Trauma Hybrid Operating Room (THOR) shortened procedure time in abdominopelvic trauma patients requiring surgery and interventional radiology procedures.

INTRODUCTION: Abdominopelvic injuries are common, and bleeding occurring in both cavities requires various bleeding control techniques i.e., laparotomy, angiographic embolization (AE), and orthopedic fixation. Hence, the use of Trauma Hybrid Operating Room (THOR) in abdominopelvic injuries has theoretical advantages including rapid bleeding control and minimizing patient transportation. The objective of the present study is to evaluate the impact of THOR in abdominopelvic injuries. METHOD: A pre-post intervention study of abdominopelvic injury patients requiring both surgery and interventional radiology (IR) procedures for bleeding control from January 2015 to May 2020 was conducted. The patients were divided into 2 groups, pre-THOR group (received surgery in OR and scheduled for IR procedures in a separate IR suite, before December 2017) and THOR group (received all procedures in THOR, after December 2017). The primary outcomes were procedure time (including transit time in the pre-THOR group) and mortality. RESULTS: Ninety-one abdominopelvic trauma patients were identified during the study period, 56 patients in pre-THOR group and 35 patients in THOR group. Distribution of injuries was similar in both groups (59 abdominal injuries, 25 pelvic fractures, and 7 combined injuries). The bleeding-control interventions in both groups were 79 laparotomies, 10 preperitoneal pelvic packings, 12 pelvic fixations, 45 liver AEs, and 21 pelvic AEs. THOR group underwent significantly less thoracotomy (1 vs. 11, p = 0.036), more resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA, 0 vs. 5, p = 0.014), and more pelvic AE (13 vs. 9, p = 0.043). The procedure time was significantly shorter in THOR group (153 min vs. 238 min, p = 0.030). Excluding the transit time in the pre-THOR group, procedure time was not significantly different (153 vs. 154 min, p = 0.872). Both groups had similar mortality rates of 34%, but the mortality due to exsanguination was significantly lower in THOR group (11% vs. 34%, p = 0.026). CONCLUSIONS: THOR eliminated transit time, resulting in shorter procedure time in abdominopelvic trauma patients requiring bleeding-control intervention. Although overall mortality reduction could not be demonstrated, the mortality due to exsanguination was reduced in THOR group.

Open versus endovascular repair of primary infected thoracic and abdominal aortic aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: Primary infected aortic aneurysms are life-threatening if not treated promptly, but still possess a high mortality rate following open repair. The goal of treatment is to prevent rupture and clear infection. An endovascular approach is accepted as a bridge to definitive open repair. Our study compares the outcomes of endovascular versus conventional open repair of infected aortic aneurysms. METHOD: A single-center retrospective review was conducted of data from January 2012 to December 2021. Patients were categorized into three cohorts according to aortic involvement: thoracic aortic aneurysm (TAA), thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA), and abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). The primary endpoint was survival rate and the assessment of any associated factors. RESULT: Ninety-nine patients presented with infected aortic aneurysms. Of the 56 patients who presented with infected TAA, 38 patients underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair and 18 patients underwent open TAA repair. Forty patients presented with infected AAA, of which 21 patients underwent endovascular aortic repair and 19 patients underwent open repair. Three patients presented with infected TAAA and all underwent open repair. The mean age was 67 years (range 33-88); 74 patients (74.8%) were men and 71 patients (71.7%) had immune dysfunction. Mean follow-up time was 24 months in the endovascular repair group and 38 months in the open repair group. The probability survival rate in the endovascular repair group was 86%, 86%, 77% and 51% at 1 year, 2 years, 5 years and 10 years, respectively, and in the open repair group this was 81%, 81%, 76%, and 64% at 1 year, 2 years, 5 years and 10 years, respectively. CONCLUTIONS: Endovascular repair for primary infected aortic aneurysms plays an important role in current practice as an alternate to open surgery or used as bridging to definitive open surgical repair. No significant difference was observed in either short- or long-term survival in patients with infected aortic aneurysm undergoing open or endovascular repairs.

Coverage of the Left Subclavian Artery in Blunt Thoracic Aortic Injury Repair Is Rarely Indicated.

BACKGROUND: Thoracic endovascular repair has become the standard treatment for blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI). Occlusion of the left subclavian artery (LSA) is generally required for an adequate landing zone (ALZ). We propose that coverage of the LSA is not necessary for BTAI even with a short landing zone (SLZ). METHODS: Retrospective review of BTAI patients, who were treated from January 2008 to December 2020, was analyzed. BTAI was categorized into 2 cohorts, SLZ <20 mm and ALZ >20 mm. Demographic data, trauma scores, grade of BTAI, procedure-related data, and clinical outcomes were analyzed. t-Test and chi-squared tests were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Thoracic endovascular repair was performed in 59 BTAI patients (mean age of 38.9 ± 14 years, mean Injury Severity Score of 40.4 ± 9.3). Two cohorts were identified: 49 patients had an SLZ, and 10 patients had an ALZ (14 ± 3.1 mm vs. 25 ± 4.1 mm, P = 0.03). The procedures were performed successfully with 59 patients (86.4%) deploying in zone 3. In-hospital mortality (SLZ group: 4.1% vs. ALZ group: 0, P = 0.318), endoleak (SLZ group: 4.1% vs. ALZ group: 20%, P = 0.45), stroke (SLZ group: 0 vs. ALZ group: 0, P = 1), spinal cord ischemia (SLZ group: 2% vs. ALZ group: 0, P = 1), left arm ischemia (SLZ group: 0 vs. ALZ group: 0, P =1), and reintervention rate (SLZ group: 0 vs. ALZ group: 0, P = 1) were not statistically different between cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: BTAI repair with an SLZ can be treated successfully without covering the LSA, analyzing technical success and in-hospital complications. Mid- and long-term data are necessary to confirm the durability of this technique.

Abdominal Wall Thickness Predicts Surgical Site Infection in Emergency Colon Operations.

BACKGROUND: Body mass index (BMI) does not reliably predict Surgical site infections (SSI). We hypothesize that abdominal wall thickness (AWT) would serve as a better predictor of SSI for patients undergoing emergency colon operations. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated our Emergency Surgery Database (2007-2018). Emergency colon operations for any indication were included. AWT was measured by pre-operative CT scans at 5 locations. Only superficial and deep SSIs were considered as SSI in the analysis. Univariate then multivariable analyses were used to determine predictors of SSI. RESULTS: 236 patients met inclusion criteria. The incidence of post-operative SSI was 25.8% and the median BMI was 25.8kg/m2 [22.5-30.1]. The median AWT between patients with and without SSI was significantly different (2.1cm [1.4, 2.8] and 1.8cm [1.2, 2.5], respectively). A higher BMI trended toward increased rates of SSI, but this was not statistically significant. In overweight (BMI 25-29.9kg/m2) and obese (BMI ≥30kg/m2) patients, SSI versus no SSI rates were (50.0% versus 41.9% and 47.4% versus 36.4%, P = 0.365 and 0.230) respectively. The incidence of SSI in patients with an average AWT < 1.8cm was 20% and 30% for patients with average AWT ≥1.8cm. On multivariable analysis, AWT ≥1.8cm at 2cm inferior to umbilicus was an independent predictor of SSI (OR 2.98, 95%CI 1.34-6.63, P = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: AWT is a better predictor of SSI than BMI. Preoperative imaging of AWT may direct intraoperative decisions regarding wound management. Future clinical outcomes research in emergency surgery should include abdominal wall thickness as an important patient variable.

No news is good news? Three-year postdischarge mortality of octogenarian and nonagenarian patients following emergency general surgery.

BACKGROUND: Outcome data on the very elderly patients undergoing emergency general surgery (EGS) are sparse. We sought to examine short- and long-term mortality in the 80 plus years population following EGS. METHODS: Using our institutional 2008-2018 EGS Database, all the 80 plus years patients undergoing EGS were identified. The data were linked to the Social Security Death Index to determine cumulative mortality rates up to 3 years after discharge. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to determine predictors of in-hospital and 1-year cumulative mortality. RESULTS: A total of 385 patients were included with a mean age of 84 years; 54% were female. The two most common comorbidities were hypertension (76.1%) and cardiovascular disease (40.5%). The most common procedures performed were colectomy (20.0%), small bowel resection (18.2%), and exploratory laparotomy for other procedures (15.3%; e.g., internal hernia, perforated peptic ulcer). The overall in-hospital mortality was 18.7%. Cumulative mortality rates at 1, 2, and 3 years after discharge were 34.3%, 40.5%, and 43.4%, respectively. The EGS procedure associated with the highest 1-year mortality was colectomy (49.4%). Although hypertension, renal failure, hypoalbuminemia, hyperbilirubinemia, and elevated liver enzymes predicted in-hospital mortality, the only independent predictors of cumulative 1-year mortality were hypoalbuminemia (odds ratio, 2.17; 95% confidence interval, 1.10-4.27; p = 0.025) and elevated serum glutamic pyruvic transaminase (SGOT) level (odds ratio, 2.56; 95% confidence interval, 1.09-4.70; p = 0.029) at initial presentation. Patients with both factors had a cumulative 1-year mortality rate of 75.0%. CONCLUSION: More than half of the very elderly patients undergoing major EGS were still alive at 3 years postdischarge. The combination of hypoalbuminemia and elevated liver enzymes predicted the highest 1-year mortality. Such information can prove useful for patient and family counseling preoperatively. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic, Level III.

Necrotizing Soft Tissue Infection: Time is Crucial, and the Admitting Service Matters.

Background: Early diagnosis and prompt debridement of necrotizing soft tissue infection (NSTI) improves the outcome. We sought to determine whether failure to admit NSTI patients to acute care surgery (ACS) departments delays treatment and increases the mortality rate. Methods: Patients with NSTI were identified using the 2007-2018 institutional emergency surgery database at a tertiary care hospital. The diagnosis was confirmed by the operative/pathology reports. Patients who developed NSTI during hospitalization or underwent initial debridement at an outside hospital were excluded. Patients admitted to a non-ACS service (e.g., medicine, gynecology) were compared with those admitted to the ACS service with respect to co-morbidities, clinical presentation, time to surgery, and mortality rate. Multi-variable linear and logistic analyses were performed to determine whether admission to a non-ACS service predicts a delay in surgery or an increase in the mortality rate. Results: Of 132 patients, 91 met the inclusion criteria. The mean age was 53 years; 56% were male. Twenty patients (22%) were admitted to a non-ACS service, two thirds of them with an initial misdiagnosis (e.g., cellulitis). The demographics, co-morbidities, and clinical presentation were similar in the two groups except that the non-ACS group more often had human immunodeficiency virus infection (15.0% versus 2.8%; p = 0.04) and less often presented with erythema (70% versus 94.4%; p = 0.01). The median time to incision in non-ACS patients was significantly longer (24.8 versus 3.9 hours; p < 0.001). The mortality rates were 20.0% for the non-ACS group and 7.0% for the ACS group (p = 0.086). Multi-variable analyses revealed that absence of erythema is independently associated with a non-ACS admission (odds ratio [OR] 5.9; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.3-25.6; p = 0.02), and non-ACS admissions correlated independently with delayed surgery (OR 35.20; 95% CI 3.86-321.20; p = 0.002). Conclusions: Admission of patients with NSTI to a non-ACS service often occurs because of initial misdiagnosis, especially in the absence of skin erythema; correlates with significantly delayed surgery; and might lead to more deaths.

Abdominal vascular injuries: Blunt vs. penetrating.

INTRODUCTION: Abdominal vascular injuries (AVIs) remain a great challenge since they are associated with significant mortality. Penetrating injury is the most common cause of AVIs; however, some AVI series had more blunt injuries. There is little information regarding differences between penetrating and blunt AVIs. The objective of the present study was to identify the differences between these two mechanisms in civilian AVI patients in terms of patient's characteristics, injury details, and outcomes. METHOD: From January 2007 to January 2016, we retrospectively collected the data of AVI patients at King Chulalongkorn Memorial hospital, including demographic data, details of injury, the operative managements, and outcomes in terms of morbidity and mortality. The comparison of the data between blunt and penetrating AVI patients was performed. RESULTS: There were 55 AVI patients (28 blunt and 27 penetrating). Majority (78%) of the patients in both groups were in shock on arrival. Blunt AVI patients had significantly higher injury severity score (mean(SD) ISS, 36(20) vs. 25(9), p = 0.019) and more internal iliac artery injuries (8 vs. 1, p = 0.028). On the other hand, penetrating AVI patients had more aortic injuries (5 vs. 0, p = 0.046), and inferior vena cava injuries (7 vs. 0, p = 0.009). Damage control surgery (DCS) was performed in 45 patients (82%), 25 in blunt and 20 in penetrating. The overall mortality rate was 40% (50% in blunt vs. 30% in penetrating, p = 0.205). CONCLUSIONS: Blunt AVI patients had higher ISS and more internal iliac artery injuries, while penetrating AVI patients had more aortic injuries and vena cava injuries. Majority of AVI patients in both groups presented with shock and required DCS.