Comparing Accuracy of Night Radiology Interpretations for Pediatric Trauma: Radiology Residents Versus Attending Teleradiologists.

Background: Overnight radiology coverage for pediatric trauma patients (PTPs) is addressed with a combination of on-call radiology residents (RRs) and/or attending teleradiologists (ATs); however, the accuracy of these two groups has not been investigated for PTPs. We aimed to compare the accuracy of RRs vs AT interpretations of computed tomography (CT) scans for PTPs. Methods: Pediatric trauma patients (<18 years old) at a single level-I adult/level-II pediatric trauma center were studied in a retrospective analysis (3/2019-5/2020). Computed tomography scans interpreted by both RRs and ATs were included. Radiology residents were compared to ATs for time to interpretation (TTI) and accuracy compared to faculty attending radiologist interpretation, using the validated RADPEER scoring system. Additionally, RR and AT accuracies were compared to a previously studied adult cohort during the same time-period. Results: 42 PTPs (270 interpretations) and 1053 adults (8226 interpretations) were included. Radiology residents had similar rates of discrepancy (13.3% vs 13.3%), major discrepancy (4.4% vs 4.4%), missed findings (9.6% vs 12.6%), and overcalls (3.7% vs .7%) vs ATs (all P > .05). Mean TTI was shorter for RRs (55.9 vs 90.4 minutes, P < .001). Radiology residents had a higher discrepancy rate for PTPs (13.3% vs 7.5%, P = .01) than adults. Attending teleradiologists had a similar discrepancy rate for PTPs and adults (13.3% vs 8.9%, P = .07). Discussion: When interpreting PTP CT imaging, RRs had similar discrepancy rates but faster TTI than ATs. Radiology residents had a higher discrepancy rate for PTP CTs than RR interpretation of adult patients, indicating both RRs and ATs need more focused training in the interpretation of PTP studies.

An Exploratory and Qualitative Analysis of Self-Reported Evaluations for Fever.

Background: Despite the high prevalence of post-operative fever, a variety of approaches are taken as to the components of a fever evaluation, when it should be undertaken, and when empiric antibiotic agents should be started. Hypothesis: There is a lack of consensus surrounding many common components of a post-operative fever evaluation. Patients and Methods: The Surgical Infection Society membership was surveyed to determine practices surrounding evaluation of post-operative fever. Eight scenarios were posed in febrile (38.5°C), post-operative general surgery or trauma patients, with 19 possible components of work-up (physical examination, complete blood count [CBC], fungal biomarkers, lactate and procalcitonin [PCT] concentrations, cultures, imaging) and management (antibiotic agents). Each scenario was then re-considered for intensive care unit (ICU) patients (intubated/unstable hemodynamics). Agreement on a parameter (<1/4 or >3/4 of respondents) achieved consensus, positive or negative. Parameters between had equipoise; α was set at 0.05. Results: Among the examined scenarios, only CBC and physical examination received positive consensus across most scenarios. Blood/urine cultures, imaging, lactate, inflammatory biomarkers, and the empiric administration of antibiotic agents did not reach consensus; support was variable depending on the clinical scenario, illness severity, and the individual preferences of the answering clinician. The qualitative portion of the survey identified "fever threshold and duration," "clinical suspicion," and "physiologic manifestation" as the most important factors for deciding about the initiation of a fever evaluation and the potential empiric administration of antibiotic agents. Conclusions: There is consensus only for physical and examination routine laboratory work when initiating the evaluation of febrile post-operative patients. However, there are multiple components of a fever evaluation that individual respondents would select depending on the clinical scenario and severity of illness. Parameters demonstrating equipoise are potential candidates for formal guidance or pragmatic prospective trials.

An initiative to assess and improve the resources and patient care processes used among Chest Wall Injury Society collaborative centers study (CWIS-CC2).

BACKGROUND: Over the last two decades, the acute management of rib fractures has changed significantly. In 2021, the Chest Wall injury Society (CWIS) began recognizing centers that epitomize their mission as CWIS Collaborative Centers. The primary aim of this study was to determine the resources, surgical expertise, access to care, and institutional support that are present among centers. METHODS: A survey was performed including all CWIS Collaborative Centers evaluating the resources available at their hospital for the treatment of patients with chest wall injury. Data about each chest wall injury center care process, availability of resources, institutional support, research support, and educational offerings were recorded. RESULTS: Data were collected from 20 trauma centers resulting in an 80% response rate. These trauma centers were made up of 5 international and 15 US-based trauma centers. Eighty percent (16 of 20) have dedicated care team members for the evaluation and management of rib fractures. Twenty-five percent (5 of 20) have a dedicated rib fracture service with a separate call schedule. Staffing for chest wall injury clinics consists of a multidisciplinary team: with attending surgeons in all clinics, 80% (8 of 10) with advanced practice providers and 70% (7 of 10) with care coordinators. Forty percent (8 of 20) of centers have dedicated rib fracture research support, and 35% (7 of 20) have surgical stabilization of rib fracture (SSRF)-related grants. Forty percent (8 of 20) of centers have marketing support, and 30% (8 of 20) have a web page support to bring awareness to their center. At these trauma centers, a median of 4 (1-9) surgeons perform SSRFs. In the majority of trauma centers, the trauma surgeons perform SSRF. CONCLUSION: Considerable similarities and differences exist within these CWIS collaborative centers. These differences in resources are hypothesis generating in determining the optimal chest wall injury center. These findings may generate several patient care and team process questions to optimize patient care, patient experience, provider satisfaction, research productivity, education, and outreach. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level V.

Different Surgeon, Different Closure: Lack of Consensus on Appropriate Closure Technique for Various Case Scenarios.

Background: Many techniques for closure of surgical incisions are available to the surgeon, but there is minimal guidance regarding which technique(s) should be utilized at the conclusion of surgery and under what circumstances. Hypothesis: Management of incisions at the conclusion of surgery lacks consensus and varies among individual surgeons. Methods: The Surgical Infection Society membership was surveyed on the management of incisions at the conclusion of surgery. Several case scenarios were provided to test the influences of operation type, intra-operative contamination, and hemodynamic stability on incision management (e.g., close fascia or skin, use of incision/wound vacuum-assisted closure [VAC] device). Responses by two-thirds of participants were required to achieve consensus. Data analysis by χ2 test and logistic regression, a = 0.05. Response heterogeneity was quantified by the Shannon index (SI). Results: Among 78 respondents, consensus was achieved for elective splenectomy (91% close skin/dry dressing). Open appendectomy and left colectomy/end-colostomy had the greatest heterogeneity (SI, 1.68 and 1.63, respectively). During trauma laparotomy, the majority used damage control for hemodynamic instability (53%-67%) but not for hemodynamically stable patients (0%-1.3%; p < 0.001). Additional consensus was achieved for close skin/dry dressing for hemodynamically stable trauma splenectomy patients (87%) and fascia open/wound VAC for hemodynamically unstable colon resection/anastomosis (67%). Fecal diversion for rectal injury and colon resection/anastomosis (both when hemodynamically stable) had high heterogeneity (SI, 1.56 and 1.48, respectively). In penetrating trauma, sentiment was for more use of wet-to-dry dressings and incision/wound VAC with increased contamination in hemodynamically stable patients. Conclusions: Damage control was favored in hemodynamically unstable trauma patients, with use of wet-to-dry dressings and incision/wound VAC with spillage after penetrating trauma. However, most scenarios did not achieve consensus. High variability of practices regarding incision management at the conclusion of surgery was confirmed. Prospective studies and evidence-based guidance are needed to guide decision making at end-operation.

Non-surgical management and analgesia strategies for older adults with multiple rib fractures: A systematic review, meta-analysis, and joint practice management guideline from the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma and the Chest Wall Injury Society.

BACKGROUND: Chest wall injury in older adults is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. Optimal nonsurgical management strategies for these patients have not been fully defined regarding level of care, incentive spirometry (IS), noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV), and the use of ketamine, epidural, and other locoregional approaches to analgesia. METHODS: Relevant questions regarding older patients with significant chest wall injury with patient population(s), intervention(s), comparison(s), and appropriate selected outcomes were chosen. These focused on intensive care unit (ICU) admission, IS, NIPPV, and analgesia including ketamine, epidural analgesia, and locoregional nerve blocks. A systematic literature search and review were conducted, our data were analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively, and the quality of evidence was assessed per the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology. No funding was used. RESULTS: Our literature review (PROSPERO 2020-CRD42020201241, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, Web of Science, January 15, 2020) resulted in 151 studies. Intensive care unit admission was qualitatively not superior for any defined cohort other than by clinical assessment. Poor IS performance was associated with prolonged hospital length of stay, pulmonary complications, and unplanned ICU admission. Noninvasive positive pressure ventilation was associated with 85% reduction in odds of pneumonia ( p < 0.0001) and 81% reduction in odds of mortality ( p = 0.03) in suitable patients without risk of airway loss. Ketamine use demonstrated no significant reduction in pain score but a trend toward reduced opioid use. Epidural and other locoregional analgesia techniques did not affect pneumonia, length of mechanical ventilation, hospital length of stay, or mortality. CONCLUSION: We do not recommend for or against routine ICU admission. We recommend use of IS to inform ICU status and conditionally recommend use of NIPPV in patients without risk of airway loss. We offer no recommendation for or against ketamine, epidural, or other locoregional analgesia. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic Review/Meta-analysis; Level IV.

Prospective single-center paradigm shift of surgical stabilization of rib fractures with decreased length of stay and operative time with an intrathoracic approach.

INTRODUCTION: Intrathoracic surgical stabilization of rib fractures allows for a novel approach to rib fracture repair. This approach can help minimize muscle disruption, which may improve patient recovery compared with traditional extrathoracic plating. We hypothesized patients undergoing intrathoracic plating (ITP) to have a shorter length of stay (LOS) and intensive care unit (ICU) LOS compared with extrathoracic plating (ETP). METHODS: A prospective observational paradigm shift study was performed from November 2017 until September 2021. Patients 18 and older who underwent surgical stabilization of rib fractures were included. Patients with ahead Abbreviated Injury Scale score ≥3 were excluded. Patients undergoing ETP (July 2017 to October 2019) were compared with ITP (November 2019 to September 2021) with Pearson χ 2 tests and Mann-Whitney U tests, with the primary outcome being LOS and ICU LOS. RESULTS: Ninety-six patients were included, 59 (61%) underwent ETP and 37 (38%) underwent ITP. The most common mechanism of injury was motor vehicle collision (29%) followed by falls (23%). There were no differences between groups in age, comorbidities, insurance, discharge disposition and injury severity score (18 vs. 19, p = 0.89). Intrathoracic plating had a shorter LOS (10 days vs. 8 days, p = 0.04) when compared with ETP but no difference in ICU LOS (4 days vs. 3 days, p = 0.12) and ventilator days. Extrathoracic plating patients more commonly received epidural anesthesia (56% vs. 24%, p < 0.001) and intercostal nerve block (56% vs. 29%, p = 0.01) compared with ITP. However, there was no difference in median morphine equivalents between cohorts. Operative time was shorter for ITP with ETP (279 minutes vs. 188 minutes, p < 0.001) after adjusting for numbers of ribs fixed. CONCLUSION: In this single-center study, patients who underwent ITP had a decreased LOS and operative time in comparison to ETP in patients with similar injury severity. Future prospective multicenter research is needed to confirm these findings and may lead to further adoption of this minimally invasive technique. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.

Surgical Infection Society: Chest Wall Injury Society Recommendations for Antibiotic Use during Surgical Stabilization of Traumatic Rib or Sternal Fractures to Reduce Risk of Implant Infection.

Background: Surgical stabilization of rib fractures is recommended in patients with flail chest or multiple displaced rib fractures with physiologic compromise. Surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) and surgical stabilization of sternal fractures (SSSF) involve open reduction and internal fixation of fractures with a plate construct to restore anatomic alignment. Most plate constructs are composed of titanium and presence of this foreign, non-absorbable material presents opportunity for implant infection. Although implant infection rates after SSRF and SSSF are low, they present a challenging clinical entity often requiring prolonged antibiotic therapy, debridement, and potentially implant removal. Methods: The Surgical Infection Society's Therapeutics and Guidelines Committee and Chest Wall Injury Society's Publication Committee convened to develop recommendations for antibiotic use during and after surgical stabilization of traumatic rib and sternal fractures. Clinical scenarios included patients with concomitant infectious processes (sepsis, pneumonia, empyema, cellulitis) or sources of contamination (open chest, gross contamination) incurred as a result of their trauma and present at the time of their surgical stabilization. PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for pertinent studies. Using a process of iterative consensus, all committee members voted to accept or reject each recommendation. Results: For patients undergoing SSRF or SSSF in the absence of pre-existing infectious process, there is insufficient evidence to suggest existing peri-operative guidelines or recommendations are inadequate. For patients undergoing SSRF or SSSF in the presence of sepsis, pneumonia, or an empyema, there is insufficient evidence to provide recommendations on duration and choice of antibiotic. This decision may be informed by existing guidelines for the concomitant infection. For patients undergoing SSRF or SSSF with an open or contaminated chest there is insufficient evidence to provide specific antibiotic recommendations. Conclusions: This guideline document summarizes the current Surgical Infection Society and Chest Wall Injury Society recommendations regarding antibiotic use during and after surgical stabilization of traumatic rib or sternal fractures. Limited evidence exists in the chest wall surgical stabilization literature and further studies should be performed to delineate risk of implant infection among patients undergoing SSSRF or SSSF with concomitant infectious processes.

Comparison of surgical fixation and non-operative management in patients with traumatic sternum fracture.

PURPOSE: The incidence of sternal fractures in blunt trauma patients lies between 3 and 7%. The role, timing and indications for surgical management are not well delineated and remain controversial for patients undergoing surgical stabilization of sternum fracture (SSSF). We sought to identify the national rate of SSSF in patients with a sternum fracture hypothesizing patients undergoing SSSF will have a decreased rate of mortality and complications. METHODS: The Trauma Quality Improvement Program (2015-2016) was queried for patients with sternum fracture. Propensity scores were calculated to match patients undergoing SSSF to patients managed non-operatively in a 1:2 ratio using demographic data. RESULTS: From 9460 patients with a sternum fracture, 114 (1.2%) underwent SSSF. After propensity-matching, 112 SSSF patients were compared to 224 patients undergoing non-operative management (NOM). There were no differences in matched characteristics (all p > 0.05). Compared to patients undergoing NOM, patients undergoing SSSF had an increased median length of stay (LOS) (16 vs. 7 days, p < 0.001), ICU LOS (9.5 vs. 5.5 days, p = 0.016) and ventilator days (8 vs. 5, p = 0.035). The SSSF group had a similar rate of ARDS (2.7% vs. 2.2%, p = 0.80), pneumonia (1.8% vs. 0.9%, p = 0.48) and unplanned intubation (8.9% vs. 5.8%, p = 0.29) but a lower mortality rate (2.7% vs. 11.2%, p = 0.008). CONCLUSION: Just over 1% of patients with sternum fracture underwent SSSF in a national analysis. Patients undergoing SSSF had an increased LOS and similar rate of all measured pulmonary complications, however a lower mortality rate compared to patients managed non-operatively.

Surgical Infection Society Guidance for Restoration of Surgical Services during the Coronavirus Disease-2019 Pandemic.

Background: As the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues globally, high numbers of new infections are developing nationwide, particularly in the U.S. Midwest and along both the Atlantic and Pacific coasts. The need to accommodate growing numbers of hospitalized patients has led facilities in affected areas to suspend anew or curtail normal hospital activities, including elective surgery, even as earlier-affected areas normalized surgical services. Backlogged surgical cases now number in the tens of millions globally. Facilities will be hard-pressed to address these backlogs, even absent the recrudescence of COVID-19. This document provides guidance for the safe and effective resumption of surgical services as circumstances permit. Methods: Review and synthesis of pertinent international peer-reviewed literature, with integration of expert opinion. Results: The "second-wave" of serious infections is placing the healthcare system under renewed stress. Surgical teams likely will encounter persons harboring the virus, whether symptomatic or not. Continued vigilance and protection of patients and staff remain paramount. Reviewed are the impact of COVID-19 on the surgical workforce, considerations for operating on a COVID-19 patient and the outcomes of such operations, the size and nature of the surgical backlog, and the logistics of resumption, including organizational considerations, patient and staff safety, preparation of the surgical candidate, and the role of enhanced recovery programs to reduce morbidity, length of stay, and cost by rational, equitable resource utilization. Conclusions: Resumption of surgical services requires institutional commitment (including teams of surgeons, anesthesiologists, nurses, pharmacists, therapists, dieticians, and administrators). Structured protocols and equitable implementation programs, and iterative audit, planning, and integration will improve outcomes, enhance safety, preserve resources, and reduce cost, all of which will contribute to safe and successful reduction of the surgical backlog.

No difference in mortality between level I and level II trauma centers performing surgical stabilization of rib fracture.

BACKGROUND: A comparison of outcomes between Level I (LI) and Level II (LII) Trauma Centers (TCs) performing surgical stabilization of rib fracture (SSRF) has not been well described. We sought to compare risk of mortality for patients undergoing SSRF between LI and LII TCs. METHODS: The Trauma Quality Improvement Program was queried for patients presenting with rib fracture to LI or LII TCs from 2010 to 2015. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed. RESULTS: 14,046 (7.1%) of 199,020 patients with rib fractures underwent SSRF. SSRF increased from 1304 in 2010 to 3489 in 2015: a geometric mean annual increase of 22%. LI TCs demonstrated a mortality incidence of 1.6% while LII TCs demonstrated a mortality incidence of 1.5% (p > 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in risk of mortality after SSRF between LI and LII TCs (odds ratio 1.12, confidence interval 0.79-1.59, p-value 0.529). CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing SSRF at LI and LII TCs have no significant difference in risk of mortality. Additionally, there is an annually growing trend across all centers in SSRF performed both for flail and non-flail segments.

Octogenarians with blunt splenic injury: not all geriatrics are the same.

Geriatric trauma patients (GTP) (age ≥ 65 years) with blunt splenic injury (BSI) have up to a 6% failure rate of non-operative management (NOM). GTPs failing NOM have a similar mortality rate compared to GTPs managed successfully with NOM. However, it is unclear if this remains true in octogenarians (aged 80-89 years). We hypothesized that the failure rate for NOM in octogenarians would be similar to their younger geriatric cohort, patients aged 65-79 years; however risk of mortality in octogenarians who fail NOM would be higher than that of octogenarians managed successfully with NOM. The Trauma Quality Improvement Program (2010-2016) was queried for patients with BSI. Those undergoing splenectomy within 6 h were excluded to select for patients undergoing NOM. Patients aged 65-79 years (young GTPs) were compared to octogenarians. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to determine the risk for failed NOM and mortality. From 43,041 BSI patients undergoing NOM, 3660 (8.5%) were aged 65-79 years and 1236 (2.9%) were octogenarians. Both groups had a similar median Injury Severity Score (ISS) (p = 0.10) and failure rate of NOM (6.6% young GTPs vs. 6.8% octogenarians p = 0.82). From those failing NOM, octogenarians had similar units of blood products transfused (p > 0.05) and a higher mortality rate (40.5% vs. 18.2%, p < 0.001), compared to young GTPs. Independent risk factors for failing NOM in octogenarians included ≥ 1 unit of packed red blood cells (PRBC) (p = 0.039) within 24 h of admission. Octogenarians who failed NOM had a higher mortality rate compared to octogenarians managed successfully with NOM (40.5% vs 23.6% p = 0.001), which persisted in a multivariable logistic regression analysis (OR 2.25, CI 1.37-3.70, p < 0.001). Late failure of NOM ≥ 24 h (vs. early failure) was not associated with increased risk of mortality (p = 0.88), but ≥ 1 unit of PRBC transfused had higher risk (OR 1.88, CI 1.20-2.95, p = 0.006). Compared to young GTPs with BSI, octogenarians have a similar rate of failed NOM. Octogenarians with BSI who fail NOM have over a twofold higher risk of mortality compared to those managed successfully with NOM. PRBC transfusion increases risk for mortality. Therefore, clinicians should consider failure of NOM earlier in the octogenarian population to mitigate the risk of increased mortality.

Intracranial pressure monitors associated with increased venous thromboembolism in severe traumatic brain injury.

BACKGROUND: Utilization of intracranial pressure monitors (ICPMs) has not been consistently shown to improve mortality in patients with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI). A single-center analysis concluded that venous thromboembolism (VTE) chemoprophylaxis (CP) posed no significant bleeding risk in patients following ICPM implementation; however, there is still debate about the optimal use and timing of CP in patients with ICPMs for fear of worsening intracranial hemorrhage. We hypothesized that ICPM use is associated with increased time to VTE CP and thus increased VTE in patients with severe TBI. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the Trauma Quality Improvement Program (2010-2016) was performed to compare severe TBI patients with and without ICPMs. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was completed. RESULTS: From 35,673 patients with severe TBI, 12,487 (35%) had an ICPM. Those with ICPMs had a higher rate of VTE CP (64.3% vs. 49.4%, p < 0.001) but a longer median time to CP initiation (5 vs. 4 days, p < 0.001) as well as a longer hospital length of stay (LOS) (18 vs. 9 days, p < 0.001) compared to those without ICPMs. After adjusting for covariates, ICPM use was found to be associated with a higher risk of VTE (9.2% vs 4.3%, OR = 1.75, CI = 1.42-2.15, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to patients without ICPMs, those with ICPMs had a longer delay to initiation of CP leading to an increase in VTE. In addition, there was a nearly two-fold higher associated risk for VTE in patients with ICPMs even when controlling for known VTE risk factors. Improved adherence to initiation of CP in the setting of ICPMs may help decrease the associated risk of VTE with ICPMs.

Same-Day Discharge after Non-Perforated Laparoscopic Appendectomy Is Safe.

Purpose: Several single-center studies have demonstrated same-day discharge (SDD) to be safe in adults undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) for non-perforated appendicitis (NPA). The proportion of SDD appendectomy patients nationally is unknown. We sought to identify the incidence of SDD among patients undergoing LA after NPA hypothesizing a similar risk of complications including superficial surgical site infections (SSSIs), post-operative intra-abdominal abscess, and 30-day readmission rates. Materials and methods: The 2016-2017 ACS-NSQIP Procedure-Targeted Appendectomy database was queried for adults undergoing LA with no intraoperative findings of perforation or abscess. Patients with SDD were compared to those discharged within two days. A multivariable logistic regression model was used for analysis. Results: From 16,931 patients undergoing LA, 3988 (23.6%) were SDD. Compared to those with a longer hospital stay, patients with SDD were of similar age (p = 0.29) and less likely to have a contaminated wound-class (58.5% vs. 62.6%, p < 0.001). After adjusting for age and comorbidities, patients with SDD had a similar risk of 30-day readmission (p = 0.088) and post-operative abscess (p = 0.739) but lower risk of SSSI (OR: 0.48, 0.28-0.82, p = 0.008), compared to those discharged within two days. Conclusions: Nearly a quarter of patients with NPA undergoing LA are discharged the same day. The risk of 30-day readmission is similar compared to those with a longer index hospital stay. Interestingly, the risk of SSSI is lower, however this may be related to differences in wound classification and/or selection bias. Regardless, SDD for NPA patients appears safe and should be utilized whenever possible.

Decreased Length of Stay After Laparoscopic Diaphragm Repair for Isolated Diaphragm Injury After Penetrating Trauma.

BACKGROUND: Isolated diaphragm injury (IDI) occurs in up to 30% of penetrating left thoracoabdominal injuries. Laparoscopic abdominal procedures have demonstrated improved outcome including decreased postoperative pain and length of stay (LOS) compared to open surgery. However, there is a paucity of data on this topic for penetrating IDI. The aim of this study was to examine the prevalence and outcome of laparoscopic diaphragmatic repair versus open diaphragmatic repair (LDR vs ODR) of IDI. METHODS: The Trauma Quality Improvement Program (2010-2016) was queried for patients with IDI who underwent ODR versus LDR. A bivariate analysis using Pearson chi-square and Mann-Whitney test was performed to determine LOS among the two groups. RESULTS: From 2039 diaphragm injuries, 368 patients had IDI; 281 patients (76.4%) underwent ODR and 87 (23.6%) underwent LDR. Compared to LDR, the ODR patients were older (median, 31 vs 25 years, P < .001) and had a higher injury severity score (mean, 11.2 vs 9.6, P = .03) but had similar rates of intensive care unit LOS, unplanned return to the operating room, ventilator days, and complications (P > .05). Patients undergoing ODR had a longer LOS (5 vs 4 days, P = .01), compared to LDR. There were no deaths in either group. CONCLUSIONS: Trauma patients presenting with IDI undergoing ODR had a longer hospital LOS compared to patients undergoing LDR with no difference in complications or mortality. Therefore, we recommend when possible an LDR should be employed to decrease hospital LOS. Further research is needed to examine other benefits of laparoscopy such as postoperative pain, incisional hernia, and wound-related complications.

Chemoprophylaxis and Venous Thromboembolism in Traumatic Brain Injury at Different Trauma Centers.

Patients with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) are at an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Because of concerns of worsening intracranial hemorrhage, clinicians are hesitant to start VTE chemoprophylaxis in this population. We hypothesized that ACS Level I trauma centers would be more aggressive with VTE chemoprophylaxis in adults with severe TBI than Level II centers. We also predicted that Level I centers would have a lower risk of VTE. We queried the Trauma Quality Improvement Program (2010-2016) database for patients with Abbreviated Injury Scale scores of 4 and 5 of the head and compared them based on treating the hospital trauma level. Of 204,895 patients with severe TBI, 143,818 (70.2%) were treated at Level I centers and 61,077 (29.8%) at Level II centers. The Level I cohort had a higher rate of VTE chemoprophylaxis use (43.2% vs 23.3%, P < 0.001) and a shorter median time to chemoprophylaxis (61.9 vs 85.9 hours, P < 0.001). Although Level I trauma centers started VTE chemoprophylaxis more often and earlier than Level II centers, there was no difference in the risk of VTE (P = 0.414) after controlling for covariates. Future prospective studies are warranted to evaluate the timing, safety, and efficacy of early VTE chemoprophylaxis in severe TBI patients.

Geriatric patients undergoing appendectomy have increased risk of intraoperative perforation and/or abscess.

BACKGROUND: The number of geriatric patients is expected to grow 3-fold over the next 30 years, and as many as 50% of the surgeries done in the United States may occur in geriatric patients. Geriatric patients often have increased comorbidities and more often present in a delayed manner for acute appendicitis. The aim of this study was to evaluate outcomes between geriatric patients and younger patients undergoing appendectomy, hypothesizing that geriatric patients will have a higher risk of abscess and/or perforation, conversion to open surgery, postoperative intra-abdominal abscess, and 30-day readmission. METHODS: The 2016 to 2017 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Procedure Targeted Appendectomy database was queried for patients with preoperative image findings consistent with acute appendicitis. Geriatric patients (age ≥65 years old) were compared with younger patients (age <65 years old). A multivariable logistic regression model was used for analysis. RESULTS: From 21,586 patients undergoing appendectomy, 2,060 (9.5%) were geriatric patients. Compared with the younger cohort, geriatric patients were less likely to have leukocytosis (59.0% vs 65.8%, P < .001) and more likely to have a tumor and/or malignancy involving the appendix on final pathology (2.0% vs 0.8%, P < .001), an unplanned laparoscopic conversion to open surgery (4.2% vs 1.5%, P < .001), and 30-day readmission (7.0% vs 3.3%, P < .001). Geriatric patients had a longer median length of stay (2 vs 1 days, P < .001) and higher mortality rate (0.5% vs <0.1%, P < .001). After adjusting for covariates, there was an increased associated risk of intraoperative abscess and/or perforation (odds ratio 2.23, 2.01-2.48, P < .001) and postoperative intra-abdominal abscess (odds ratio 1.43, 1.12-1.83, P = .005) but no difference in associated risk for mortality (odds ratio 2.56, 0.79-8.25, P = .116), compared with the younger cohort. CONCLUSION: Nearly 10% of laparoscopic appendectomies are done on geriatric patients with geriatric patients having a higher rate of conversion to open surgery and tumor and/or malignancy on final pathology. Geriatric patients have an associated increased risk of intraoperative perforation and/or abscess and postoperative intra-abdominal abscess but have similar risk for mortality compared with nongeriatric patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy.

The effects of smoking on adolescent trauma patients: a propensity-score-matched analysis.

PURPOSE: Cigarettes have been demonstrated to be toxic to the pulmonary connective tissue by impairing the lung's ability to clear debris, resulting in infection and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Approximately 8% of adolescents are smokers. We hypothesized that adolescent trauma patients who smoke have a higher rate of ARDS and pneumonia when compared to non-smokers. METHODS: The Trauma Quality Improvement Program (2014-2016) was queried for adolescent trauma patients aged 13-17 years. Adolescent smokers were 1:2 propensity-score-matched to non-smokers based on age, comorbidities, and injury type. Data were analyzed using chi square for categorical data and Mann-Whitney U test for continuous data. RESULTS: From 32,610 adolescent patients, 997 (3.1%) were smokers. After matching, 459 smokers were compared to 918 non-smokers. There were no differences in matched characteristics. Compared to non-smokers, smokers had an increased rate of pneumonia (3.1% vs. 1.1%, p = 0.01) but not ARDS (0.2% vs. 0%, p = 0.16). Compared to the non-smoking group, the smokers had a longer median total hospital length-of-stay (3 vs. 2 days, p = 0.01) and no difference in overall mortality (1.5% vs. 2.4%, p = 0.29). CONCLUSION: Smoking is associated with an increased rate of pneumonia in adolescent trauma patients. Future research should target smoking cessation and/or interventions to mitigate the deleterious effects of smoking in this population.

Intracranial pressure monitoring associated with increased mortality in pediatric brain injuries.

BACKGROUND: Utilization of ICP monitors for pediatric patients is low and varies between centers. We hypothesized that in more severely injured patients (GCS 3-4), there would be a decreased mortality associated with invasive monitoring devices. METHODS: The pediatric Trauma Quality Improvement Program (TQIP) was queried for patients aged ≤ 16 years meeting criteria for invasive monitors. Our primary outcome was mortality. Patients with ICP monitoring were compared to those without. A logistic regression was used to examine the risk of mortality. RESULTS: Of 3,808 patients, 685 (18.0%) underwent ICP monitoring. ICP monitors were associated with increased risk of mortality (OR 1.82, CI 1.36-2.44, p < 0.001). A secondary analysis including type of invasive ICP monitor and dividing GCS into 3 categories revealed both intraventricular drain (OR 1.89, CI 1.3-2.7, p = 0.001) and intraparenchymal pressure monitor (OR 1.86, CI 1.32-2.6, p < 0.001) to be independently associated with an increased likelihood of mortality regardless of GCS, while intraparenchymal oxygen monitoring was not (OR 0.47, CI 0.11-2.05, p = 0.316). The strongest effect was seen in those patients with a GCS of 5-6. CONCLUSION: ICP monitors are an independent risk factor for mortality, particularly with intraventricular drains and intraparenchymal monitors in patients with a GCS 5-6.

No Reduction in Surgical Site Infection Obtained with Post-Operative Antibiotics in Facial Fractures, Regardless of Duration or Anatomic Location: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background: We performed a systematic review of the literature on antibiotic prophylaxis practices in open reduction, and internal fixation of, facial fracture(s) (ORIFfx). We hypothesized that prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis (PAP) would not decrease the rate of surgical site infections (SSIs). Methods: We performed a systematic review of four databases: PubMed, CENTRAL, EMBase, and Web of Science, from inception through January 15, 2017. Three independent reviewers extracted fracture location (orbital, mid-face, mandible), antibiotic use, SSI incidence, and time from injury to surgery. Mantel-Haenszel and generalized estimating equations were carried out independently for each fracture zone. Results: Of the 587 articles identified, 54 underwent full-text review, yielding 27 studies that met our inclusion criteria. Of these, 16 studies (n = 2,316 patients) provided data for mandible fractures, four studies (n = 439) for mid-face fractures, and six studies (n = 377) for orbital fractures. Pooled analysis of each fracture type's SSI rate showed no statistically significant association with the odds ratio (OR) of developing an SSI. For mandible fractures treated with ORIFfx, the OR for an SSI after 24-72 hours of prophylaxis relative to <24 hours was 0.85 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62-1.17), whereas for >72 hours compared with <24 hours, the OR was 1.42 (95% CI) 0.96-2.11). For mid-face fractures, there was no improvement in SSI rate from PAP (OR 1.05; 95% CI 0.20-5.63). Conclusions: We did not demonstrate a lower rate of SSI associated with PAP for any ORIFfx repair. Post-operative antibiotics for >72 hours paradoxically may increase the SSI risk after mandible fracture repairs.