RESUMEN
Importance: Critically ill pediatric patients often require parenteral nutrition (PN) in the intensive care unit (ICU). Literature suggests mixed lipid emulsions (LE) with soybean oil reduction strategies may improve outcomes. Objective: To examine the association of a hospital-wide switch to a mixed-lipid formula (4-OLE) with pediatric outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study at a large US academic referral center. Pediatric patients aged 1 month to 17 years requiring parenteral nutrition from May 2016 to September 2019 were included. Data were analyzed from October 2020 to February 2023. Exposure: In 2017, Duke University Health System fully converted to a soybean oil/MCT/olive/fish oil lipid (4-OLE) from pure soybean oil-based LE in pediatric patients. Pediatric patients before the change (Intralipid [IL] group) were compared with patients after (4-OLE group). Main Outcomes and Measures: Clinical outcomes were compared between treatment periods via multivariable regression models. The primary outcome was hospital length of stay (LOS). Fourteen secondary outcomes included hospital mortality of any cause, 30-day or 90-day readmission, pneumonia, urinary tract infections (UTIs), total caloric delivery, and liver function tests (aspartate aminotransferase, alanine transaminase, alkaline phosphatase, and total bilirubin). Results: A total of 684 children dependent on PN were identified (342 were critically ill), with 30% (206 children) in the preswitch (IL) period and 70% (478 children) in the postswitch (4-OLE) period; 123 were male (59.7%). In comparing IL vs 4-OLE, there was a significant difference in median (IQR) age (4.0 [1.2-13.0] vs 3.0 [0.8-9.0] years, respectively; P = .04), without difference in body mass index or baseline comorbidities except for significant differences in cancer diagnosis (26 patients in the IL group [12.6%] vs 29 patients in the 4-OLE group [6.1%]; P = .004) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (24 patients in the IL group [11.7%] vs 30 patients in the 4-OLE group [6.3%]; P = .02). In the all children cohort, 4-OLE was associated with shorter hospital LOS (IRR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.05-0.78), and reduced UTI risk (OR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.18-0.64). In the ICU cohort, 4-OLE was associated with shorter hospital LOS (IRR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.78-0.83), and reduced UTI risk (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.11-0.51). Other secondary outcomes were not significant. Conclusions and Relevance: In this observational study of clinical outcomes among children dependent on PN, a switch to 4-OLE in a large academic hospital was associated with a significant decrease in hospital LOS in ICU and non-ICU patients. These findings suggest switching to a soy-LE sparing strategy using 4-OLE is feasible, safe, and associated with improved clinical outcomes in pediatric PN patients.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedad Crítica , Aceite de Soja , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Alanina Transaminasa , Enfermedad Crítica/terapia , Emulsiones , Estudios Retrospectivos , Lactante , Preescolar , Niño , AdolescenteRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to report our experience with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) and validate the experts' opinion about anatomical predictors of failed transcystic LCBDE (TLCBDE) approach. METHODS: Patients undergoing LCBDE at Kaiser Permanente Southern California hospitals (2005-2015) were included. Predictors of failed TLCBDE were identified using bivariate analysis. RESULTS: Of 115 LCBDE, 89.6% were TLCBDE and 10.4% through choledochotomy. Success rate, morbidity, and length of hospital stay were 83.5%, 6.1%, and 3.8 days respectively. Only stone size:cystic duct ratio >1 (35% versus 63%, P = .044) was associated with failure of TLCBDE. In accordance with experts' opinion, there was a suggestive association of stone size ≥6 mm, cystic duct ≤4 mm, multiple stones, and proximal stone location with failure; however, these did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSION: LCBDE is an effective and safe mean of clearing common bile duct stones at community hospitals of an integrated health system. Previously cited contraindications for TLCBDE are not absolute, but rather predictors of failure.
Asunto(s)
Procedimientos Quirúrgicos del Sistema Biliar/efectos adversos , Colecistectomía Laparoscópica/efectos adversos , Coledocolitiasis/cirugía , Conducto Colédoco/cirugía , Laparoscopía/efectos adversos , Adulto , Anciano , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos del Sistema Biliar/métodos , California , Colecistectomía Laparoscópica/métodos , Bases de Datos Factuales , Prestación Integrada de Atención de Salud , Femenino , Humanos , Laparoscopía/métodos , Tiempo de Internación/estadística & datos numéricos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: We compared endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) for managing choledocholithiasis found at time of cholecystectomy. METHODS: One hundred and five LCBDE (2005-2015) were compared to 195 LC/ERCP (2014-2015) from the Southern California Kaiser Permanente database. RESULTS: LC/ERCP was more effective at clearing the CBD (98% vs. 88.6%, p = 0.01); but required more procedures per patient (mean ± standard deviation, 1.1 ± 0.4 vs. 2.0 ± 0.12, p < 0.001). Morbidity, hospital length of stay and readmission were not different (P > 0.05). Four patients failed ERCP, while 12 patients failed LCBDE and had subsequent ERCP (10) or CBD exploration (2). All patients with RYGB had successful LCBDE. CONCLUSION: LC/ERCP is better than LCBDE in clearing CBD stones, but has similar morbidity and is an effective alternative for patients with RYGB.