Assessing Alternative Approaches for Wound Closure in a National Pediatric Learning Health System.

INTRODUCTION: Our objective was to perform a feasibility study using real-world data from a learning health system (LHS) to describe current practice patterns of wound closure and explore differences in outcomes associated with the use of tissue adhesives and other methods of wound closure in the pediatric surgical population to inform a potentially large study. METHODS: A multi-institutional cross-sectional study was performed of a random sample of patients <18 y-old who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy, open or laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair, umbilical hernia repair, or repair of traumatic laceration from January 1, 2019, to December 31, 2019. Sociodemographic and operative characteristics were obtained from 6 PEDSnet (a national pediatric LHS) children's hospitals and OneFlorida Clinical Research Consortium (a PCORnet collaboration across 14 academic health systems). Additional clinical data elements were collected via chart review. RESULTS: Of the 692 patients included, 182 (26.3%) had appendectomies, 155 (22.4%) inguinal hernia repairs, 163 (23.6%) umbilical hernia repairs, and 192 (27.8%) traumatic lacerations. Of the 500 surgical incisions, sutures with tissue adhesives were the most frequently used (n = 211, 42.2%), followed by sutures with adhesive strips (n = 176, 35.2%), and sutures only (n = 72, 14.4%). Most traumatic lacerations were repaired with sutures only (n = 127, 64.5%). The overall wound-related complication rate was 3.0% and resumption of normal activities was recommended at a median of 14 d (interquartile ranges 14-14). CONCLUSIONS: The LHS represents an efficient tool to identify cohorts of pediatric surgical patients to perform comparative effectiveness research using real-world data to support medical and surgical products/devices in children.

Addressing ethical clinical dilemmas with quality improvement methodology.

Application of Quality Improvement methodology to nuanced clinical scenarios may be useful to ensure consistent delivery of equitable and comprehensive care. The purpose of this article is to inform the pediatric surgical readership of opportunities where quality improvement methodology may aid in navigating ethical nuances of complex surgical care. We present three case scenarios and discuss how quality improvement methodology could be utilized to address issues of provider autonomy, patient autonomy, and justice.

Management of intussusception in children: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this systematic review by the American Pediatric Surgical Association Outcomes and Evidence-Based Practice Committee was to develop recommendations for the management of ileocolic intussusception in children. METHODS: The ClinicalTrials.gov, Embase, PubMed, and Scopus databases were queried for literature from January 1988 through December 2018. Search terms were designed to address the following topics in intussusception: prophylactic antibiotic use, repeated enema reductions, outpatient management, and use of minimally invasive techniques for children with intussusception. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Consensus recommendations were derived based on the best available evidence. RESULTS: A total of 83 articles were analyzed and included for review. Prophylactic antibiotic use does not decrease complications after radiologic reduction. Repeated enema reductions may be attempted when clinically appropriate. Patients can be safely observed in the emergency department following enema reduction of ileocolic intussusception, avoiding hospital admission. Laparoscopic reduction is often successful. CONCLUSIONS: Regarding intussusception in hemodynamically stable children without critical illness, pre-reduction antibiotics are unnecessary, non-operative outpatient management should be maximized, and minimally invasive techniques may be used to avoid laparotomy. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3-5 (mainly level 3-4) TYPE OF STUDY: Systematic Review of level 1-4 studies.