Timing to Rib Fixation in Patients With Flail Chest.

INTRODUCTION: Flail chest (FC) after blunt trauma is associated with significant morbidity and prolonged hospitalizations. The goal of this study was to examine the relationship between timing of rib fixation (ORIF) and pulmonary morbidity and mortality in patients with FC. METHODS: FC patients were identified from the Trauma Quality Improvement Program database over 3-year, ending 2019. Demographics, severity of injury and shock, time to ORIF, pulmonary morbidity, and mortality were recorded. Youden's index identified optimal time to ORIF. Patients were compared based on undergoing ORIF versus nonoperative management, then for patients undergoing ORIF based on time from admission to operation, utilizing Youden's index to determine the preferred time for fixation. Multivariable logistic regression determined predictors of pulmonary morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: 20,457 patients were identified: 3347 (16.4%) underwent ORIF. The majority were male (73%) with median age and injury severity score of 58 and 22, respectively. Patients undergoing ORIF were clinically similar to those managed nonoperatively but had increased pulmonary morbidity (27.6 versus 15.2%, P < 0.0001) and reduced mortality (2.9 versus 11.7%, P < 0.0001). Multivariable logistic regression identified ORIF as the only modifiable risk factor significantly associated with reduced mortality (odds ratio: 0.26; 95% CI:0.21-0.32, P < 0.0001). Youden's index identified the inflection point for time to ORIF as 4 d postinjury: EARLY (≤4 d) and LATE (>4 d). EARLY fixation was associated with a significant decrease in ventilator days, intensive care unit and hospital length of stay, and pulmonary morbidity. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing ORIF for FC experienced increased pulmonary morbidity; however, had an associated reduced mortality benefit compared to the nonoperative cohort. EARLY ORIF was associated with a reduction in pulmonary morbidity, without impacting the mortality benefit found with ORIF. Thus, for patients with FC, ORIF performed within 4 d postinjury may help reduce pulmonary morbidity, length of stay, and mortality.

Segmental Duodenal Resections: Toward Defining Indications, Complexity, and Coding.

BACKGROUND: Segmental resections of the duodenum are uncommonly performed and are technically challenging due to intimate relationships with the biliary tree, pancreas, and superior mesenteric vessels. The objective of this study was to assess indications, operative strategy, and outcomes of duodenal resections and to advocate that this form of resection deserves its own unique Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) and Relative Value Unit (RVU) structure. METHODS: Patients undergoing isolated and partial duodenal resection from 2008-2023 at University of Tennessee Health Science Center affiliated hospitals were retrospectively reviewed. Factors examined included clinical presentation, diagnostic evaluation, operative time, and technique, 90-day morbidity and mortality, and pathologic and survival outcomes. RESULTS: Thirty-one patients were identified with majority female and a median age of 61. Diagnostic studies included computed tomography and upper (including push) endoscopy. Reconstruction most often involved side-to-side duodenojejunostomy following distal duodenal resection. Intraoperative evaluation (IOE) of the biliary tree was utilized to assess and protect pancreaticobiliary structures in eleven patients. Median operative time was 206 min, increasing to 236 min when IOE was necessary. Procedure-related morbidity was 23% with one 90-day mortality. Median postoperative length of stay was 9 days. Pathology included benign adenoma, adenocarcinoma, GIST, neuroendocrine neoplasms, and erosive metastatic deposit. CONCLUSION: Duodenal resections can be effectively employed to safely address diverse pathologies. These procedures are characterized by long operative times, extended hospital stays, and an incidence of postoperative complications that mimics that of pancreatic resection. This work highlights the need for modification to the CPT system to accurately define these distinct procedures for future research endeavors and development of a more accurate valuation unit.

Role of Endovascular Stenting in Patients with Traumatic Iliac Artery Injury.

BACKGROUND: Common and external iliac artery injuries (IAI) portend significant morbidity and mortality. The goal of this study was to examine the impact of mechanism of injury and type of repair on outcomes and identify the optimal repair for patients with traumatic IAI using a large, national dataset. STUDY DESIGN: Patients undergoing operative repair for IAI were identified from the Trauma Quality Improvement Program database during a 5-year timespan, ending in 2019. Age, sex, race, severity of injury, severity of shock, type of iliac repair (open or endovascular), mechanism, morbidity and mortality were recorded. Patients with IAI were stratified by both type of repair and mechanism and compared. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify independent predictors of mortality. RESULTS: Operative IAI was identified in 507 patients. Of these injuries, 309 (61%) were penetrating and 346 (68.2%) involved the external iliac artery. The majority of patients were male (82%) with a median age and ISS of 31 and 20, respectively. Endovascular repair was performed in 31% of cases. For patients with penetrating injuries, the type of repair impacted neither morbidity nor mortality. For blunt-injured patients, endovascular repair was associated with lower morbidity (29.3% vs 41.3%; p = 0.082) and significantly reduced mortality (14.6% vs 26.7%; p = 0.037) compared with the open-repair approach. Multivariable logistic regression identified endovascular repair as the only modifiable risk factor associated with decreased mortality (odds ratio 0.34; 95% CI 0.15 to 0.79; p = 0.0116). CONCLUSIONS: Traumatic IAI causes significant morbidity and mortality. Endovascular repair was identified as the only modifiable predictor of decreased mortality in blunt-injured patients with traumatic IAI. Therefore, for select patients with blunt IAIs, an endovascular repair should be the preferred approach.

Impact of Endovascular Stenting on Outcomes in Patients with Traumatic Subclavian Artery Injury.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic subclavian artery injury (SAI) remains uncommon but can lead to significant morbidity and mortality. Although open and endovascular repair offer excellent limb salvage rates, their role in blunt and penetrating injuries is not well defined. The goal of this study was to examine the effect of mechanism of injury and type of repair on outcomes in patients with traumatic SAI. STUDY DESIGN: Patients undergoing procedures for traumatic SAI were identified from the Trauma Quality Improvement Program database between 2015 and 2018. Demographics, severity of injury and shock, type of subclavian repair (open vs endovascular), morbidity, and mortality were recorded. Patients with SAI were stratified by mechanism and type of repair and compared. Multivariable logistic regression (MLR) analysis was performed to determine independent predictors of mortality. RESULTS: Seven hundred thirty-seven patients undergoing procedures for SAI were identified. Of these, 39% were penetrating. The majority were male (80%) with a median age and Injury Severity Score (ISS) of 37 and 21, respectively. 58% of patients were managed endovascularly. For patients with blunt injury, the type of repair affected neither morbidity (25% vs 19%, p = 0.116) nor mortality (11% vs 10%, p = 0.70). For patients with penetrating injuries, endovascular repair had significantly lower morbidity (12% vs 22%, p = 0.028) and mortality (6% vs 21%, p = 0.001). MLR identified endovascular repair as the only modifiable risk factor associated with reduced mortality (odds ratio, 0.35; 95% confidence interval, 0.14 to 0.87, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: SAI results in significant morbidity and mortality regardless of mechanism. Although the type of repair did not affect mortality in patients with blunt injury, endovascular repair was identified as the only modifiable predictor of reduced mortality in patients with penetrating injuries.