A Surgical Desirability of Outcome Ranking (DOOR) Reveals Complex Relationships Between Race/Ethnicity, Insurance Type, and Neighborhood Deprivation.

OBJECTIVE: Develop an ordinal Desirability of Outcome Ranking (DOOR) for surgical outcomes to examine complex associations of Social Determinants of Health. BACKGROUND: Studies focused on single or binary composite outcomes may not detect health disparities. METHODS: Three health care system cohort study using NSQIP (2013-2019) linked with EHR and risk-adjusted for frailty, preoperative acute serious conditions (PASC), case status and operative stress assessing associations of multilevel Social Determinants of Health of race/ethnicity, insurance type (Private 13,957; Medicare 15,198; Medicaid 2835; Uninsured 2963) and Area Deprivation Index (ADI) on DOOR and the binary Textbook Outcomes (TO). RESULTS: Patients living in highly deprived neighborhoods (ADI>85) had higher odds of PASC [adjusted odds ratio (aOR)=1.13, CI=1.02-1.25, P <0.001] and urgent/emergent cases (aOR=1.23, CI=1.16-1.31, P <0.001). Increased odds of higher/less desirable DOOR scores were associated with patients identifying as Black versus White and on Medicare, Medicaid or Uninsured versus Private insurance. Patients with ADI>85 had lower odds of TO (aOR=0.91, CI=0.85-0.97, P =0.006) until adjusting for insurance. In contrast, patients with ADI>85 had increased odds of higher DOOR (aOR=1.07, CI=1.01-1.14, P <0.021) after adjusting for insurance but similar odds after adjusting for PASC and urgent/emergent cases. CONCLUSIONS: DOOR revealed complex interactions between race/ethnicity, insurance type and neighborhood deprivation. ADI>85 was associated with higher odds of worse DOOR outcomes while TO failed to capture the effect of ADI. Our results suggest that presentation acuity is a critical determinant of worse outcomes in patients in highly deprived neighborhoods and without insurance. Including risk adjustment for living in deprived neighborhoods and urgent/emergent surgeries could improve the accuracy of quality metrics.

The Use and Impact of a Decision Support Tool for Appendicitis Treatment.

OBJECTIVE: Since introducing new and alternative treatment options may increase decisional conflict, we aimed to describe the use of the decision support tool (DST) and its impact on treatment preference and decisional conflict. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: For the treatment of appendicitis, antibiotics are an effective alternative to appendectomy, with both approaches associated with a different set of risks (e.g., recurrence vs surgical complications) and benefits (e.g., more rapid return to work vs decreased chance of readmission). Patients often have limited knowledge of these treatment options and decision support tools that include video-based educational materials and questions to elicit patient preferences about outcomes may be helpful. Concurrent to the Comparing Outcomes of Drugs and Appendectomy (CODA) trial, our group developed a DST for appendicitis treatment (www.appyornot.org). METHODS: A retrospective cohort including people who self-reported current appendicitis and used the AppyOrNot DST between 2021-2023. Treatment preferences before- and after- use of the DST, demographic information, and Ottawa Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) were reported after completing the DST. RESULTS: 8,243 people from 66 countries and all 50 US states accessed the DST. Before the DST, 14% had a strong preference for antibiotics and 31% for appendectomy, with 55% undecided. After using the DST, the proportion in the undecided category decreased to 49% (P<0.0001). 52% of those who completed the Ottawa Decisional Conflict Score (DCS) (n=356) reported the lowest level of decisional conflict (<25) after using the DST; 43% had a DCS score of 25-50, 5.1% had a DCS score of >50 and 2.5% had and DCS score of >75. CONCLUSION: The publicly available DST appyornot.org reduced the proportion that was undecided about which treatment they favored and had a modest influence on those with strong treatment preferences. Decisional conflict was not common after use. The use of this DST is now a component of a nationwide implementation program aimed at improving the way surgeons share information about appendicitis treatment options. If its use can be successfully implemented, this may be a model for improving communication about treatment for patients experiencing emergency health conditions.

Identifying Age-Specific Risk Factors for Poor Outcomes After Trauma With Machine Learning.

INTRODUCTION: Risk stratification for poor outcomes is not currently age-specific. Risk stratification of older patients based on observational cohorts primarily composed of young patients may result in suboptimal clinical care and inaccurate quality benchmarking. We assessed two hypotheses. First, we hypothesized that risk factors for poor outcomes after trauma are age-dependent and, second, that the relative importance of various risk factors are also age-dependent. METHODS: A cohort study of severely injured adult trauma patients admitted to the intensive care unit 2014-2018 was performed using trauma registry data. Random forest algorithms predicting poor outcomes (death or complication) were built and validated using three cohorts: (1) patients of all ages, (2) younger patients, and (3) older patients. Older patients were defined as aged 55 y or more to maintain consistency with prior trauma literature. Complications assessed included acute renal failure, acute respiratory distress syndrome, cardiac arrest, unplanned intubation, unplanned intensive care unit admission, and unplanned return to the operating room, as defined by the trauma quality improvement program. Mean decrease in model accuracy (MDA), if each variable was removed and scaled to a Z-score, was calculated. MDA change ≥4 standard deviations between age cohorts was considered significant. RESULTS: Of 5489 patients, 25% were older. Poor outcomes occurred in 12% of younger and 33% of older patients. Head injury was the most important predictor of poor outcome in all cohorts. In the full cohort, age was the most important predictor of poor outcomes after head injury. Within age cohorts, the most important predictors of poor outcomes, after head injury, were surgery requirement in younger patients and arrival Glasgow Coma Scale in older patients. Compared to younger patients, head injury and arrival Glasgow Coma Scale had the greatest increase in importance for older patients, while systolic blood pressure had the greatest decrease in importance. CONCLUSIONS: Supervised machine learning identified differences in risk factors and their relative associations with poor outcomes based on age. Age-specific models may improve hospital benchmarking and identify quality improvement targets for older trauma patients.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Severe Abdominal Trauma: A Secondary Analysis of the Damage Control Laparotomy Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Little is known about patient-reported outcomes (PROs) following abdominal trauma. We hypothesized that patients undergoing definitive laparotomy (DEF) would have better PROs compared to those treated with damage control laparotomy (DCL). METHODS: The DCL Trial randomized DEF versus DCL in abdominal trauma. PROs were measured using the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-5 Levels (EQ-5D) questionnaire at discharge and six months postdischarge (1 = perfect health, 0 = death, and <0 = worse than death) and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) Checklist-Civilian. Unadjusted Bayesian analysis with a neutral prior was used to assess the posterior probability of achieving minimal clinically important difference. RESULTS: Of 39 randomized patients (21 DEF versus 18 DCL), 8 patients died (7 DEF versus 1 DCL). Of those who survived, 28 completed the EQ-5D at discharge (12 DEF versus 16 DCL) and 25 at 6 mo (12 DEF versus 13 DCL). Most patients were male (79%) with a median age of 30 (interquartile range (IQR) 21-42), suffered blunt injury (56%), and were severely injured (median injury severity score 33, IQR 21 - 42). Median EQ-5D value at discharge was 0.20 (IQR 0.06 - 0.52) DEF versus 0.31 (IQR -0.03 - 0.43) DCL, and at six months 0.51 (IQR 0.30 - 0.74) DEF versus 0.50 (IQR 0.28 - 0.84) DCL. The posterior probability of minimal clinically important difference DEF versus DCL at discharge and six months was 16% and 23%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Functional deficits for trauma patients persist beyond the acute setting regardless of laparotomy status. These deficits warrant longitudinal studies to better inform patients on recovery expectations.

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Ventral Hernia Repair: Two-Year Results From a Prospective, Multicenter, Blinded Randomized Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Report the 2-year outcomes of a multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing robotic versus laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh ventral hernia repair. BACKGROUND: Ventral hernia repair is one of the most common operations performed by general surgeons. To our knowledge, no studies have been published to date comparing long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus robotic ventral hernia repair. METHODS: The trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03490266). Clinical outcomes included surgical site infection, surgical site occurrence, hernia occurrence, readmission, reoperation, and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 175 consecutive patients were approached that were deemed eligible for elective minimally invasive ventral hernia repair. In all, 124 were randomized and 101 completed follow-up at 2 years. Two-year follow-up was completed in 54 patients (83%) in the robotic arm and 47 patients (80%) in the laparoscopic arm. No differences were seen in surgical site infection or surgical site occurrence. Hernia recurrence occurred in 2 patients (4%) receiving robotic repair versus in 6 patients (13%) receiving laparoscopic repair (relative risk: 0.3, 95% CI: 0.06-1.39; P =0.12). No patients (0%) required reoperation in the robotic arm whereas 5 patients (11%) underwent reoperation in the laparoscopic arm ( P =0.019, relative risk not calculatable due to null outcome). CONCLUSIONS: Robotic ventral hernia repair demonstrated at least similar if not improved outcomes at 2 years compared with laparoscopy. There is potential benefit with robotic repair; however, additional multi-center trials and longer follow-up are needed to validate the hypothesis-generating findings of this study.

Randomized Controlled Trial of Surgical Rib Fixation to Nonoperative Management in Severe Chest Wall Injury.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRFs) to nonoperative management in severe chest wall injury. BACKGROUND: SSRF has been shown to improve outcomes in patients with clinical flail chest and respiratory failure. However, the effect of SSRF outcomes in severe chest wall injuries without clinical flail chest is unknown. METHODS: Randomized controlled trial comparing SSRF to nonoperative management in severe chest wall injury, defined as: (1) a radiographic flail segment without clinical flail or (2) ≥5 consecutive rib fractures or (3) any rib fracture with bicortical displacement. Randomization was stratified by the unit of admission as a proxy for injury severity. Primary outcome was hospital length of stay (LOS). Secondary outcomes included intensive care unit (ICU) LOS, ventilator days, opioid exposure, mortality, and incidences of pneumonia and tracheostomy. Quality of life at 1, 3, and 6 months was measured using the EQ-5D-5L survey. RESULTS: Eighty-four patients were randomized in an intention-to-treat analysis (usual care = 42, SSRF = 42). Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. The numbers of total fractures, displaced fractures, and segmental fractures per patient were also similar, as were the incidences of displaced fractures and radiographic flail segments. Hospital LOS was greater in the SSRF group. ICU LOS and ventilator days were similar. After adjusting for the stratification variable, hospital LOS remained greater in the SSRF group (RR: 1.48, 95% CI: 1.17-1.88). ICU LOS (RR: 1.65, 95% CI: 0.94-2.92) and ventilator days (RR: 1.49, 95% CI: 0.61--3.69) remained similar. Subgroup analysis showed that patients with displaced fractures were more likely to have LOS outcomes similar to their usual care counterparts. At 1 month, SSRF patients had greater impairment in mobility [3 (2-3) vs 2 (1-2), P = 0.012] and self-care [2 (1-2) vs 2 (2-3), P = 0.034] dimensions of the EQ-5D-5L. CONCLUSIONS: In severe chest wall injury, even in the absence of clinical flail chest, the majority of patients still reported moderate to extreme pain and impairment of usual physical activity at one month. SSRF increased hospital LOS and did not provide any quality of life benefit for up to 6 months.

Association of Frailty and the Expanded Operative Stress Score with Preoperative Acute Serious Conditions, Complications, and Mortality in Males Compared to Females: A Retrospective Observational Study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to expand Operative Stress Score (OSS) increasing procedural coverage and assessing OSS and frailty association with Preoperative Acute Serious Conditions (PASC), complications and mortality in females versus males. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Veterans Affairs male-dominated study showed high mortality in frail veterans even after very low stress surgeries (OSS1). METHODS: Retrospective cohort using NSQIP data (2013-2019) merged with 180-day postoperative mortality from multiple hospitals to evaluate PASC, 30-day complications and 30-, 90-, and 180-day mortality. RESULTS: OSS expansion resulted in 98.2% case coverage versus 87.0% using the original. Of 82,269 patients (43.8% male), 7.9% were frail/very frail. Males had higher odds of PASC [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 1.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.21-1.41, P < 0.001] and severe/life-threatening Clavien-Dindo IV (CDIV) complications (aOR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.09-1.28, P < 0.001). Although mortality rates were higher (all time-points, P < 0.001) in males versus females, mortality was similar after adjusting for frailty, OSS, and case status primarily due to increased male frailty scores. Additional adjustments for PASC and CDIV resulted in a lower odds of mortality in males (30-day, aOR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.71-0.92, P = 0.002) that was most pronounced for males with PASC compared to females with PASC (30-day, aOR = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.56-0.99, P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Similar to the male-dominated Veteran population, private sector, frail patients have high likelihood of postoperative mortality, even after low-stress surgeries. Preoperative frailty screening should be performed regardless of magnitude of the procedure. Despite males experiencing higher adjusted odds of PASC and CDIV complications, females with PASC had higher odds of mortality compared to males, suggesting differences in the aggressiveness of care provided to men and women.

Perception of Treatment Success and Impact on Function with Antibiotics or Appendectomy for Appendicitis: A Randomized Clinical Trial with an Observational Cohort.

OBJECTIVE: To compare secondary patient reported outcomes of perceptions of treatment success and function for patients treated for appendicitis with appendectomy vs. antibiotics at 30 days. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The Comparison of Outcomes of antibiotic Drugs and Appendectomy trial found antibiotics noninferior to appendectomy based on 30-day health status. To address questions about outcomes among participants with lower socioeconomic status, we explored the relationship of sociodemographic and clinical factors and outcomes. METHODS: We focused on 4 patient reported outcomes at 30 days: high decisional regret, dissatisfaction with treatment, problems performing usual activities, and missing >10 days of work. The randomized (RCT) and observational cohorts were pooled for exploration of baseline factors. The RCT cohort alone was used for comparison of treatments. Logistic regression was used to assess associations. RESULTS: The pooled cohort contained 2062 participants; 1552 from the RCT. Overall, regret and dissatisfaction were low whereas problems with usual activities and prolonged missed work occurred more frequently. In the RCT, those assigned to antibiotics had more regret (Odd ratios (OR) 2.97, 95% Confidence intervals (CI) 2.05-4.31) and dissatisfaction (OR 1.98, 95%CI 1.25-3.12), and reported less missed work (OR 0.39, 95%CI 0.27-0.56). Factors associated with function outcomes included sociodemographic and clinical variables for both treatment arms. Fewer factors were associated with dissatisfaction and regret. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, participants reported high satisfaction, low regret, and were frequently able to resume usual activities and return to work. When comparing treatments for appendicitis, no single measure defines success or failure for all people. The reported data may inform discussions regarding the most appropriate treatment for individuals. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02800785.

A Randomized Trial Comparing Antibiotics with Appendectomy for Appendicitis.

BACKGROUND: Antibiotic therapy has been proposed as an alternative to surgery for the treatment of appendicitis. METHODS: We conducted a pragmatic, nonblinded, noninferiority, randomized trial comparing antibiotic therapy (10-day course) with appendectomy in patients with appendicitis at 25 U.S. centers. The primary outcome was 30-day health status, as assessed with the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire (scores range from 0 to 1, with higher scores indicating better health status; noninferiority margin, 0.05 points). Secondary outcomes included appendectomy in the antibiotics group and complications through 90 days; analyses were prespecified in subgroups defined according to the presence or absence of an appendicolith. RESULTS: In total, 1552 adults (414 with an appendicolith) underwent randomization; 776 were assigned to receive antibiotics (47% of whom were not hospitalized for the index treatment) and 776 to undergo appendectomy (96% of whom underwent a laparoscopic procedure). Antibiotics were noninferior to appendectomy on the basis of 30-day EQ-5D scores (mean difference, 0.01 points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.001 to 0.03). In the antibiotics group, 29% had undergone appendectomy by 90 days, including 41% of those with an appendicolith and 25% of those without an appendicolith. Complications were more common in the antibiotics group than in the appendectomy group (8.1 vs. 3.5 per 100 participants; rate ratio, 2.28; 95% CI, 1.30 to 3.98); the higher rate in the antibiotics group could be attributed to those with an appendicolith (20.2 vs. 3.6 per 100 participants; rate ratio, 5.69; 95% CI, 2.11 to 15.38) and not to those without an appendicolith (3.7 vs. 3.5 per 100 participants; rate ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.45 to 2.43). The rate of serious adverse events was 4.0 per 100 participants in the antibiotics group and 3.0 per 100 participants in the appendectomy group (rate ratio, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.67 to 2.50). CONCLUSIONS: For the treatment of appendicitis, antibiotics were noninferior to appendectomy on the basis of results of a standard health-status measure. In the antibiotics group, nearly 3 in 10 participants had undergone appendectomy by 90 days. Participants with an appendicolith were at a higher risk for appendectomy and for complications than those without an appendicolith. (Funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute; CODA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02800785.).

Sex-Related Differences in Acuity and Postoperative Complications, Mortality and Failure to Rescue.

INTRODUCTION: Yentl syndrome describing sex-related disparities has been extensively studied in medical conditions but not after surgery. This retrospective cohort study assessed the association of sex, frailty, presenting with preoperative acute serious conditions (PASC), and the expanded Operative Stress Score (OSS) with postoperative complications, mortality, and failure-to-rescue. METHODS: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program from 2015 to 2019 evaluating 30-d complications, mortality, and failure-to-rescue. RESULTS: Of 4,860,308 cases (43% were male; mean [standard deviation] age of 56 [17] y), 6.0 and 0.8% were frail and very frail, respectively. Frailty score distribution was higher in men versus women (P < 0.001). Most cases were low-stress OSS2 (44.9%) or moderate-stress OSS3 (44.5%) surgeries. While unadjusted 30-d mortality rates were higher (P < 0.001) in males (1.1%) versus females (0.8%), males had lower odds of mortality (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.90-0.94, P < 0.001) after adjusting for frailty, OSS, case status, PASC, and Clavien-Dindo IV (CDIV) complications. Males have higher odds of PASC (aOR = 1.33, CI = 1.31-1.35, P < 0.001) and CDIV complications (aOR = 1.13, CI = 1.12-1.15, P < 0.001). Male-PASC (aOR = 0.76, CI = 0.72-0.80, P < 0.001) and male-CDIV (aOR = 0.87, CI = 0.83-0.91, P < 0.001) interaction terms demonstrated that the increased odds of mortality associated with PASC or CDIV complications/failure-to-rescue were lower in males versus females. CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides a comprehensive analysis of sex-related surgical outcomes across a wide range of procedures and health care systems. Females presenting with PASC or experiencing CDIV complications had higher odds of mortality/failure to rescue suggesting sex-related care differences. Yentl syndrome may be present in surgical patients; possibly related to differences in presenting symptoms, patient care preferences, or less aggressive care in female patients and deserves further study.

Two-year Outcomes of Prehabilitation Among Obese Patients With Ventral Hernias: A Randomized Controlled Trial (NCT02365194).

OBJECTIVE: To determine if preoperative nutritional counseling and exercise (prehabilitation) improve outcomes in obese patients seeking ventral hernia repair (VHR)? SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Obesity and poor fitness are associated with complications following VHR. It is unknown if preoperative prehabilitation improves outcomes of obese patients seeking VHR. METHODS: This is the 2-year follow-up of a blinded randomized controlled trial from 2015 to 2017 at a safety-net academic institution. Obese patients (BMI 30-40) seeking VHR were randomized to prehabilitation versus standard counseling. Elective VHR was performed once preoperative requirements were met: 7% total body weight loss or 6 months of counseling and no weight gain. Primary outcome was percentage of hernia-free and complication-free patients at 2 years. Complications included recurrence, reoperation, and mesh complications. Primary outcome was compared using chi-square. We hypothesize that prehabilitation in obese patients with VHR results in more hernia- and complication-free patients at 2-years. RESULTS: Of the 118 randomized patients, 108 (91.5%) completed a median (range) follow-up of 27.3 (6.2-37.4) months. Baseline BMI (mean±SD) was similar between groups (36.8 ±â€Š2.6 vs 37.0 ±â€Š2.6). More patients in the prehabilitation group underwent emergency surgery (5 vs 1) or dropped out of the program (3 vs 1) compared to standard counseling (13.6% vs 3.4%, P = 0.094). Among patients who underwent surgery, there was no difference in major complications (10.2% vs 9.1%, P = 0.438). At 2-years, there was no difference in percentage of hernia-free and complication-free patients (72.9% vs 66.1%, P = 0.424, 1.14, 0.88-1.47). CONCLUSION: There is no difference in 2-year outcomes of obese patients seeking VHR who undergo prehabilitation versus standard care. Prehabilitation may not be warranted in obese patients undergoing elective VHR.Clinical Trial Registration: This trial was registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02365194).

Validation of the Adapted Clavien-Dindo in Trauma (ACDiT) Classifications in Medical and Surgical Management of Acute Diverticulitis.

OBJECTIVES: To validate the adapted Clavien-Dindo in trauma (ACDiT) tool as a novel outcome measure for patients with acute diverticulitis managed both operatively and nonoperatively. BACKGROUND: Complications following diverticulitis are difficult to classify because no traditional tools address patients managed both operatively and nonoperatively. The ACDiT grading system-graded from 0 to 5b-is applied in this manner but has not yet been validated for this patient group. METHODS: We performed a 5-year observational study of patients with acute diverticulitis at a safety-net hospital. Baseline demographics and hospitalization data were collected. ACDiT scores were assigned, and validation was undertaken by comparing scores with hospital-free days, and verifying that higher scores were associated with known risk factors for poor outcomes. Inverse probability weighted propensity scores were assigned for surgical management, and inverse probability weighted regression analysis was used to determine factors associated with ACDiT ≥ grade 2. RESULTS: Of 260 patients, 188 (72%) were managed nonoperatively. Eighty (31%) developed a complication; 73 (91%) were grades 1 to 3b. Higher grades correlated inversely with hospital-free days (rs = -0.67, P < 0.0001) for all patients and for nonoperative (rs = -0.63, P < 0.0001) and operative (rs = -0.62, P < 0.0001) patients. Hinchey 2 to 3 and initial operative management had higher odds of having a complication of ACDiT ≥ grade 2. CONCLUSION: The ACDiT tool was successfully applied to acute diverticulitis patients managed operatively and nonoperatively, is associated with known risk factors for adverse outcomes. ACDiT may be considered a meaningful outcome measure for comparing strategies for acute diverticulitis.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of optimal diagnostic strategy for patients with symptomatic cholelithiasis with intermediate probability for choledocholithiasis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: EUS, MRCP, and intraoperative cholangiogram (IOC) are the recommended diagnostic modalities for patients with intermediate probability for choledocholithiasis (IPC). The relative cost-effectiveness of these modalities in patients with cholelithiasis and IPC is understudied. METHODS: We developed a decision tree for diagnosing IPC (base-case probability, 50%; range, 10%-70%); patients with a positive test were modeled to undergo therapeutic ERCP. The strategies tested were laparoscopic cholecystectomy with IOC (LC-IOC), MRCP, single-session EUS + ERCP, and separate-session EUS + ERCP. Costs and probabilities were extracted from the published literature. Effectiveness was assessed by assigning utility scores to health states, average proportion of true-positive diagnosis of IPC, and the mean length of stay (LOS) per strategy. Cost-effectiveness was assessed by extrapolating a net-monetary benefit (NMB) and average cost per true-positive diagnosis. RESULTS: LC-IOC was the most cost-effective strategy to diagnose IPC (base-case probability of 50%) among patients with cholelithiasis in health state-based effectiveness analysis (NMB of $34,612), diagnostic test accuracy-based effectiveness analysis (average cost of $13,260 per true-positive diagnosis), and LOS-based effectiveness analysis (mean LOS of 4.13) compared with strategies 2 (MRCP), 3 (single-session EUS + ERCP), and 4 (separate-session EUS + ERCP). These findings were robust on deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with cholelithiasis with IPC, LC-IOC is a cost-effective approach that should limit preoperative testing and may shorten hospital LOS. Our findings may be used to design institutional and organizational management protocols.

Proceedings From the Advances in Surgery Channel Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Series: Lessons Learned From Asian Academic Surgeons.

In this series of talks and the accompanying panel session, leaders from the Society of Asian Academic Surgeons discuss issues faced by Asian Americans and the importance of the role of mentors and allyship in professional development in the advancement of Asian Americans in leadership roles. Barriers, including the model minority myth, are addressed. The heterogeneity of the Asian American population and disparities in healthcare and in research, specifically as relates to Asian Americans, also are examined.

Age-related Opioid Exposure in Trauma: A Secondary Analysis of the Multimodal Analgesia Strategies for Trauma (MAST) Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the effect of age on opioid consumption after traumatic injury. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Older trauma patients receive fewer opioids due to decreased metabolism and increased complications, but adequacy of pain control is unknown. We hypothesized that older trauma patients require fewer opioids to achieve adequate pain control. METHODS: A secondary analysis of the multimodal analgesia strategies for trauma Trial evaluating the effectiveness of 2 multimodal pain regimens in 1561 trauma patients aged 16 to 96 was performed. Older patients (≥55 years) were compared to younger patients. Median daily oral morphine milligram equivalents (MME) consumption, average numeric rating scale pain scores, complications, and death were assessed. Multivariable analyses were performed. RESULTS: Older patients (n = 562) had a median age of 68 years (interquartile range 61-78) compared to 33 (24-43) in younger patients. Older patients had lower injury severity scores (13 [9-20] vs 14 [9-22], P = 0.004), lower average pain scores (numeric rating scale 3 [1-4] vs 4 [2-5], P < 0.001), and consumed fewer MME/day (22 [10-45] vs 52 [28-78], P < 0.001). The multimodal analgesia strategies for trauma multi-modal pain regimen was effective at reducing opioid consumption at all ages. Additionally, on multivariable analysis including pain score adjustment, each decade age increase after 55 years was associated with a 23% reduction in MME/day consumed. CONCLUSIONS: Older trauma patients required fewer opioids than younger patients with similar characteristics and pain scores. Opioid dosing for post-traumatic pain should consider age. A 20 to 25% dose reduction per decade after age 55 may reduce opioid exposure without altering pain control.

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Ventral Hernia Repair: One-year Results From a Prospective, Multicenter, Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare clinical and patient-reported outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (LVHR) at 1-year postoperative. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Despite a relative lack of research at low risk for bias assessing robotic ventral hernia repair (RVHR), the growth of RVHR has been rapid. We previously reported short-term results of the first randomized control trial comparing RVHR versus LVHR; there was no clear difference in clinical outcomes but increased operative time and cost with robotic repair. METHODS: Patients from a multicenter, blinded randomized control trial comparing RVHR versus LVHR were followed at 1 year. Outcomes included wound complication (surgical site infection, surgical site occurrence, wound dehiscence), hernia occurrence including recurrence and port site hernia, readmission, reoperation, and patient-reported outcomes (functional status, pain, and satisfaction with repair and cosmesis). RESULTS: A total of 124 patients were randomized and 113 patients (91%; 60 robot, 53 laparoscopic) completed 1-year follow-up. Baseline demographics were similar in both groups. No differences were seen in wound complication (15% vs 15%; P = 0.899), hernia recurrence (7% vs 9%; P = 0.576), or readmission (2% vs 6%; P = 0.251). No patients underwent reoperation in the robotic arm, whereas 5 (9%) did in the laparoscopic arm (P = 0.020). No differences were seen in patient-reported outcomes. Both arms reported clinically significant improvements in functional status, low pain scores, and high satisfaction scores at 1-year post repair. CONCLUSION: This study confirms that robotic ventral hernia repair is safe when compared to laparoscopy. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Comparing diagnostic accuracy of current practice guidelines in predicting choledocholithiasis: outcomes from a large healthcare system comprising both academic and community settings.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) 2010 guidelines for suspected choledocholithiasis were recently updated by proposing more specific criteria for selection of high-risk patients to undergo direct ERCP while advocating the use of additional imaging studies for intermediate- and low-risk individuals. We aim to compare the performance and diagnostic accuracy of 2019 versus 2010 ASGE criteria for suspected choledocholithiasis. METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of a prospectively maintained database (2013-2019) of over 10,000 ERCPs performed by 70 gastroenterologists in our 14-hospital system. We randomly selected 744 ERCPs in which the primary indication was suspected choledocholithiasis. Patients with a history of cholecystectomy or prior sphincterotomy were excluded. The same patient cohort was assigned as low, intermediate, or high risk according to the 2010 and 2019 guideline criteria. Overall accuracy of both guidelines was compared against the presence of stones and/or sludge on ERCP. RESULTS: Of 744 patients who underwent ERCP, 544 patients (73.1%) had definite stones during ERCP and 696 patients (93.5%) had stones and/or sludge during ERCP. When classified according to the 2019 guidelines, fewer patients were high risk (274/744, 36.8%) compared with 2010 guidelines (449/744, 60.4%; P < .001). Within the high-risk group per both guidelines, definitive stone was found during ERCP more frequently in the 2019 guideline cohort (226/274, 82.5%) compared with the 2010 guideline cohort (342/449, 76.2%; P < .001). In our patient cohort, overall specificity of the 2010 guideline was 46.5%, which improved to 76.0% as per 2019 guideline criteria (P < .001). However, no significant change was noted for either positive predictive value or negative predictive value between 2019 and 2010 guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: The 2019 ASGE guidelines are more specific for detection of choledocholithiasis during ERCP when compared with the 2010 guidelines. However, a large number of patients are categorized as intermediate risk per 2019 guidelines and will require an additional confirmatory imaging study.

Predictors for Direct to Operating Room Admission in Severe Trauma.

BACKGROUND: Protocols for expediting critical trauma patients directly from the helipad to the operating room tend to vary by center, rely heavily on physician gestalt, and lack supporting evidence. We evaluated a population of severely injured trauma patients with the aim of determining objective factors associated with the need for immediate surgical intervention. METHODS: All highest-activation trauma patients transported by air ambulance between 1/1/16 and 12/31/17 were enrolled retrospectively. Transfer, pediatric, isolated burn, and isolated head trauma patients were excluded. Patients who underwent emergency general surgery within 30 min of arrival without the aid of cross-sectional imaging were compared to the remainder of the cohort. RESULTS: Of the 863 patients who were enrolled, 85 (10%) spent less than 30 min in the emergency department (ED) before undergoing an emergency operation. The remaining 778 patients (90%) formed the comparison group. The ED ≤ 30 min group had a higher percentage of penetrating injuries, lower blood pressure, and was more likely to have a positive FAST exam. The "Direct to Operating Room" (DTOR) score is a predictive scoring system devised to identify patients most likely to benefit from bypassing the ED. The odds ratio of emergency operation within 30 min of hospital arrival increased by 2.71 (95% confidence interval 2.23-3.29; P < 0.001) for every 1-point increase in DTOR score. CONCLUSIONS: Trauma patients with profound hypotension or acidosis and positive FAST were more likely to require surgery within 30 min of hospital presentation. Use of a scoring system may allow early identification of these patients in the prehospital setting by nonphysician providers.

Trends in Use of Diagnostic Imaging for Abdominal Pain in U.S. Emergency Departments.

OBJECTIVE. CT has excellent accuracy for appendicitis but is associated with risks. Research and educational campaigns have been conducted to implement an ultrasound-first strategy for children but not for adults. The purpose of this study was to measure the use of CT and ultrasound in emergency department (ED) visits for abdominal pain and appendicitis to examine the impact of these efforts. MATERIALS AND METHODS. We analyzed data from the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (1997-2016). Use of CT and ultrasound was measured over time in visits for abdominal pain and visits in which appendicitis was diagnosed. Predictors of CT use were identified by means of regression analysis. RESULTS. For children, CT use increased from 1.2% (95% CI, 0.6-2.5%) in 1997, peaked in 2010 at 16.6% (95% CI, 13.8-19.6%), and decreased slightly in 2016. In adults, CT use increased steadily from 3.9% in 1997 (95% CI, 3.1-4.8%) to 37.8% (95% CI, 35.5-41.0%) in 2016. CT use increased for both pediatric and adult ED visits with a diagnosis of appendicitis, from 5.2% (95% CI, 0.7-29.5%) to 71.0% (95% CI, 43.1-88.8%) for children and 7.2% (95% CI, 2.7-17.6%) to 83.3% (95% CI, 64.1-93.3%) for adults. Children with abdominal pain and a diagnosis of appendicitis evaluated in a pediatric ED were at decreased odds (pain odds ratio, 0.6 [95% CI, 0.3-0.9]; appendicitis odds ratio, 0.2 [95% CI, 0.0-0.7]) of receiving CT than were those evaluated in general EDs. CONCLUSION. CT use has decreased in the evaluation of abdominal pain in children, perhaps because of research findings and efforts to implement an ultrasound-first strategy for suspected appendicitis. In contrast, CT use has continued to increase among adults with abdominal pain in EDs.

Timely Care is Patient-Centered Care for Patients with Acute Cholecystitis at a Safety-Net Hospital.

BACKGROUND: Multiple strategies exist to improve the timeliness and efficiency of surgical care at safety-net hospitals (SNH), such as acute care surgery models and nighttime surgery. However, the patient-centeredness of such approaches is unknown. METHODS: Adults ( ≥18 years) with acute cholecystitis were interviewed upon admission to a SNH. Interviews were semi-structured and designed to obtain both exploratory qualitative data and ratings of patient-centered outcomes, ranked by importance to the patient. Outcomes included for rating were general health, symptom status, quality of life, and return to prior functional status. Latent content analysis applying inductive coding methods were used to code and condense raw qualitative data from interview transcripts. RESULTS: Thematic saturation was reached with a sample size of 15 patients. Most participants were female (87%), Hispanic (87%), and had prior diagnosis of benign biliary disease (60%). Patients identified symptom resolution as the highest-ranked outcome in their treatment. Themes expressed by patients during the exploratory segments of the interview included: desire for pain alleviation, frustration with delays to both symptom resolution and surgical intervention, lack of perceived control over their health care, and reticence in discussing preferences with physicians. All patients preferred to have surgical treatment as soon as possible, even if that meant having nighttime surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Effective and timely resolution of symptoms is of utmost importance to patients with acute cholecystitis at a SNH. Efforts to improve timeliness of surgical care are also perceived as patient-centered.