A comparison of outcomes including bile duct injury of subtotal cholecystectomy versus open total cholecystectomy as bailout procedures for severe cholecystitis: A multicenter real-world study.

BACKGROUND: Dense inflammation obscuring the hepatocystic anatomy can hinder the ability to perform a safe standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy in severe cholecystitis, requiring use of a bailout procedure. We compared clinical outcomes of laparoscopic and open subtotal cholecystectomy against the traditional standard of open total cholecystectomy to identify the optimal bailout strategy for the difficult gallbladder. METHODS: A multicenter, multinational retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent bailout procedures for severe cholecystitis. Procedures were compared using one-way analysis of variance/Kruskal-Wallis tests and χ2 tests with multiple pairwise comparisons, maintaining a family-wise error rate at 0.05. Multiple multivariate linear/logistical regression models were created. RESULTS: In 11 centers, 727 bailout procedures were conducted: 317 laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomies, 172 open subtotal cholecystectomies, and 238 open cholecystectomies. Baseline characteristics were similar among subgroups. Bile leak was common in laparoscopic and open fenestrating subtotal cholecystectomies, with increased intraoperative drain placements and postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography(P < .05). In contrast, intraoperative bleeding (odds ratio = 3.71 [1.9, 7.22]), surgical site infection (odds ratio = 2.41 [1.09, 5.3]), intensive care unit admission (odds ratio = 2.65 [1.51, 4.63]), and length of stay (Δ = 2 days, P < .001) were higher in open procedures. Reoperation rates were higher for open reconstituting subtotal cholecystectomies (odds ratio = 3.43 [1.03, 11.44]) than other subtypes. The overall rate of bile duct injury was 1.1% and was not statistically different between groups. Laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomy had a bile duct injury rate of 0.63%. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomy is a feasible surgical bailout procedure in cases of severe cholecystitis where standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy may carry undue risk of bile duct injury. Open cholecystectomy remains a reasonable option.

Using the Social Vulnerability Index to Analyze Statewide Health Disparities in Cholecystectomy.

INTRODUCTION: Addressing the effects of social determinants of health in surgery has become a national priority. We evaluated the utility of the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) in determining the likelihood of receiving cholecystectomy for cholecystitis in Texas. METHODS: A retrospective study of adults with cholecystitis in the Texas Hospital Inpatient Discharge Public Use Data File and Texas Outpatient Surgical and Radiological Procedure Data Public Use Data File from 2016 to 2019. Patients were stratified into SVI quartiles, with the lowest quartile as low vulnerability, the middle two as average vulnerability, and the highest as high vulnerability. The relative risk (RR) of undergoing surgery was calculated using average vulnerability as the reference category and subgroup sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: A total of 67,548 cases were assessed, of which 48,603 (72.0%) had surgery. Compared with the average SVI groups, the low vulnerability groups were 21% more likely to undergo cholecystectomy (RR = 1.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.18-1.24), whereas the high vulnerability groups were 9% less likely to undergo cholecystectomy (RR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.88-0.93). The adjusted model showed similar results (RR = 1.05, 95% CI 1.04-1.06 and RR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.96-0.99, for low and high vulnerability groups, respectively). These results remained significant after stratifying for age, sex, ethnicity, and insurance status. However, the differences between low, average, and high vulnerability groups diminished in rural settings, with lower surgery rates in all groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with higher SVI were less likely to receive an elective cholecystectomy. SVI is an effective method of identifying social determinants impacting access to and receipt of surgical care.

Association of social vulnerability with receipt of hernia repair in Texas.

BACKGROUND: The effect of social health determinants on hernia surgery receipt is unclear. We aimed to assess the association of the social vulnerability index with the likelihood of undergoing elective and emergency hernia repair in Texas. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort analysis of the Texas Hospital Inpatient Discharge Public Use Data File and Texas Outpatient Surgical and Radiological Procedure Public Use Data File from 2016 to 2019. Patients ≥18 years old with inguinal or umbilical hernia were included. Social vulnerability index and urban/rural status were merged with the database at the county level. Patients were stratified based on social vulnerability index quartiles, with the lowest quartile (Q1) designated as low vulnerability, Q2 and Q3 as average, and Q4 as high vulnerability. Wilcoxon rank sum, t test, and χ2 analysis were used, as appropriate. The relative risk of undergoing surgery was calculated with subgroup sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: Of 234,843 patients assessed, 148,139 (63.1%) underwent surgery. Compared to patients with an average social vulnerability index, the low social vulnerability index group was 36% more likely to receive surgery (relative risk: 1.36, 95% CI 1.34-1.37), whereas the high social vulnerability index group was 14% less likely to receive surgery (relative risk: 0.86, 95% CI 0.85-0.86). This remained significant after stratifying for age, sex, insurance status, ethnicity, and urban/rural status (P < .05). For emergency admissions, there was no difference in receipt of surgery by social vulnerability index. CONCLUSION: Vulnerable patients are less likely to undergo elective surgical hernia repair, even after adjusting for demographics, insurance, and urbanicity. The social vulnerability index may be a useful indicator of social determinants of health barriers to hernia repair.

Rates and risk factors for anastomotic leak following blunt trauma-associated bucket handle intestinal injuries: a multicenter study.

Objectives: The risk factors for anastomotic leak (AL) after resection and primary anastomosis for traumatic bucket handle injury (BHI) have not been previously defined. This multicenter study was conducted to address this knowledge gap. Methods: This is a multicenter retrospective study on small intestine and colonic BHIs from blunt trauma between 2010 and 2021. Baseline patient characteristics, risk factors, presence of shock and transfusion, operative details, and clinical outcomes were compared using R. Results: Data on 395 subjects were submitted by 12 trauma centers, of whom 33 (8.1%) patients developed AL. Baseline details were similar, except for a higher proportion of patients in the AL group who had medical comorbidities such as diabetes, hypertension, and obesity (60.6% vs. 37.3%, p=0.015). AL had higher rates of surgical site infections (13.4% vs. 5.3%, p=0.004) and organ space infections (65.2% vs. 11.7%, p<0.001), along with higher readmission and reoperation rates (48.4% vs. 9.1%, p<0.001, and 39.4% vs. 11.6%, p<0.001, respectively). There was no difference in intensive care unit length of stay or mortality (p>0.05). More patients with AL were discharged with an ostomy (69.7% vs. 7.3%, p<0.001), and the mean duration until ostomy reversal was 5.85±3 months (range 2-12.4 months). The risk of AL significantly increased when the initial operation was a damage control procedure, after adjusting for age, sex, injury severity, presence of one or more comorbidities, shock, transfusion of >6 units of packed red blood cells, and site of injury (adjusted RR=2.32 (1.13, 5.17)), none of which were independent risk factors in themselves. Conclusion: Damage control surgery performed as the initial operation appears to double the risk of AL after intestinal BHI, even after controlling for other markers of injury severity. Level of evidence: III.

Creating an Optimal Learning Environment in the Operating Room: Lessons From the Soccer Field.

For trainees, the operating room (OR) often represents an educational sanctuary, where for a few hours they can focus on their craft, rather than on phone calls, pages, and the never-ending task of electronic health record documentation. The OR provides a unique opportunity for unfettered one-on-one time with an attending surgeon at their side, where they can learn the art of surgery without interruption. It is vitally important to maximize learning in the OR, yet evidence suggests that it is not always an ideal educational environment. Considering the recent excitement over the World Cup soccer tournament (full disclosure: the senior author is an Argentine immigrant and soccer fan), in this article, we provide evidence-based ideas and suggestions on how to optimize learning in the OR using some analogies from the soccer field.

Anastomotic leak rates after repair of mesenteric bucket-handle injuries: A multi-center retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Primary aim was to assess the relative risk (RR) of anastomotic leak (AL) in intestinal bucket-handle (BH) compared to non-BH injury. METHODS: Multi-center study comparing AL in BH from blunt trauma 2010-2021 compared to non-BH intestinal injuries. RR was calculated for small bowel and colonic injury using R. RESULTS: AL occurred in 20/385 (5.2%) of BH vs. 4/225 (1.8%) of non-BH small intestine injury. AL was diagnosed 11.6 ± 5.6 days from index operation in small intestine BH and 9.7 ± 4.3 days in colonic BH. Adjusted RR for AL was 2.32 [0.77-6.95] for small intestinal and 4.83 [1.47-15.89] for colonic injuries. AL increased infections, ventilator days, ICU & total length of stay, reoperation, and readmission rates, although mortality was unchanged. CONCLUSION: BH carries a significantly higher risk of AL, particularly in the colon, than other blunt intestinal injuries.

Circulation First for the Rapidly Bleeding Trauma Patient-It Is Time to Reconsider the ABCs of Trauma Care.

This Surgical Innovation describes the advantages of prioritizing circulation in patients with compressible bleeding sources and in those with noncompressible torso injuries.

Utility of Cell Saver in Trauma Compared to Cardiac Surgery.

While reperfusion of autologous blood using the Cellsaver (CS) device is routine in cardiothoracic surgery, there is a paucity of evidence-based literature regarding its use in trauma. Utility of CS was compared in these two distinct populations at a Level 1 trauma center from 2017 to 2022. CS was successfully used in 97% and 74% of cardiac and trauma cases, respectively. The proportion of blood requirements provided by CS, compared to allogenic transfusion, was also significantly higher in cardiac surgery. However, there was still net benefit for CS in trauma surgery, with median salvaged transfusion volume of one unit, in both general & orthopedic trauma. Therefore, in centers where the cost of setting up CS, both in terms of equipment and personnel, is less than the cost of one unit of blood from blood bank, use of CS in trauma operations should be considered.

Impact of elevated body mass index on burn injury-associated mortality in a representative US sample.

BACKGROUND: The impact of obesity on burn-related mortality is inconsistent and incongruent; despite being a risk factor for numerous comorbidities that would be expected to increase complications and worsen outcomes, there is evidence of a survival advantage for patients with high body mass index-the so-called obesity paradox. We used a national data set to explore further the relationship between body mass index and burn-related mortality. METHODS: Deidentified data from patients with second and third-degree burns between 2014 and 2018 were obtained from the Cerner Health Facts Database. Univariate and multivariate regression models were created to identify potential factors related to burn-related mortality. A restricted cubic spline model was built to assess the nonlinear association between body mass index and burn-related mortality. All statistical analyses were conducted using R (R Foundation for Statistical Computing). RESULTS: The study included 9,405 adult burn patients. Univariate and multivariate analyses revealed that age (odds ratio = 2.189 [1.771, 2.706], P < .001), total burn surface area (odds ratio = 1.824 [1.605, 2.074], P < .001), full-thickness burns (odds ratio = 1.992 [1.322, 3.001], P < .001), and comorbidities (odds ratio = 2.03 [1.367, 3.014], P < .001) were associated with increased mortality. Sensitivity analysis showed similar results. However, a restricted cubic spline indicated a U-shaped relation between body mass index and burn-related mortality. The nadir of body mass index was 28.92 kg/m2, with the lowest mortality. This association persisted even after controlling for age, total burn surface area, full-thickness burns, and comorbidities, which all remained significant. CONCLUSION: This study confirms a U-shaped association between body mass index and burn-related mortality along with age, total burn surface area, full-thickness burns, and comorbidities as risk factors.

Improved Outcomes in Treating Acute Biliary Disorders With a Shift-Based Acute Care Surgery Model.

BACKGROUND: As Acute Care Surgery and shift-based models increase in popularity, there is evidence of better outcomes for many types of emergency general surgery patients. We explored the difference in outcomes for patients with acute biliary disorders, treated by either Acute Care Surgery (ACS) model or traditional call model (TRAD) during the same period. METHODS: Retrospective review of patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute biliary disease 2017-2018. Demographics, clinical presentation, operative details, and outcomes were compared. RESULTS: Demographics, clinical presentation, and complication rates were similar between groups. Time from surgical consult to operating room (Δ = -15.34 hours [-24.57, -6.12], P = .001), length of stay (Δ = -1.4 days [-2.45, -.35], P = .009), and total charges were significantly decreased in ACS group compared to TRAD (Δ$2797.76 [-4883.12, -712.41], P = .009). CONCLUSIONS: Acute biliary disease can be managed successfully in an ACS shift-based model with reduced overall hospital charges and equivalent outcomes.

Predicting Outcomes in Trauma Patients With Cirrhosis Using Model for End-Stage Liver Disease Score: A Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Liver cirrhosis is associated with increased mortality in trauma victims. We stratified the impact of cirrhosis on trauma mortality by Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score. METHODS: Trauma center database was accessed for patients with established diagnosis of cirrhosis presenting 2014 - 2018, matched to control patients without cirrhosis in a 2:1 ratio by age, sex, and TRISS. Primary outcome was mortality, secondary outcomes were length of stay, intensive care unit days, and ventilator dependent days. RESULTS: Cirrhosis was present in 182 (1.5%) trauma patients. Mortality difference between 12 (7%) deaths in cirrhosis cohort versus 14 (4%) in control was not statistically significant (p = 0.38). No difference was found in secondary outcomes. Categorization of cirrhosis severity by MELD score range (MELD 6-7, 8-10, 11-14, 15-20, 21-30) showed a 1.9 fold increase in the odds of mortality for every increase in MELD score category (OR = 1.91, p = 0.03, 95% CI = 1.08 - 3.37). CONCLUSION: Mortality effects of cirrhosis in trauma patients can be estimated using MELD score.

Patient Outcomes in Laparoscopic Appendectomy With Acute Surgical Care Model Compared to Traditional Call.

INTRODUCTION: Shift-based models for acute surgical care (ACS), where surgical emergencies are treated by a dedicated team of surgeons working shifts, without a concurrent elective practice, are becoming more common nationwide. We compared the outcomes for appendectomy, one of the most common emergency surgical procedures, between the traditional (TRAD) call and ACS model at the same institution during the same time frame. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis during 2017-2018. ACS and TRAD-patient demographics, clinical presentation, operative details, and outcomes were compared using independent sample t-tests, Wilcoxon rank-sum tests and Fisher's exact or χ2 tests. Multiple exploratory regression models were constructed to examine the effects of confounding variables. RESULTS: Demographics, clinical presentation, and complication rates were similar between groups except for a longer duration of symptoms prior to arrival in the TRAD group (Δ = 0.5 d, P = 0.006). Time from admission to operating room (Δ = -1.85 h, P = 0.003), length of hospital stay (Δ = -2.0 d, P < 0.001), and total cost (Δ = $ -2477.02, P < 0.001) were significantly lower in the ACS group compared to the TRAD group. Furthermore, perforation rates were lower in ACS (8.3% versus 28.6%, P = 0.003). Differences for the outcomes remained significant even after controlling for duration of symptoms prior to arrival (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Acute appendicitis managed using the ACS shift-based model seems to be associated with reduced time to operation, hospital stay, and overall cost, with equivalent success rates, compared to TRAD.

SAGES safe cholecystectomy modules improve practicing surgeons' judgment: results of a randomized, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite the advantages of laparoscopic cholecystectomy, major bile duct injury (BDI) rates during this operation remain unacceptably high. In October 2018, SAGES released the Safe Cholecystectomy modules, which define specific strategies to minimize the risk of BDI. This study aims to investigate whether this curriculum can change the knowledge and behaviors of surgeons in practice. METHODS: Practicing surgeons were recruited from the membership of SAGES and the American College of Surgeons Advisory Council for Rural Surgery. All participants completed a baseline assessment (pre-test) that involved interpreting cholangiograms, troubleshooting difficult cases, and managing BDI. Participants' dissection strategies during cholecystectomy were also compared to the strategies of a panel of 15 experts based on accuracy scores using the Think Like a Surgeon validated web-based platform. Participants were then randomized to complete the Safe Cholecystectomy modules (Safe Chole module group) or participate in usually scheduled CME activities (control group). Both groups completed repeat assessments (post-tests) one month after randomization. RESULTS: Overall, 41 participants were eligible for analysis, including 18 Safe Chole module participants and 23 controls. The two groups had no significant differences in pre-test scores. However, at post-test, Safe Chole module participants made significantly fewer errors managing BDI and interpreting cholangiograms. Safe Chole module participants were less likely to convert to an open operation on the post-test than controls when facing challenging dissections. However, Safe Chole module participants displayed a similar incidence of errors when evaluating adequate critical views of safety. CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized-controlled trial, the SAGES Safe Cholecystectomy modules improved surgeons' abilities to interpret cholangiograms and safely manage BDI. Additionally, surgeons who studied the modules were less likely to convert to open during difficult dissections. These data show the power of the Safe Cholecystectomy modules to affect practicing surgeons' behaviors in a measurable and meaningful way.

Addressing Burnout in Surgery-Where Did the Yabba Dabba Doo Go?

This Viewpoint discusses the lack of work-life balance in surgery, particularly that surgeons are expected to be ready to work even when they are not in the operating room.

Comparing Outcomes of Sub-Total Cholecystectomy Versus Open Cholecystectomy as Bailout Procedures for the Difficult Gallbladder.

BACKGROUND: Although laparoscopic cholecystectomy is one of the most common operations performed, there is no consensus on the best surgical approach when inflammation obscures hepatocystic anatomy in severe cholecystitis. Traditionally, this situation triggered conversion to open cholecystectomy (COC); however, in recent decades, alternative approaches have been described. We compared outcomes of bailout procedures for severe cholecystitis, primarily focusing on COC versus laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomy (LSTC). STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review comparing outcomes of intended laparoscopic cholecystectomy cases that were converted to bailout procedures between 2015-2020 at a single institution. Bailout procedures were categorized into LSTC and COC groups. Demographics, clinical presentation, time to surgery, operative indications, operative duration, and post-operative outcomes were compared using independent sample t-tests with Welch-Satterthwaite correction or Wilcoxon rank-sum tests (continuous variables) or Fisher's exact/χ2 tests. A P-value of less than .05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Final analysis included 158 subjects: 55 LSTC and 99 COC. Patient demographics and clinical presentations were similar between groups. LSTC had shorter operative time, fewer ICU admissions, and shorter length of stay than COC (P < .05). There were 9 (9.2%) cases of ileus, 4 (4.0%) cases of post-operative bleeding, and 2 (2.0%) cases of bile duct injury in COC. There was 1 (1.8%) case of ileus, 1 (1.8%) case of post-operative bleeding, and no bile duct injury in LSTC. CONCLUSION: LSTC was associated with fewer complications than COC, which had higher rates of biliary injury, bleeding, ileus, ICU admission, and longer hospital stay.

Simple suture whipstitch closure is a reasonable option for many patients requiring temporary abdominal closure for blunt or penetrating trauma.

Objectives: Multiple temporary abdominal closure (TAC) techniques are currently used to manage the open abdomen (OA) in severely injured trauma patients, with variability in efficacy and cost. We evaluated the clinical outcomes of two commonly used TAC methods: ABTHERA Negative Pressure Therapy System and whipstitch suture closure (WC). Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of patients who had blunt or penetrating trauma from 2015 to 2021 with OA managed using either ABTHERA, WC, or both. Primary outcomes included overall and intensive care unit length of stay, ventilator days, number of laparotomies, time to definitive fascial closure, and complications (bleeding, evisceration, wound dehiscence, and reoperation). Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to compare baseline characteristics, outcomes, and complications. Potential mediators of the relationship between the type of TAC and outcomes were explored using mediation analyses. Results: A total of 112 TAC were analyzed; 86 patients had a single type of TAC placement (either WC or ABTHERA), whereas 26 had both types. A majority of patients had blunt trauma in both WC (77%) and ABTHERA (76%) cohorts. There were no differences in baseline characteristics, including injury severity (27.5±12.4 and 27.5±12.0 for ABTHERA and WC, respectively). There was no statistically significant difference among individual complications and overall complications (OR=0.622 (0.274 to 1.412)). No differences were found between the outcomes, and any apparent differences seen were mediated by factors such as a higher number of laparotomies. Conclusion: WC is a low-cost option for TAC in trauma, with similar clinical outcomes and complications to ABTHERA. Level of evidence: Level III therapeutic/care management study.

What Operations Should a Modern Rural Surgeon Do?

Rural patients have fewer complications and deaths, shorter hospital stay, and less resource utilization than their urban counterparts. They also tend to have fewer chronic illnesses; this reflects a system working as intended, with high-risk patients transferred to better-resourced institutions, while others receive surgical care closer to home. Deciding which operations a modern rural surgeon should-and shouldn't-perform starts with the question "Who decides?" Government, insurers, hospitals, surgeons, and patients are all stakeholders, with a vested interest in the answer.Rural hospitals depend on surgeons for their financial existence, and rural surgeons need hospitals to function. The closure of rural hospitals throughout the country threatens the future of rural surgery. Without surgeons, rural patients will die unnecessarily. During the first COVID surge, patients died from such basic surgical emergencies as small bowel obstruction, when tertiary referral hospitals were full. Rural surgeons are essential in providing timely care of the injured patient; even today, patients die in isolated facilities from treatable injuries from lack of a surgeon who can do a splenectomy, or tube thoracostomy for traumatic pneumothorax, for example.Recruitment of rural surgeons requires identifying interested trainees, often from rural backgrounds, and a defined residency curriculum with emphasis on endoscopy and vascular surgery plus basic gynecology, obstetrics, urology, and orthopedics. Financial incentives & credentials support are also essential for the new rural surgeon. We need to develop many more focused rural surgery programs, and quickly, before the possibility of a broadly skilled rural surgeon in the USA evaporates.

Comparing outcomes between patients transferred from a critical access hospital versus directly from scene to a level 1 trauma center.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the outcomes of trauma patients directly transported to a level I trauma center (SCENE) versus those who were stabilized at a critical access hospital (CAH) and subsequently transferred. METHODS: Patients were grouped based on their transfer status, interventions performed at CAH and outcomes. Google Maps was used to calculate the distances from the location of injury (LOI). Each transfer group data was analyzed separately to examine associations of different factors on the outcomes. Outcomes were compared using univariate and multivariate analyses and propensity score matching analysis. RESULTS: There were 262 patients in SCENE and 684 in CAH. Compared to SCENE, CAH had higher rates of blunt injury and a greater distance from LOI, whereas lower ISS score and length of stay (LOS) (p < 0.05). The majority of CAH group survived compared to SCENE (p = 0.007). For both groups, baseline factors (e.g., age) were associated with outcomes (p < 0.05). Interestingly, longer LOS in the CAH was associated with an increase in survival (p = 0.009), whereas an increased number of CT/MRI performed was associated with increased LOS (p < 0.05)., and an increased number of procedures was associated with longer LOS and ICU stay (p < 0.05). After matching, the two groups had no significant differences in survival, LOS, or ICU stay (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Equivalent overall clinical outcomes were seen in both groups, suggesting that existing trauma system protocols in the West Texas region are functioning well to select appropriate patients for each transfer modality. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III: Retrospective Analysis.