Impact of Automated Reminder Calls in a Safety-Net Setting on Surgical Clinic No-Show Rates.

In surgical clinics, missed appointments may lead to delayed diagnosis and postponed surgical intervention. Automated reminder calls (robocalls) have replaced live staff phone calls in many systems as a cost-saving measure. This study aims to evaluate whether robocalls reduced the outpatient appointment no-show rate for surgical patients in a county hospital. Demographic and clinic data from two surgical clinics at a safety net hospital were collected over two time periods: 3-months immediately before robocalls went live and 3-months immediately after robocalls went live. No-show rates were compared between time periods. Multivariate analysis confirmed that robocalls were independently associated with reduced no-show rates (OR: 1.32; 95% CI: 1.0-1.7; P = .032). In addition, new appointments were independently predictive of higher no-show rates (OR: 1.32; 95% CI: 1.0-1.7; P = .048). Robocalls appear to be an effective tool for improving appointment attendance overall. Furthermore, robocalls may free limited staff to perform higher value work in the healthcare system.

Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM): feasible as reoperation following Heller myotomy.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to demonstrate the feasibility of performing peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) in the management of recurrent achalasia after failed myotomy. METHODS: Eight patients presented to our institution between October 2010 and June 2013 with recurrent/persistent symptoms after prior laparoscopic Heller myotomy. Three patients underwent redo laparoscopic Heller myotomy, and five patients consented to redo myotomy with POEM. RESULTS: Demographics were similar between the groups with exception of age (POEM 69.5 vs. laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM) 34.5, p = 0.003). Preoperative Eckardt scores, motility, and prior interventions were not significantly different. Three patients who underwent POEM and two who underwent laparoscopic Heller myotomy had prior fundoplication. There was one perforation identified after laparoscopic Heller myotomy and one patient with persistent subcutaneous emphysema after POEM. Both POEM and laparoscopic Heller myotomy demonstrated significant improvement in symptoms and Eckardt scores at average follow-up of approximately 5 months (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: POEM is a feasible option for patients after failed myotomy even in the presence of prior fundoplication. The procedure can be performed safely using a similar technique as for primary myotomy with the exception of creating the myotomy laterally along the right side of the esophagus and lesser curvature avoiding the previous anterior myotomy.

Management of non-parasitic splenic cysts: does size really matter?

BACKGROUND: Splenic cysts are relatively rare clinical entities and are often diagnosed incidentally upon imaging conducted for a variety of clinical complaints. They can be categorized as primary or secondary based on the presence or absence of an epithelial lining. Primary cysts are further subdivided into those that are and are not secondary to parasitic infection. The treatment of non-parasitic splenic cysts (NPSC) has historically been dictated by two primary factors: the presence of symptoms attributable to the cyst and cyst size greater or less than 5 cm. While it is appropriate to resect a symptomatic lesion, the premise of recommending operative intervention based on size is not firmly supported by the literature. METHODS: In the current study, we identified 115 patients with splenic cysts and retrospectively reviewed their management that included aspiration, resection, or observation. RESULTS: Our data reveal a negative overall growth rate of asymptomatic cysts, a high recurrence rate after percutaneous drainage, as well as demonstrate the safety of observing asymptomatic lesions over time. CONCLUSION: We conclude that observation of asymptomatic splenic cysts is safe regardless of size and that aspiration should be reserved for those who are not surgical candidates or in cases of diagnostic uncertainty.

Peroral endoscopic myotomy: A short-term comparison with the standard laparoscopic approach.

BACKGROUND: We report our short-term experience with peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) and compare perioperative outcomes with laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM) for achalasia. METHODS: Patients from an institutional review board-approved protocol underwent POEM and were followed prospectively. Comparisons were made, in a prospective esophageal database, with patients who underwent LHM over the same period. RESULTS: We studied 18 patients who underwent POEM and compared them to 21 who underwent LHM. Demographics, preoperative Eckardt scores, motility data, and prior intervention history were comparable. Operative time, myotomy length, and complication rates (1 perforation in each group) were equal. Postoperative pain was significantly different by visual analogue score (POEM 3.9 ± 0.6 versus LHM 5.7 ± 0.4, P = .02) and analgesic use (POEM 26.0 ± 13.7 versus LHM 90.0 ± 48.5 mg morphine, P = .02). Return to activities of daily living was significantly faster in the POEM group (2.2 ± 0.6 vs 6.4 ± 1.0 days, P = .03). Postoperative dysphagia and Eckardt scores were equally successful in both groups. CONCLUSION: POEM results in similar relief of dysphagia with less postoperative pain and quicker return to normal activities.

Single-incision surgery has higher cost with equivalent pain and quality-of-life scores compared with multiple-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective randomized blinded comparison.

BACKGROUND: Since the development of single-incision surgery, several retrospective studies have demonstrated its feasibility; however, randomized prospective trials are still lacking. We report a prospective randomized single-blinded trial with a cost analysis of single-incision (SI) to multi-incision (MI) laparoscopic cholecystectomy. STUDY DESIGN: After obtaining IRB approval, patients with chronic cholecystitis, acute cholecystitis, or biliary dyskinesia were offered participation in this multihospital, multisurgeon trial. Consenting patients were computer randomized into either a transumbilical SI or standard MI group; patient data were then entered into a prospective database. RESULTS: We report 79 patients that were prospectively enrolled and analyzed. Total hospital charges were found to be significantly different between SI and MI groups (MI $15,717 ± $14,231 vs SI $17,817 ± $5,358; p < 0.0001). Broken down further, the following subcharges were found to also be significant: operating room charges (MI $4,445 ± $1,078 vs SI $5,358 ± 893; p < 0.0001); medical/surgical supplies (MI $3,312 ± $6,526 vs SI $5,102 ± $1,529; p < 0.0001); and anesthesia costs (MI $579 ± $7,616 vs SI $820 ± $23,957; p < 0.0001). A validated survey (ie, Surgical Outcomes Measurement System) was used to evaluate various patient quality-of-life parameters at set visits after surgery; scores were statistically equivalent for fatigue, physical function, and satisfaction with results. No difference was found between visual analogue scale scores or inpatient and outpatient pain-medication use. CONCLUSIONS: We show SI surgery to have higher costs than MI surgery with equivalent quality-of-life scores, pain analogue scores, and pain-medication use.