Consequences of anemia in geriatric hip fractures: how low is too low?

Background: The transfusion threshold for low hemoglobin (Hgb) in geriatric patients with hip fractures is widely debated. In certain populations, low Hgb is associated with poor outcomes. Our objective was to evaluate the relationship between lowest Hgb and outcome to identify the Hgb threshold where poor outcomes were more prevalent. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included consecutive patients with hip fractures, aged ≥60 years, evaluated at two level 1 trauma centers from 2018 to 2021. Patients who did not undergo operative fixation or had a length of stay <1 day were excluded. The primary endpoint was adverse outcome defined as the composite of myocardial infarction, stroke, new-onset arrhythmia or death. We compared lowest Hgb and possible confounders between patients with and without adverse outcomes. Classification and regression tree (CART) analysis was performed to identify the threshold for Hgb where adverse outcomes were more prevalent. Multivariate analysis was performed. Results: We evaluated 935 patients. Mean age was 80±10 years; admission Hgb was 12.5±1.7 g/dL. Diabetes was present in 20%, and 20% had coronary artery disease. Adverse outcomes were noted in 57 patients (6.1%). CART identified ≤7.1 g/dL as the Hgb threshold where adverse outcomes were more prevalent (15% vs. 4.1%, p<0.001). Additionally, a greater number of adverse outcomes were noted in the subgroup of patients having both a hemoglobin ≤7.1 g/dL and advanced age (age >79 years (22%)). After controlling for age, American Society of Anesthesiologist Physical Status Classification (ASA), antiplatelet medication, admission Hgb, time to operation and blood transfusions, lowest Hgb ≤7.1 g/dL remained a risk factor for adverse outcomes. Conclusions: In geriatric patients with isolated hip fractures, Hgb ≤7.1 g/dL is associated with a significantly higher rate of adverse outcomes. This risk was most pronounced in patients older than 79 years; particular care should be taken in this demographic. Level of evidence/study type: Level III/prognostic and epidemiological.

The safety of continuous fascia iliaca block in patients with hip fracture taking pre-injury anticoagulant and/or antiplatelet medications.

BACKGROUND: Fascia iliaca compartment block (FICB) is an effective method to treat pain in adult trauma patients with hip fracture. Of importance is the high prevalence of preinjury anticoagulants and antiplatelet medications in this population. To date, we have not identified any literature that has specifically evaluated the safety of FICB with continuous catheter infusion in patients on antiplatelet and/or anticoagulant therapy. The purpose of this study is to quantify the complication rate associated with FICB in patients who are actively taking prescribed anticoagulant and/or antiplatelet medications prior to injury and identify factors that may predispose patients to an adverse event. METHODS: This retrospective study included consecutive adult trauma patients (age ≥18) with hip fracture who underwent placement of FICB within 24 h of admission and had been taking anticoagulant and/or antiplatelet medications pre-injury. Patients were excluded if their catheter was placed more than 24 h post-hospital admission. Patients were evaluated for demographics, injury severity, laboratory values, medication history, receipt of coagulation-related reversal medications, and complications related to FICB placement. Complications included bleeding at the insertion site requiring catheter removal and 30-day catheter site infection. The incidence of complications was reported and risk factors for complications were identified using univariate and multivariate statistics. RESULTS: There were 124 patients included. The mean age was 81 ± 10 years, and the most common mechanism was ground level fall (94%). Most patients were taking single antiplatelet therapy (65%), followed by anticoagulant alone (21%), combined antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy (7.3%) and dual antiplatelet therapy (7.3%). The most common antiplatelet was aspirin (88%) and the most common anticoagulant was warfarin (60%). Of the patients taking warfarin, the average INR on admission was 2.3 ± 0.8. Only 1 bleeding complication (0.8%) was noted in a patient prescribed clopidogrel pre-injury which occurred 5 days post-catheter placement. This same patient was noted to have superficial surgical site bleeding most likely secondary to the use of enoxaparin for post-operative deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis. There were 4 orthopedic superficial surgical site infections (3.2%), all remote from the catheter site. The pre-injury medication prescribed in these patients was aspirin 81 mg, aspirin 325 mg, rivaroxaban and dabigatran, respectively. No factors were associated with a complication thus multivariate analysis was not performed. CONCLUSION: The incidence of complications associated with fascia iliaca compartment block (FICB) in adult trauma patients prescribed pre-injury anticoagulants or antiplatelet medications is low. In this retrospective review, we did not identify any complications that were directly associated with the FICB procedure. Fascia iliaca block with continuous infusion catheter placement can be safely performed on patients who are on therapeutic anticoagulant and/or antiplatelet agents.

Identifying augmented renal clearance in trauma patients: Validation of the Augmented Renal Clearance in Trauma Intensive Care scoring system.

BACKGROUND: Augmented renal clearance (ARC) is common in trauma patients and associated with subtherapeutic antimicrobial concentrations. This study reported the incidence of ARC, identified ARC risk factors, and described a model to predict ARC (i.e., ARCTIC) that is specific to trauma patients. METHODS: Consecutive trauma patients who were admitted to the intensive care unit between March 2015 and January 2016 and had a measured creatinine clearance (CrCl) were considered for inclusion. Patients were excluded if their serum creatinine (SCr) was greater than 1.3 mg/dL. ARC was defined as a measured CrCl of 130 mL/min or greater. Demographic and trauma-specific variables were then compared, and multivariate analysis was performed. Using these results, a weighted scoring system was constructed and evaluated using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. ARCTIC score cutoffs were chosen based on sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value. The derived scoring system was then compared to a previously published scoring system for accuracy. RESULTS: There were 133 patients with a mean age of 48 ± 19 years and SCr of 0.8 ± 0.2 mg/dL. The mean measured CrCl was 168 ± 65 mL/min, and the incidence of ARC was 67%. Multivariate analysis revealed the following risk factors for ARC (age, <56: odds ratios [OR], 58.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5.2-658.9; age, 56 to 75: OR, 13.5; 95% CI, 1.2-151.7), SCr less than 0.7 mg/dL (OR, 12.5; 95% CI, 3-52.6), and male sex (OR, 6.9; 95% CI, 1.9-24.9). Using these results, the ARCTIC scoring system was: 4 points if younger than 56 years, 3 points if aged 56 years to 75 years, 3 points if SCr less than 0.7 mg/dL, and 2 points if male sex. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis revealed an area (95% CI) of 0.813 (0.735-0.892) (p < 0.001). An ARCTIC score of 6 or higher had a sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of 0.843, 0.682, 0.843, and 0.682, respectively. CONCLUSION: The incidence of ARC in trauma patients is high. The ARCTIC score represents a practical, pragmatic system that can be easily applied at the bedside. An ARCTIC score of 6 or higher represents an appropriate cutoff to screen for ARC where antimicrobial adjustments should be considered. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic/epidemiologic study, level III.

The importance of empiric antibiotic dosing in critically ill trauma patients: Are we under-dosing based on augmented renal clearance and inaccurate renal clearance estimates?

BACKGROUND: An accurate assessment of creatinine clearance (CrCl) is essential when dosing medications in critically ill trauma patients. Trauma patients are known to experience augmented renal clearance (i.e., CrCl ≥130 mL/min), and the use of CrCl estimations may be inaccurate leading to under-/over-dosing of medications. As such, our Level I trauma center began using measured CrCl from timed urine collections to better assess CrCl. This study sought to determine the prevalence of augmented renal clearance and the accuracy of calculated CrCl in critically ill trauma patients. METHODS: This observational study evaluated consecutive ICU trauma patients with a timed 12-hour urine collection for CrCl. Data abstracted were patient demographics, trauma-related factors, and CrCl. Augmented renal clearance was defined as measured CrCl ≥130 mL/min. Bias and accuracy were determined by comparing measured and estimated CrCl using the Cockcroft-Gault and other formulas. Bias was defined as measured minus calculated CrCl, and accuracy was calculated CrCl that was within 30% of measured. RESULTS: There were 65 patients with a mean age of 48 years, serum creatinine (SCr) of 0.8 ± 0.3 mg/dL, and injury severity score of 22 ± 14. The incidence of augmented renal clearance was 69% and was more common when age was <67 years and SCr <0.8 mg/dL. Calculated CrCl was significantly lower than measured (131 ± 45 mL/min vs. 169 ± 70 mL/min, p < 0.001) and only moderately correlated (r = 0.610, p < 0.001). Bias was 38 ± 56 mL/min, which was independent of age quartile (p = 0.731). Calculated CrCl was inaccurate in 33% of patients and trauma-related factors were not predictive. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of augmented renal clearance in critically ill trauma patients is high. Formulas used to estimate CrCl in this population are inaccurate and could lead to under-dosing of medications. Measured CrCl should be used in this setting to identify augmented renal clearance and allow for more accurate estimates of renal function. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic/epidemiologic study, level III.

Teaching residents may affect the margin status of breast-conserving operations.

PURPOSE: The current study was performed to evaluate the effects of teaching surgical residents on the margin status after lumpectomy. METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients from July 2006 to Nov 2009 was performed. The impact of the technical ability of surgical residents to perform lumpectomy was evaluated to determine if there was an effect on the margin status. A logistic regression analysis was performed to adjust for clinical variables known to affect the margin status. RESULTS: Of 106 patients, 19% had positive margins. Residents with unsatisfactory technical skills had a positive margin rate of 34% compared to 8% for residents with satisfactory skills (p = 0.004). In the multivariate logistic regression analysis, the operating surgeon remained significantly associated with a positive margin status. Operations performed by residents with satisfactory technical skills or by attending surgeons were less likely to have positive margins than those performed by residents with unsatisfactory technical skills (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.08-0.86; p = 0.03). After a mean follow-up of 60 months, the breast cancer-specific survival rate was 94%, and there were no local recurrences as a first event. CONCLUSIONS: The technical ability of residents may affect the margin status after lumpectomy. The importance of teaching surgical residents needs to be considered in future quality of care evaluations.

Intra-abdominal Infections.

Intra-abdominal infections are multifactorial, but all require prompt identification, diagnosis, and treatment. Resuscitation, early antibiotic administration, and source control are crucial. Antibiotic administration should initially be broad spectrum and target the most likely pathogens. When cultures are available, antibiotics should be narrowed and limited in duration. The method of source control depends on the anatomic site, site accessibility, and the patient's clinical condition. Patient-specific factors (advanced age and chronic medical conditions) as well as disease-specific factors (health care-associated infections and inability to obtain source control) combine to affect patient morbidity and mortality.

Implementation of educational video improves patient understanding of basic breast cancer concepts in an undereducated county hospital population.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of a video on patient understanding of basic breast cancer concepts. METHODS: An 11 item tool of breast cancer concepts was devised. A previous study obtained baseline information on patient knowledge. Subsequently an 8 min video was designed to facilitate the understanding of these concepts. The next 40 consecutive patients who saw the video were then administered the same 11 item questionnaire. RESULTS: Eighty-one women agreed to participate in the study, 41 before and 40 after the implementation of the video. Fifty-one percent had less than a high school education. The group who saw the video had a higher mean number of questions correct (6.7 vs. 8.9, P = 0.0007). Interestingly 90% of all respondents correctly answered the question on the value of screening mammography, however, only 37% of these patients underwent screening mammograms. A multiple linear regression model adjusting for years of education, language, and seeing the video, revealed that having seen the video (P = 0.0029) and years of education (P = 0.0002) remained significantly associated with higher score. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of an educational video significantly improved understanding of breast cancer concepts in an undereducated population.

Occurrence of prolonged injection site mass with methylene blue but not isosulfan blue after the sentinel node procedure.

HYPOTHESIS: Methylene blue and isosulfan blue perform similarly in the sentinel node procedure. DESIGN: Retrospective medical record review. SETTING: County hospital with surgical residency. PATIENTS: A total of 194 patients underwent the sentinel node procedure. INTERVENTION: Sentinel node procedure with methylene blue or isosulfan blue. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The identification rate, number of sentinel nodes identified, clinicopathologic variables, adverse effects, and complications were compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: The sentinel node identification rate was similar between the 2 groups (99.1% with methylene blue and 100.0% with isosulfan blue). Slightly more sentinel nodes were identified using methylene blue (mean, 2.7 vs 2.1; P = .03). No allergic reactions were seen. Significantly more patients experienced a change in pulse oximetry readings, a wider range of pulse oximetry reduction, and a greater mean decrease in pulse oximetry readings with isosulfan blue than with methylene blue. No skin complications were seen in either group. A palpable mass occurred at the site of methylene blue injection in 8.2% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: The sentinel node identification rate was similar with methylene blue and with isosulfan blue. Methylene blue has significant advantages with respect to product cost, absence of anaphylactic reactions, and lack of interference with pulse oximetry. However, awareness is necessary of the possibility of injection site mass after methylene blue injection.