACKGROUND: The prognostic value of frailty in the elderly surgical population has been well studied across surgical specialties. However, no studies have yet explored the effects of frailty across the full spectrum of adverse events after bariatric surgery. OBJECTIVES: To study the impact of index-frailty on the full range of adverse short-term outcomes after bariatric surgery. METHODS: Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program data file for 2016 was used. Descriptive analyses, univariable, and multivariable regression models, assessed for discriminative and predictive capacities, were used to assess the effects of frailty on Clavien-Dindo categorized adverse outcomes within 30 days of bariatric surgery. Frailty index was modified from Canadian Study of Health and Aging Frailty Index. SETTING: Data pooled from American Society for Bariatric Surgery-accredited bariatric surgery centers, United States. RESULTS: A total of 21,426 patients aged ≥60 undergoing primary bariatric procedures were included. The prevalence of frailty as defined by the modified frailty index was 44.4%. Frail status was independently associated with higher odds of 30-day adverse events (Clavien-Dindo grades I, II, III, IV, and V). Frailty scores had weakly positive correlations with increasing age and increasing body mass index in the bariatric patients. CONCLUSION: Frailty can be used as a risk stratification modality for patients before bariatric surgery. Further research should focus on exploring the relationship between obesity and frailty and the effects of weight loss on frailty status of bariatric patients.

Development of a bariatric surgery specific risk assessment tool for perioperative myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative myocardial infarction (PMI) is a feared complication after surgery. Bariatric surgery, due to its intraabdominal nature, is traditionally considered an intermediate risk procedure. However, there are limited data on MI rates and its predictors in patients undergoing bariatric surgery. OBJECTIVES: To enumerate the prevalence of PMI after bariatric surgery and develop a risk assessment tool. SETTING: Bariatric surgery centers, United States. METHODS: Patients undergoing bariatric surgery were identified from the MBSAQIP participant use file (PUF) 2016. Preoperative characteristics, which correlated with PMI were identified by multivariable regression analysis. PUF 2015 was used to validate the scoring tool developed from PUF 2016. RESULTS: We identified 172,017 patients from PUF 2016. Event rate for MI within 30 days of the operation was .03%; with a mortality rate of 17.3% in patients with a PMI. Four variables correlated with PMI on regression, including history of a previous MI (odds ratio [OR] = 8.57, confidence interval [CI] = 3.4-21.0), preoperative renal insufficiency (OR = 3.83, CI = 1.2-11.4), hyperlipidemia (OR = 2.60, CI = 1.3-5.1), and age >50 (OR = 2.15, CI = 1.1-4.2). Each predicting variable was assigned a score and event rate for MI was assessed with increasing risk score in PUF 2015; the rate increased from 9.5 per 100,000 operations with a score of 0 to 3.2 per 100 with a score of 5. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of MI after bariatric surgery is lower than other intraabdominal surgeries. However, mortality with PMI is high. This scoring tool can be used by bariatric surgeons to identify patients who will benefit from focused perioperative cardiac workup.

Enhanced Recovery in Bariatric Surgery: A Study of Short-Term Outcomes and Compliance.

INTRODUCTION: The implementation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) guidelines has been widely studied among various surgical specialties. We aimed at comparing the perioperative outcomes and compliance with ERAS protocol in bariatric surgery at our center. METHODS: An observational review of a prospectively maintained database was performed. Patients who underwent primary bariatric surgery (gastric bypass or sleeve gastrectomy) between January 2011 and June 2018 were included. Patients were divided into pre- and post-ERAS groups. Data including basic demographic information, length of hospital stay, 30-day perioperative complications, and readmission rates were collected. Compliance with elements of ERAS was assessed using a combination of chart review and a prospectively implemented checklist. P < 0.05 was chosen to be statistically significant. RESULTS: A total of 435 patients were included: 239 patients in the pre-ERAS group and 196 patients in the post-ERAS group. There were no statistical differences in baseline demographics and major comorbidities between the 2 groups. The post-ERAS group had shorter length of hospital stay (2.23 vs 1.23, p < 0.001) and lower rates of 30-day postoperative morbidity (8.7 vs 4%, p = .04). There was no significant difference between the 2 groups with respect to readmissions rates. There was no mortality in either group. Overall compliance rates with ERAS elements were 85%; compliance increased significantly with the implementation of a checklist (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of ERAS program for bariatric surgery is safe and feasible. It reduces hospital stay and postoperative morbidity. Easy to implement strategies such as checklists should be encouraged in bariatric programs to aid in implementation and compliance with ERAS elements for perioperative care.