Early versus late enteral nutrition in critically ill patients receiving vasopressor support.

BACKGROUND: Outcomes of early enteral nutrition (EEN) in critically ill patients on vasoactive medications remain unclear. We aimed to compare in-hospital outcomes for EEN vs late EN (LEN) in mechanically ventilated patients receiving vasopressor support. METHODS: This was a retrospective study using the national eICU Collaborative Research Database. Adult patients requiring vasopressor support and mechanical ventilation within 24 h of admission and for ≥2 days were included. Patients with an admission diagnosis that could constitute a contraindication for EEN (eg, gastrointestinal [GI] perforation, GI surgery) and patients with an intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS) <72 h were excluded. EEN and LEN were defined as tube feeding within 48 h and between 48 h and 1 week (nothing by mouth during the first 48 h) of admission, respectively. Propensity score matching was performed to derive two cohorts receiving EEN and LEN that were comparable for baseline patient characteristics. RESULTS: Among 1701 patients who met the inclusion criteria (EEN: 1001, LEN: 700), 1148 were included in propensity score-matched cohorts (EEN: 574, LEN: 574). Median time to EN was 29 vs 79 h from admission in the EEN and LEN groups, respectively. There was no significant difference in mortality or hospital LOS between the two nutrition strategies. EEN was associated with shorter ICU LOS, lower need for renal replacement therapy, and lower incidence of electrolyte abnormalities. CONCLUSION: This study showed no difference in 28-day mortality between EEN and LEN in critically ill patients receiving vasopressor support.

Bowel Ischemia in COVID-19 Infection: One-Year Surgical Experience.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is a deadly multisystemic disease, and bowel ischemia, the most consequential gastrointestinal manifestation, remains poorly described. Our goal is to describe our institution's surgical experience with management of bowel ischemia due to COVID-19 infection over a one-year period. METHODS: All patients admitted to our institution between March 2020 and March 2021 for treatment of COVID-19 infection and who underwent exploratory laparotomy with intra-operative confirmation of bowel ischemia were included. Data from the medical records were analyzed. RESULTS: Twenty patients were included. Eighty percent had a new or increasing vasopressor requirement, 70% had abdominal distension, and 50% had increased gastric residuals. Intra-operatively, ischemia affected the large bowel in 80% of cases, the small bowel in 60%, and both in 40%. Sixty five percent had an initial damage control laparotomy. Most of the resected bowel specimens had a characteristic appearance at the time of surgery, with a yellow discoloration, small areas of antimesenteric necrosis, and very sharp borders. Histologically, the bowel specimens frequently have fibrin thrombi in the small submucosal and mucosal blood vessels in areas of mucosal necrosis. Overall mortality in this cohort was 33%. Forty percent of patients had a thromboembolic complication overall with 88% of these developing a thromboembolic phenomenon despite being on prophylactic pre-operative anticoagulation. CONCLUSION: Bowel ischemia is a potentially lethal complication of COVID-19 infection with typical gross and histologic characteristics. Suspicious clinical features that should trigger surgical evaluation include a new or increasing vasopressor requirement, abdominal distension, and intolerance of gastric feeds.

Multisystem outcomes and predictors of mortality in critically ill patients with COVID-19: Demographics and disease acuity matter more than comorbidities or treatment modalities.

BACKGROUND: We sought to describe characteristics, multisystem outcomes, and predictors of mortality of the critically ill COVID-19 patients in the largest hospital in Massachusetts. METHODS: This is a prospective cohort study. All patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) with reverse-transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection between March 14, 2020, and April 28, 2020, were included; hospital and multisystem outcomes were evaluated. Data were collected from electronic records. Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) was defined as PaO2/FiO2 ratio of ≤300 during admission and bilateral radiographic pulmonary opacities. Multivariable logistic regression analyses adjusting for available confounders were performed to identify predictors of mortality. RESULTS: A total of 235 patients were included. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score was 5 (3-8), and the median (IQR) PaO2/FiO2 was 208 (146-300) with 86.4% of patients meeting criteria for ARDS. The median (IQR) follow-up was 92 (86-99) days, and the median ICU length of stay was 16 (8-25) days; 62.1% of patients were proned, 49.8% required neuromuscular blockade, and 3.4% required extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. The most common complications were shock (88.9%), acute kidney injury (AKI) (69.8%), secondary bacterial pneumonia (70.6%), and pressure ulcers (51.1%). As of July 8, 2020, 175 patients (74.5%) were discharged alive (61.7% to skilled nursing or rehabilitation facility), 58 (24.7%) died in the hospital, and only 2 patients were still hospitalized, but out of the ICU. Age (odds ratio [OR], 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-1.12), higher median Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score at ICU admission (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.06-1.43), elevated creatine kinase of ≥1,000 U/L at hospital admission (OR, 6.64; 95% CI, 1.51-29.17), and severe ARDS (OR, 5.24; 95% CI, 1.18-23.29) independently predicted hospital mortality.Comorbidities, steroids, and hydroxychloroquine treatment did not predict mortality. CONCLUSION: We present here the outcomes of critically ill patients with COVID-19. Age, acuity of disease, and severe ARDS predicted mortality rather than comorbidities. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic, level III.

One-way-street revisited: Streamlined admission of critically-ill trauma patients.

INTRODUCTION: Emergency department (ED) crowding is associated with increased mortality and delays in care. We developed a rapid admission pathway targeting critically-ill trauma patients in the ED. This study investigates the sustainability of the pathway, as well as its effectiveness in times of increased ED crowding. MATERIALS & METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study assessing the admission of critically-ill trauma patients with and without the use of a rapid admission pathway from 2013 to 2018. We accessed demographic and clinical data from trauma registry data and ED capacity logs. Statistical analyses included univariate and multivariate testing. RESULTS: A total of 1700 patients were included. Of this cohort, 434 patients were admitted using the rapid admission pathway, whereas 1266 were admitted using the traditional pathway. In bivariate analysis, mean ED LOS was 1.54 h (95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 1.41, 1.66) with the rapid pathway, compared with 5.88 h (95% CI: 5.64, 6.12) with the traditional pathway (p < 0.01). We found no statistically significant relationship between rapid admission pathway use and survival to hospital discharge. During times of increased crowding, rapid pathway use continued to be associated with reduction in ED LOS (p < 0.01). The reduction in ED LOS was sustained when comparing initial results (2013-2014) to recent data (2015-2018). CONCLUSION: This study found that a streamlined process to admit critically-ill trauma patients is sustainable and associated with reduction in ED LOS. As ED crowding remains pervasive, these findings support restructured care processes to limit prolonged ED boarding times for critically-ill patients.

Effect of Transcranial Low-Level Light Therapy vs Sham Therapy Among Patients With Moderate Traumatic Brain Injury: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Preclinical studies have shown that transcranial near-infrared low-level light therapy (LLLT) administered after traumatic brain injury (TBI) confers a neuroprotective response. Objectives: To assess the feasibility and safety of LLLT administered acutely after a moderate TBI and the neuroreactivity to LLLT through quantitative magnetic resonance imaging metrics and neurocognitive assessment. Design, Setting, and Participants: A randomized, single-center, prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled parallel-group trial was conducted from November 27, 2015, through July 11, 2019. Participants included 68 men and women with acute, nonpenetrating, moderate TBI who were randomized to LLLT or sham treatment. Analysis of the response-evaluable population was conducted. Interventions: Transcranial LLLT was administered using a custom-built helmet starting within 72 hours after the trauma. Magnetic resonance imaging was performed in the acute (within 72 hours), early subacute (2-3 weeks), and late subacute (approximately 3 months) stages of recovery. Clinical assessments were performed concomitantly and at 6 months via the Rivermead Post-Concussion Questionnaire (RPQ), a 16-item questionnaire with each item assessed on a 5-point scale ranging from 0 (no problem) to 4 (severe problem). Main Outcomes and Measures: The number of participants to successfully and safely complete LLLT without any adverse events within the first 7 days after the therapy was the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcomes were the differential effect of LLLT on MR brain diffusion parameters and RPQ scores compared with the sham group. Results: Of the 68 patients who were randomized (33 to LLLT and 35 to sham therapy), 28 completed at least 1 LLLT session. No adverse events referable to LLLT were reported. Forty-three patients (22 men [51.2%]; mean [SD] age, 50.49 [17.44] years]) completed the study with at least 1 magnetic resonance imaging scan: 19 individuals in the LLLT group and 24 in the sham treatment group. Radial diffusivity (RD), mean diffusivity (MD), and fractional anisotropy (FA) showed significant time and treatment interaction at 3-month time point (RD: 0.013; 95% CI, 0.006 to 0.019; P < .001; MD: 0.008; 95% CI, 0.001 to 0.015; P = .03; FA: -0.018; 95% CI, -0.026 to -0.010; P < .001).The LLLT group had lower RPQ scores, but this effect did not reach statistical significance (time effect P = .39, treatment effect P = .61, and time × treatment effect P = .91). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, LLLT was feasible in all patients and did not exhibit any adverse events. Light therapy altered multiple diffusion tensor parameters in a statistically significant manner in the late subacute stage. This study provides the first human evidence to date that light therapy engages neural substrates that play a role in the pathophysiologic factors of moderate TBI and also suggests diffusion imaging as the biomarker of therapeutic response. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02233413.

Emergency Surgery Score Accurately Predicts the Risk of Post-Operative Infection in Emergency General Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The Emergency Surgery Score (ESS) was validated recently as an accurate and user-friendly post-operative mortality risk calculator specific for Emergency General Surgery (EGS). ESS is calculated by adding one to three integer points for each of 22 pre-operative variables (demographics, co-morbidities, and pre-operative laboratory values); increasing scores accurately and gradually predict higher mortality rates. We sought to evaluate whether ESS can predict the occurrence of post-operative infectious complications in EGS patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database from 2007-2015, all EGS patients were identified by using the "emergent" ACS-NSQIP variable and a concomitant surgery Current Procedural Terminology code for "digestive system." Patients with any missing ESS variables or those who died within 72 hours from the surgical procedure were excluded. A composite variable, post-operative infection, was created and defined as the post-operative occurrence of one or more of the following: superficial, deep incisional or organ/space surgical site infection, surgical site disruption, pneumonia, sepsis, septic shock, or urinary tract infection. ESS was calculated for all included patients, and the correlation between ESS and post-operative infection was examined using c-statistics. RESULTS: Of a total of 4,456,809 patients, 90,412 patients were included. The mean age of the population was 56 years, 51% were female, and 70% were white; 22% developed one or more post-operative infections, most commonly sepsis/septic shock (12.2%), surgical site infection (9%), and pneumonia (5.7%). The ESS gradually and consistently predicted infectious complications; post-operative infections developed in 7%, 24%, and 49% of patients with an ESS of 1, 5, and 10, respectively. The c-statistics for overall post-operative infection, post-operative sepsis/septic shock, and pneumonia were 0.73, 0.75, and 0.80, respectively. CONCLUSION: The ESS accurately predicts the occurrence of post-operative infectious complications in EGS patients and could be used for pre-operative clinical decision-making as well as quality benchmarking of infection rates in EGS.

Variation of Opioid Prescribing Patterns among Patients undergoing Similar Surgery on the Same Acute Care Surgery Service of the Same Institution: Time for Standardization?

BACKGROUND: Diversion of unused prescription opioids is a major contributor to the current United States opioid epidemic. We aimed to study the variation of opioid prescribing in emergency surgery. METHODS: Between October 2016 and March 2017, all patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy, laparoscopic cholecystectomy, or inguinal hernia repair in the acute care surgery service of 1 academic center were included. For each patient, we systematically reviewed the electronic medical record and the prescribing pharmacy platform to identify: (1) history of opioid abuse, (2) opioid intake 3 months preoperatively, (3) number of opioid pills prescribed, (4) prescription of nonopioid pain medications (eg, acetaminophen, ibuprofen), and (5) the need for opioid prescription refills. The mean and range of opioid pills prescribed, as well as their oral morphine equivalent, were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 255 patients were included (43.5% laparoscopic appendectomy, 44.3% laparoscopic cholecystectomy, and 12.1% inguinal hernia repair). The mean age was 47.5 years, 52.1% were female, 11.4% had a history of opioid use, and 92.5% received opioid prescriptions upon hospital discharge. Only 70.9% of patients were instructed to use nonopioid pain medications. The mean and range of opioid pills prescribed were 17.4; 0-56 (laparoscopic appendectomy), 17.1; 0-75 (laparoscopic cholecystectomy), and 20.9; 0-50 (inguinal hernia repair), while the range of prescribed oral morphine equivalent was 0-600 mg for laparoscopic appendectomy/laparoscopic cholecystectomy and 0-375 mg for inguinal hernia repair. No patients required any opioid medication refills. CONCLUSION: Even within the same surgical service, wide variation of opioid prescription was observed. Guidelines that standardize pain management may help prevent opioid overprescribing.

Are surgeons reluctant to accurately report intraoperative adverse events? A prospective study of 1,989 patients.

BACKGROUND: The true incidence of intraoperative adverse events (iAEs) remains unknown. METHODS: All patients undergoing abdominal surgery at an academic institution between January and July 2016 were included in a prospective fashion. At the end of surgery, using a secure REDCap database, the surgeon was given the Institute of Medicine definition of intraoperative adverse events and asked whether an intraoperative adverse event had occurred. Blinded reviewers systematically examined all operative reports for intraoperative adverse events and their severity. The response rate and the intraoperative adverse event rate reported by surgeons were calculated. The latter was compared with the rate of intraoperative adverse events detected by operative report review. The severity of intraoperative adverse events was assessed based on a previously validated intraoperative adverse event classification system. RESULTS: A total of 1,989 operations were included. The surgeons' response rate was 71.9%, reporting intraoperative adverse events in 107 operations (7.5%). Of those intraoperative adverse events, 26 (24.3%) were not described in the operative report. Operative report review revealed intraoperative adverse events in 417 operations (21.0%). Most injuries were of lower severity (85.8% were either class I or II). The surgeons' response rate was similar in operations with and without intraoperative adverse events (69.8% versus 72.5%, P=.28), but they underreported low severity intraoperative adverse events-only 13.2% of class I compared with 35.3%, 36.8%, and 55.6% of injury classes II, III, and IV respectively (P<.001). CONCLUSION: Surgeons are willing to report intraoperative adverse events, but systematically and significantly underreport them, especially if they are of lower severity. This is potentially related to the absence of a clear intraoperative adverse event definition or their personal interpretation of their clinical significance.

Using Physician-Level Emergency Department Utilization Reports to Address Avoidable Visits by Patients Managed by Pediatric Specialists.

OBJECTIVES: Emergency department (ED) utilization is a major driver of cost. Specialist physicians have an important role in addressing ED utilization, especially at tertiary medical centers that treat highly specialized patients. We analyzed if reporting of ED utilization to pediatric specialist physicians can decrease ED visits. METHODS: Physicians within pediatric neurology, hematology and oncology, infectious diseases, and pulmonary divisions received their ED use reports. By using control charts, we examined if this intervention decreased the rate of ED utilization. RESULTS: Overall, for the 4 divisions, specialty-related ED utilization decreased significantly during all hours, weekdays, and office hours. This was in the setting of ED utilization increasing for all diagnoses ED visits. Pediatric ED volume did not change during the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Physician-level reporting of ED utilization was associated with a reduction in ED use by patients managed by our pediatric specialists.

Does the emergency surgery score accurately predict outcomes in emergent laparotomies?

BACKGROUND: The emergency surgery score is a mortality-risk calculator for emergency general operation patients. We sought to examine whether the emergency surgery score predicts 30-day morbidity and mortality in a high-risk group of patients undergoing emergent laparotomy. METHODS: Using the 2011-2012 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database, we identified all patients who underwent emergent laparotomy using (1) the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program definition of "emergent," and (2) all Current Procedural Terminology codes denoting a laparotomy, excluding aortic aneurysm rupture. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to measure the correlation (c-statistic) between the emergency surgery score and (1) 30-day mortality, and (2) 30-day morbidity after emergent laparotomy. As sensitivity analyses, the correlation between the emergency surgery score and 30-day mortality was also evaluated in prespecified subgroups based on Current Procedural Terminology codes. RESULTS: A total of 26,410 emergent laparotomy patients were included. Thirty-day mortality and morbidity were 10.2% and 43.8%, respectively. The emergency surgery score correlated well with mortality (c-statistic = 0.84); scores of 1, 11, and 22 correlated with mortalities of 0.4%, 39%, and 100%, respectively. Similarly, the emergency surgery score correlated well with morbidity (c-statistic = 0.74); scores of 0, 7, and 11 correlated with complication rates of 13%, 58%, and 79%, respectively. The morbidity rates plateaued for scores higher than 11. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that the emergency surgery score effectively predicts mortality in patients undergoing emergent (1) splenic, (2) gastroduodenal, (3) intestinal, (4) hepatobiliary, or (5) incarcerated ventral hernia operation. CONCLUSION: The emergency surgery score accurately predicts outcomes in all types of emergent laparotomy patients and may prove valuable as a bedside decision-making tool for patient and family counseling, as well as for adequate risk-adjustment in emergent laparotomy quality benchmarking efforts.

Elevated admission N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide level predicts the development of atrial fibrillation in general surgical intensive care unit patients.

BACKGROUND: New onset atrial fibrillation (AF) in critically ill surgical patients is associated with significant morbidity and increased mortality. N-terminal pro-B type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) is released by cardiomyocytes in response to stress and may predict AF development after surgery. We hypothesized that elevated NT-proBNP level at surgical intensive care unit (ICU) admission predicts AF development in a general surgical and trauma population. METHODS: From July to October 2015, NT-proBNP concentrations were measured at ICU admission. Abnormal NT-proBNP concentrations were defined by age-adjusted cut-offs. We examined the relationship between the development of AF and demographics, clinical variables, and NT-proBNP level using univariate analysis and a multivariable logistic regression model. RESULTS: Three hundred eighty-seven subjects were included in the cohort, none of whom were in AF at ICU admission. The median age was 63 years (52-73 years), and 40.3% were women. The risk of developing AF was higher for abnormal versus normal NT-proBNP (22% vs. 4%; p < 0.0001). Using optimal derived cutoffs (regardless of age), the risk of developing AF was 2% for NT-proBNP less than 600 ng/L, 15% for NT-proBNP of 600 ng/L to 1,999 ng/L, and 27% for NT-proBNP of 2,000 ng/L or greater. Multiple logistic regression analysis identified three independent predictors for new-onset AF: age, older than 70 years (odds ratio [OR], 3.7, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.5-9.3), history of AF (OR, 25.3; 95% CI, 9.6-67.0), and NT-proBNP of 600 or greater (OR, 4.3; 95% CI, 1.3-14.2). When none or only one predictor was present, AF incidence was less than 1%. When all three predictors were present, AF incidence was 66%. For subjects 70 years or older but no history of AF, AF incidence was 12.8% when NT-proBNP was 600 or greater compared with 0% when NT-proBNP was less than 600. For subjects younger than 70 years with a history of AF, AF incidence was 44.4% when NT-proBNP was 600 or higher compared to 0% when NT-proBNP was less than 600. CONCLUSION: Elevated NT-proBNP at ICU admission in general surgical and trauma patients is predictive of AF development in the first 3 ICU days. Addition of NT-proBNP measurement to known risk factors can improve predictive power and identify patients who might potentially benefit from evidence-based prophylactic treatment for AF.

The Emergency Surgery Score (ESS) accurately predicts the occurrence of postoperative complications in emergency surgery patients.

BACKGROUND: The Emergency Surgery Score (ESS) was recently validated as a scoring system to predict mortality in emergency surgery (ES) patients. We sought to examine the ability of ESS to predict the occurrence of 30-day postoperative complications in ES. METHODS: The 2011-2012 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database was screened for all surgical operations classified as "emergent." Thirty-day postoperative complications were defined as per ACS-NSQIP (e.g., surgical site infection, respiratory failure, acute renal failure). Each patient-related ESS was calculated, and the correlation between ESS and the probability of occurrence of 30-day postoperative complications was assessed by calculating the c-statistic. Univariate and multivariable models were also created to identify which ESS components independently predict complications. RESULTS: Of 37,999 cases that captured all ESS variables, 14,446 (38%) resulted in at least one 30-day complication. The observed probability of a 30-day complication gradually increased from 7% to 53% to 91% at scores of 0, 7, and 15, respectively, with a c-statistic of 0.78. For ESS >15, the complication rate plateaued at a mean of 92%. On multivariable analyses, each of the 22 ESS components independently predicted the occurrence of postoperative complications. CONCLUSIONS: ESS reliably predicts postoperative complications in ES patients. Such a score could prove useful for (1) perioperative patient and family counseling and (2) benchmarking the quality of ES care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic, level III.

The Surgeon as the Second Victim? Results of the Boston Intraoperative Adverse Events Surgeons' Attitude (BISA) Study.

BACKGROUND: An intraoperative adverse event (iAE) is often directly attributable to the surgeon's technical error and/or suboptimal intraoperative judgment. We aimed to examine the psychological impact of iAEs on surgeons as well as the surgeons' attitude about iAE reporting. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a web-based cross-sectional survey of all surgeons at 3 major teaching hospitals of the same university. The 29-item questionnaire was developed using a systematic closed and open approach focused on assessing the surgeons' personal account of iAE incidence, emotional response to iAEs, available support systems, and perspective about the barriers to iAE reporting. RESULTS: The response rate was 44.8% (n = 126). Mean age of respondents was 49 years, 77% were male, and 83% performed >150 procedures/year. During the last year, 32% recalled 1 iAE, 39% recalled 2 to 5 iAEs, and 9% recalled >6 iAEs. The emotional toll of iAEs was significant, with 84% of respondents reporting a combination of anxiety (66%), guilt (60%), sadness (52%), shame/embarrassment (42%), and anger (29%). Colleagues constituted the most helpful support system (42%) rather than friends or family; a few surgeons needed psychological therapy/counseling. As for reporting, 26% preferred not to see their individual iAE rates, and 38% wanted it reported in comparison with their aggregate colleagues' rate. The most common barriers to reporting iAEs were fear of litigation (50%), lack of a standardized reporting system (49%), and absence of a clear iAE definition (48%). CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative AEs occur often, have a significant negative impact on surgeons' well-being, and barriers to transparency are fear of litigation and absence of a well-defined reporting system. Efforts should be made to support surgeons and standardize reporting when iAEs occur.

Implementation of an Aggressive Enteral Nutrition Protocol and the Effect on Clinical Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Macronutrient deficiency in critical illness is associated with worse outcomes. We hypothesized that an aggressive enteral nutrition (EN) protocol would result in higher macronutrient delivery and fewer late infections. METHODS: We enrolled adult surgical intensive care unit (ICU) patients receiving >72 hours of EN from July 2012 to June 2014. Our intervention consisted of increasing protein prescription (2.0-2.5 vs 1.5-2.0 g/kg/d) and compensatory feeds for EN interruption. We compared the intervention group with historical controls. To test the association of the aggressive EN protocol with the risk of late infections (defined as occurring >96 hours after ICU admission), we performed a Poisson regression analysis, while controlling for age, sex, body mass index (BMI), Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score, and exposure to gastrointestinal surgery. RESULTS: The study cohort comprised 213 patients, who were divided into the intervention group (n = 119) and the historical control group (n = 94). There was no difference in age, sex, BMI, admission category, or Injury Severity Score between the groups. Mean APACHE II score was higher in the intervention group (17 ± 8 vs 14 ± 6, P = .002). The intervention group received more calories (19 ± 5 vs 17 ± 6 kcal/kg/d, P = .005) and protein (1.2 ± 0.4 vs 0.8 ± 0.3 g/kg/d, P < .001), had a higher percentage of prescribed calories (77% vs 68%, P < .001) and protein (93% vs 64%, P < .001), and accumulated a lower overall protein deficit (123 ± 282 vs 297 ± 233 g, P < .001). On logistic regression, the intervention group had fewer late infections (adjusted odds ratio, 0.34; 95% confidence interval, 0.14-0.83). CONCLUSIONS: In surgical ICU patients, implementation of an aggressive EN protocol resulted in greater macronutrient delivery and fewer late infections.

The impact of major intraoperative adverse events on hospital readmissions.

BACKGROUND: Hospital-wide readmission rates recently became a recognized benchmarking quality metric. We sought to study the independent impact of major intraoperative adverse events (iAEs) on 30-day readmission in abdominal surgery. METHODS: The 2007 to 2012 institutional American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program and administrative databases for abdominal operations were matched then screened for iAEs using the International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification-based Patient Safety Indicator "Accidental Puncture/Laceration". Flagged charts were reviewed to confirm the presence of iAEs. Major iAEs were defined as class 3 or above, as per our recently validated iAE Classification System. The inpatient database was queried for readmission within 30 days from discharge. Univariate and multivariable models were constructed to analyze the independent impact of major iAEs on readmission, controlling for demographics, comorbidities, American Society of Anesthesiology class, and procedure type/approach/complexity (using relative value units as proxy). Reasons for readmission were investigated using the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification-based Clinical Classification Software. RESULTS: Of 9,274 surgical procedures; 921 resulted in readmission (9.9%), 183 had confirmed iAEs, 73 of which were major iAEs. Procedures with major iAEs had a higher readmission rate compared with procedures with no iAEs [24.7% vs 9.8%, P < .001]. In multivariable analyses, major iAEs were independently associated with a 2-fold increase in readmission rates [OR = 2.17 (95% CI = 1.22 to 3.86); P = .008]; 67% of readmissions after major iAEs were caused by "complications of surgical procedures or medical care" as defined by Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. CONCLUSIONS: Major iAEs are independently associated with increased rates of 30-day readmission. Preventing iAEs or mitigating their effects can serve as a quality improvement target to decrease surgical readmissions.

Intraoperative Adverse Events in Abdominal Surgery: What Happens in the Operating Room Does Not Stay in the Operating Room.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess the impact of intraoperative adverse events (iAEs) on 30-day postoperative mortality, 30-day postoperative morbidity, and postoperative length of stay (LOS) among patients undergoing abdominal surgery. We hypothesized that iAEs would be associated with significant increases in each outcome. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The relationship between iAEs and postoperative clinical outcomes remains largely unknown. METHODS: The 2007 to 2012 institutional ACS-NSQIP and administrative databases for abdominal surgeries were matched then screened for iAEs using the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's 15 Patient Safety Indicator, "Accidental Puncture/Laceration". Each chart flagged during the initial screen was then manually reviewed to confirm whether an iAE occurred. Univariate then multivariable logistic regression models were constructed to assess the independent impact of iAEs on 30-day mortality, 30-day morbidity, and prolonged (≥7 days) postoperative LOS, controlling for preoperative/intraoperative variables (eg, age, comorbidities, ASA, wound classification), procedure type (eg, laparoscopic vs open, intestinal, foregut, hepatopancreaticobiliary vs abdominal wall procedure), and complexity (eg, adhesions; relative value units). Propensity score analyses were conducted with each iAE patient matched with 5 non-iAE patients. Sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: A total of 9288 cases were included; 183 had iAEs. Most iAEs consisted of bowel (44%) or vessel (29%) injuries and were addressed intraoperatively (92%). In multivariable analyses, iAEs were independently associated with increased 30-day mortality [OR = 3.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.52-6.71, P = 0.002], 30-day morbidity (OR = 2.68, 95% CI 1.89-3.81, P < 0.001), and prolonged postoperative LOS (OR = 1.85, 95% CI 1.27-2.70, P = 0.001). Postoperative complications associated with iAEs included deep/organ-space surgical site infection (OR = 1.94, 95% CI 1.20-3.14), P = 0.007), sepsis (OR = 2.14, 95% CI 1.32-3.47, P = 0.002), pneumonia (OR = 2.18, 95% CI 1.11-4.26, P = 0.023), and failure to wean ventilator (OR = 3.88, 95% CI 2.17-6.95, P < 0.001). Propensity score matching confirmed these findings, as did multiple sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: iAEs are independently associated with substantial increases in postoperative mortality, morbidity, and prolonged LOS. Quality improvement efforts should focus on iAE prevention, mitigation of harm after iAEs occur, and risk/severity-adjusted iAE tracking and benchmarking.

Early, goal-directed mobilisation in the surgical intensive care unit: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Immobilisation predicts adverse outcomes in patients in the surgical intensive care unit (SICU). Attempts to mobilise critically ill patients early after surgery are frequently restricted, but we tested whether early mobilisation leads to improved mobility, decreased SICU length of stay, and increased functional independence of patients at hospital discharge. METHODS: We did a multicentre, international, parallel-group, assessor-blinded, randomised controlled trial in SICUs of five university hospitals in Austria (n=1), Germany (n=1), and the USA (n=3). Eligible patients (aged 18 years or older, who had been mechanically ventilated for <48 h, and were expected to require mechanical ventilation for ≥24 h) were randomly assigned (1:1) by use of a stratified block randomisation via restricted web platform to standard of care (control) or early, goal-directed mobilisation using an inter-professional approach of closed-loop communication and the SICU optimal mobilisation score (SOMS) algorithm (intervention), which describes patients' mobilisation capacity on a numerical rating scale ranging from 0 (no mobilisation) to 4 (ambulation). We had three main outcomes hierarchically tested in a prespecified order: the mean SOMS level patients achieved during their SICU stay (primary outcome), and patient's length of stay on SICU and the mini-modified functional independence measure score (mmFIM) at hospital discharge (both secondary outcomes). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01363102). FINDINGS: Between July 1, 2011, and Nov 4, 2015, we randomly assigned 200 patients to receive standard treatment (control; n=96) or intervention (n=104). Intention-to-treat analysis showed that the intervention improved the mobilisation level (mean achieved SOMS 2·2 [SD 1·0] in intervention group vs 1·5 [0·8] in control group, p<0·0001), decreased SICU length of stay (mean 7 days [SD 5-12] in intervention group vs 10 days [6-15] in control group, p=0·0054), and improved functional mobility at hospital discharge (mmFIM score 8 [4-8] in intervention group vs 5 [2-8] in control group, p=0·0002). More adverse events were reported in the intervention group (25 cases [2·8%]) than in the control group (ten cases [0·8%]); no serious adverse events were observed. Before hospital discharge 25 patients died (17 [16%] in the intervention group, eight [8%] in the control group). 3 months after hospital discharge 36 patients died (21 [22%] in the intervention group, 15 [17%] in the control group). INTERPRETATION: Early, goal-directed mobilisation improved patient mobilisation throughout SICU admission, shortened patient length of stay in the SICU, and improved patients' functional mobility at hospital discharge. FUNDING: Jeffrey and Judy Buzen.