Ureteral injuries in colorectal surgery and the impact of laparoscopic and robotic-assisted approaches.

BACKGROUND: Ureteral injury is a feared complication in colorectal surgery that has been increasing over the past decade. Some have attributed this to an increased adoption of minimally invasive surgery (MIS), but the literature is hardly conclusive. In this study we aim to further assess the overall trend of ureteral injuries in colorectal surgery, and investigate propensity adjusted contributions from open and MIS to include robotic-assisted surgery. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of colorectal surgeries from 2006 to 2016 using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify predisposing and protective factors. Demographics, hospital factors, and case-mix differences for open and MIS were accounted for via propensity analysis. The NIS coding structure changed in 2015, which could introduce a potential source of incongruity in complication rates over time. As a result, all statistical analyses included only the first nine years of data, or were conducted before and after the change for comparison. RESULTS: Of 514,162 colorectal surgeries identified there were 1598 ureteral injuries (0.31%). Ureteral injuries were found to be increasing through 2015 (2.3/1000 vs 3.3/1000; p < 0.001) and through the coding transition to 2016 (4.8/1000; p < 0.001). This trend was entirely accounted for by injuries made during open surgery, with decreasing injury rates for MIS over time. Adjusted odds ratio (OR) for ureteral injury with all MIS vs. open cases was 0.81 (95% CI 0.70-0.93, p = 0.003) and for robotic-assisted surgery alone versus open cases was 0.50 (95% CI 0.33-0.77, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence rate of ureteral injuries during open colorectal surgery is increasing over time, but have been stable or decreasing for MIS cases. These findings hold even after using propensity score analysis. More research is needed to further delineate the impact of MIS and robotic-assisted surgery on ureteral injuries.

Time to weigh in on obesity and associated comorbidities in combat-wounded amputees.

BACKGROUND: The Joint Trauma System database estimates that about 1,200 individuals have sustained a combat-related amputation during the Global War on Terror. Previous retrospective studies have demonstrated that combat-related amputees develop obesity and cardiovascular disease, but the incidence of obesity and associated comorbidities in this population is unknown. The objectives of this study are to determine the prevalence of obesity in the military amputee population and to compare this with the general population. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of 978 patients who sustained a combat-related amputation from 2003 to 2014. Prevalence of obesity and comorbid conditions were determined. A multivariate logistic regression model was performed to identify risk factors for postamputation obesity. Kaplan-Meier curves were constructed using obesity as the event of interest. RESULTS: A total of 1,233 charts were reviewed with 978 patients included for analysis. The median age of injury was 24 years. Median follow-up time was 8.7 years, ranging from 0.5 years to 16.9 years. The average Injury Severity Score was 23.3. The average body mass index preinjury was 25.6 kg/m2, and the average most recent corrected body mass index was found to be 31.4 kg/m2. Prevalence of comorbidities was higher in the amputee population. Fifty percent of patients who progressed to obesity did so within 1.3 years. CONCLUSION: There is a notable prevalence of obesity that develops in the amputee population that is much higher than the general population. We determined that the amputee population is at risk, and these patients should be closely monitored for 1 to 2.5 years following injury. This study provides a targeted period for which monitoring and intervention can be implemented. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Retrospective, basic science, outcomes analysis, level III/IV.

Oxidative Stress Alters Angiogenic and Antimicrobial Content of Extracellular Vesicles and Improves Flap Survival.

Extracellular vesicles (EVs) secreted from adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (ADSCs) (ADSC-EVs) improve flap survival after ischemia-reperfusion injury. Exposure of parent ADSCs to oxidative stress has been shown to enhance this effect, but mechanisms are unclear. We aimed to determine whether angiogenesis-promoting protein and microRNA (miRNA) content is altered in EVs after preconditioning with hydrogen peroxide (H2O2 ADSC-EVs) and whether H2O2 ADSC-EVs can increase viability of random pattern skin flaps. METHODS: EVs secreted by human ADSCs were isolated after culture in EV-depleted medium ± H2O2. Nanoparticle tracking analysis determined size and concentration of purified EVs. Mass spectrometry and small RNA next-generation sequencing were performed to compare proteomic and miRNA profiles. ADSC-EVs, H2O2 ADSC-EVs, or vehicle were injected into random pattern skin flaps of BALB/c mice (4-5 mice per group). Viable and necrotic areas were measured on day 7, and tissues underwent histologic analysis. RESULTS: Angiogenic and antimicrobial protein content of EVs was altered with H2O2 preconditioning. Functional enrichment analysis identified constitutive photomorphogenesis 9 signalosome (known to direct vascular endothelial growth factor production) as the major enriched Gene Ontology term unique to H2O2 ADSC-EVs. Two miRNAs were increased, and 12 (including 10 antiangiogenic miRNAs) were reduced in H2O2 ADSC-EVs. Enhanced viability (P < 0.05) of flaps treated with H2O2 ADSC-EVs compared with vehicle corresponded to increased capillary density in the H2O2 group (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Altered protein and miRNA content in ADSC-EVs after H2O2 pretreatment likely contributes to enhanced therapeutic effects on flap survival observed in preclinical models.

Impact of clinical fellowships on academic productivity in departments of surgery.

BACKGROUND: Research and innovation are crucial to advancements in medicine and improvements in patient care. The contribution of surgical fellowships to scholarly productivity is unclear. The objective of this study was to determine the impact of subspecialty fellowships on academic output in departments of surgery. METHODS: This cross-sectional study examined fellowships offered at the top 50 university-based National Institutes of Health-funded and top 5 academically prolific hospital-based departments of surgery. Publications, citations, and National Institutes of Health funding history were determined for 4,015 faculty. χ2 and t tests were used as appropriate. RESULTS: Cardiothoracic surgery fellowships are offered at all departments, while other surgical fellowships are offered in 52 of 55 departments (96.4%). Median department publications/citations increased with the number of fellowships offered in addition to cardiothoracic surgery: no fellowship (27 ± 93/437 ± 2,509), 1-3 fellowships (34 ± 90/559 ± 3,046), and 4 or more fellowships (40 ± 97/716 ± 3,200, P < .05). Significant divisional improvements in publications/citations and National Institutes of Health funding were observed for those with fellowship programs in pediatric, breast, and plastic surgery (P < .05). No differences in departmental National Institutes of Health funding rates were observed based on number of fellowships offered. CONCLUSION: Based on publications/citations and National Institutes of Health funding, it seems that select fellowships are associated with improved scholarly activity. Departments may wish to consider the academic benefits of offering these fellowship types.

Is there an impending loss of academically productive trauma surgical faculty? An analysis of 4,015 faculty.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this work was to compare the academic impact of trauma surgery faculty relative to faculty in general surgery and other surgery subspecialties. METHODS: Scholarly metrics were determined for 4,015 faculty at the top 50 National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded university-based departments and five hospital-based surgery departments. RESULTS: Overall, 317 trauma surgical faculty (8.2%) were identified. This compared to 703 other general surgical faculty (18.2%) and 2,830 other subspecialty surgical faculty (73.5%). The average size of the trauma surgical division was six faculty. Overall, 43% were assistant professors, 29% were associate professors, and 28% were full professors, while 3.1% had PhD, 2.5% had MD and PhD, and, 16.3% were division chiefs/directors. Compared with general surgery, there were no differences regarding faculty academic levels or leadership positions. Other surgical specialties had more full professors (39% vs. 28%; p < 0.05) and faculty with research degrees (PhD, 7.7%; and MD and PhD, 5.7%). Median publications/citations were lower, especially for junior trauma surgical faculty (T) compared with general surgery (G) and other (O) surgical specialties: assistant professors (T, 9 publications/76 citations vs. G, 13/138, and O, 18/241; p < 0.05), associate professors (T, 22/351 vs. G, 36/700, and O, 47/846; p < 0.05), and professors (T, 88/2,234 vs. G, 93/2193; p = NS [not significant for either publications/citations] and O, 99/2425; p = NS). Publications/Citations for division chiefs/directors were comparable with other specialties: T, 77/1,595 vs. G, 103/2,081 and O, 74/1,738; p = NS, but were lower for all nonchief faculty; T, 23/368 vs. G, 30/528 and O, 37/658; p < 0.05. Trauma surgical faculty were less likely to have current or former NIH funding than other surgical specialties (17 % vs. 27%; p < 0.05), and this included a lower rate of R01/U01/P01 funding (5.5% vs. 10.8%; p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Senior trauma surgical faculty are as academically productive as other general surgical faculty and other surgical specialists. Junior trauma faculty, however, publish at a lower rate than other general surgery or subspecialty faculty. Causes of decreased academic productivity and lower NIH funding must be identified, understood, and addressed.