The Effects of Pulmonary Risk Factors and Combination Thoracic Osseous Fractures on Mortality and Outcomes of Surgical Stabilization of Rib Fractures.

BACKGROUND: Rib fixation for traumatic rib fractures is advocated to decrease morbidity and mortality in select patient populations. We intended to investigate the effect of combination osseous thoracic injuries on mortality with the hypothesis that combination injuries will worsen overall mortality and that SSRF will improve outcomes in combination injuries and in high-risk patients. METHODS: Patients with rib fractures were identified from the Trauma Quality Improvement Project registry from 2019. Patients were then divided into rib fracture(s) alone or in combination with sternal, thoracic vertebra, or scapula fracture. Patients were also categorized into those with COPD and smokers. Patients with AIS >3 outside of thorax were excluded. Patients were subcategorized into those who had rib fixation verse nonoperative management for all subgroups. Analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy of rib fixation. RESULTS: A total of 111,066 patients were included for analysis. The overall mortality was 1.4%. Patients with COPD had over double the mortality risk, with an overall mortality of 3.4%. Combination injuries did not appear to increase mortality. SSRF did not decrease mortality; however, the number of patients in this group was too small to complete statistical analysis. The overall complication rate was 0.43%. There was a trend towards an increase in extrapulmonary complications in the group that underwent surgical fixation. DISCUSSION: Mortality from rib fractures with concomitant osseous thoracic fracture appears to be low. However, mortality is increased in patients with COPD regardless of rib fracture pattern. The number of patients who underwent SSRF was too small to make a statistical comparison.

Functional Status is Key to Long-term Survival in Emergency General Surgery Conditions.

INTRODUCTION: Emergency General Surgery (EGS) conditions in older patients constitutes a substantial public health burden due to high morbidity and mortality. We sought to utilize a supervised machine learning method to determine combinations of factors with the greatest influence on long-term survival in older EGS patients. METHODS: We identified community dwelling participants admitted for EGS conditions from the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey linked with claims (1992-2013). We categorized three binary domains of multimorbidity: chronic conditions, functional limitations, and geriatric syndromes (such as vision or hearing impairment, falls, incontinence). We also collected EGS disease type, age, and sex. We created a classification and regression tree (CART) model to identify groups of variables associated with our outcome of interest, three-year survival. We then performed Cox proportional hazards analysis to determine hazard ratios for each group with the lowest risk group as reference. RESULTS: We identified 1960 patients (median age 79 [interquartile range [IQR]: 73, 85], 59.5% female). The CART model identified the presence of functional limitations as the primary splitting variable. The lowest risk group were patient aged ≤81 y with biliopancreatic disease and without functional limitations. The highest risk group was men aged ≥75 y with functional limitations (hazard ratio [HR] 11.09 (95% confidence interval [CI] 5.91-20.83)). Notably absent from the CART model were chronic conditions and geriatric syndromes. CONCLUSIONS: More than the presence of chronic conditions or geriatric syndromes, functional limitations are an important predictor of long-term survival and must be included in presurgical assessment.

Post-Trauma Discharge Instructions: Are We Dropping the Ball?

INTRODUCTION: Complex follow-up plans for polytrauma patients are compiled at the end of hospitalization into discharge instructions. We sought to identify how often patient discharge instructions incorrectly communicated specialist recommendations. We hypothesized that patients with more complex hospitalizations would have more discharge instruction errors (DI-errors). METHODS: We reviewed adult trauma inpatients (March 2017-March 2018), excluding those who left against medical advice or were expected to follow up outside our system. Complex hospitalizations were represented using injury severity (ISS), hospital length of stay (LOS), intensive care unit length of stay (iLOS), and number of consultants (NC). We recorded the type of consultant (surgical or nonsurgical), and consultant recommendations for follow-up. DI-errors were defined as either follow-up necessary but omitted or follow-up not necessary yet present on the instructions. Patients with DI-errors were compared to patients without DI-errors. Groups were compared using Wilcoxon rank sum or chi-square (alpha <.05). RESULTS: We included 392 patients (median age 45 [IQR 26-58], ISS 14 [10-21], LOS 6 [3-11]). 55 patients (14%) had DI-errors. Factors associated with DI-errors included the total number of consultants and use of nonsurgical consultants. ISS, LOS, iLOS, were not associated with DI-errors. CONCLUSION: Common measures of admission complexity were not associated with DI-errors, although the number and type of consultants were associated with DI-errors. Non-surgical specialty consultant recommendations were more likely to be omitted. It is crucial for patients to receive accurate discharge instructions, and systematic processes are needed to improve communication with the patients at discharge.

What if You Need More Than One? More Acute Care Surgery Procedures Are Associated with Mortality.

Background: It is unknown whether having multiple acute care surgery (ACS) procedures performed in one admission confers additional risk. We hypothesized that having multiple procedures (for example, hernia repair plus bowel resection) would be associated with higher mortality. Patients and Methods: We identified all 2017 National Inpatient Sample admissions with ACS procedures including: colon, small bowel/appendix (SB), hernia, adhesiolysis, peptic ulcer procedures, gallbladder, debridement, other laparotomy, other laparoscopy. The total number of procedures for each admission and common dyad (two-procedure) and triad (three-procedure) combinations were identified. Logistic regression estimated the odds of in-hospital mortality for increasing procedure count and specific dyad and triad combinations, using patients with one procedure as the reference. Results: A total of 216,317 ACS patients (median age, 57, interquartile range [IQR], 43-70; 50.6% female) were included; 2.8% died. Patients with multiple procedures were more likely to die than patients with one procedure (7.4% vs. 1.9%). An increasing number of procedures was associated with higher odds of death (two procedures: odds ratio [OR], 3.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.9-3.2] to six or more procedures, OR, 9.5; 95% CI, 4.9-18.5); having more than three procedures was associated with at least fivefold higher odds of death. Specific dyads/triads were associated with particularly high risk of mortality, including ulcer/laparotomy (OR, 15.5; 95% CI, 13.7-17.5) and laparotomy/SB (OR, 8.31; 95% CI, 5.15-13.40). Conclusions: Multiple ACS procedures in one hospitalization confer increased odds of in-hospital mortality. This knowledge enables the ACS providers to better counsel patients by giving more specific expectations regarding mortality based on the number of procedures required or anticipated during an admission.

Do new trauma centers provide needed or redundant access? A nationwide analysis.

BACKGROUND: Our prior research has demonstrated that increasing the number of trauma centers (TCs) in a state does not reliably improve state-level injury-related mortality. We hypothesized that many new TCs would serve populations already served by existing TCs, rather than in areas without ready TC access. We also hypothesized that new TCs would also be less likely to serve economically disadvantaged populations. METHODS: All state-designated adult TCs registered with the American Trauma Society in 2014 and 2019 were mapped using ArcGIS Pro (ESRI Inc., Redlands, CA). Trauma centers were grouped as Level 1 or 2 (Lev12) or Level 3, 4 or 5 (Lev345). We also obtained census tract-level data (73,666 tracts), including population counts and percentage of population below the federal poverty threshold. Thirty-minute drive-time areas were created around each TC. Census tracts were considered "served" if their geographic centers were located within a 30-minute drive-time area to any TC. Data were analyzed at the census tract level. RESULTS: A total of 2,140 TCs were identified in 2019, with 256 new TCs and 151 TC closures. Eighty-two percent of new TCs were Levels 3 to 5. Nationwide, coverage increased from 75.3% of tracts served in 2014 to 78.1% in 2019, representing an increased coverage from 76.0% to 79.4% of the population. New TC served 17,532 tracts, of which 87.3% were already served. New Lev12 TCs served 9,100 tracts, of which 91.2% were already served; new Lev345 TCs served 15,728 tracts, of which 85.9% were already served. Of 2,204 newly served tracts, those served by Lev345 TCs had higher mean percentage poverty compared with those served by Lev12 TCs (15.7% vs. 13.2% poverty, p < 0.05). DISCUSSION: Overall, access to trauma care has been improving in the United States. However, the majority of new TCs opened in locations with preexisting access to trauma care. Nationwide, Levels 3, 4, and 5 TCs have been responsible for expanding access to underserved populations. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiologic; Level IV.

A rare case of retained sabot after close-range shotgun injury.

BACKGROUND: Shotgun injuries are a relatively uncommon type of trauma, and therefore may present a challenge in management for trauma surgeons. This is particularly true in the case of surgeons unfamiliar with the unique characteristics of shotgun wounds and the mechanics of shotguns. In many cases, the shot pellets are the primary source of injury. However, a broad understanding of shotgun mechanics is important in recognizing alternative presentations. This article details a case of sabot (a stabilization device used with certain projectiles) retention after a close-range shotgun injury, reviews underlying shotgun mechanics, and discusses strategies for the detection and mitigation of these injuries. The aim of this case report is to increase awareness of and reduce the potential morbidity of close-range shotgun injuries. CASE PRESENTATION: A middle-aged female presented to the Emergency Department with wounds to her right hip and flank after suffering a shotgun injury. A contrast computed tomography scan demonstrated no evidence of hollow viscous or vascular injury, but was otherwise severely limited by scatter artifact from the numerous embedded pellets. The patient was admitted for wound care and discharged 2 days later with a clean wound bed and no evidence of tissue necrosis. Six days after injury, she reported an "unusual" smell associated with severe pain in her right hip wound. She was evaluated in clinic where examination revealed a retained foreign body, identified to be a shotgun shell sabot, which was removed in clinic. She presented again several days before scheduled follow-up with a persistent foul smell from her wound and was noted to have necrotic tissue at the base and margins of the wound that required hospital readmission for operative debridement and closure with negative pressure wound therapy. The patient had an uncomplicated recovery after surgical debridement. CONCLUSIONS: Although shotgun sabot penetration and retention are rare, they are associated with significant morbidity. Sabot penetration should be considered if injury narrative, physical examination, or radiographic characteristics indicate a distance from shotgun to patient of less than 2 m. A high degree of suspicion is indicated at less than 1 m.