RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Evidence-based medicine underpins medical and surgical practice, with level of evidence (LOE) being a key aspect that allows clinicians and researchers to better discriminate the methodological context by which studies are conducted and appropriately interpret their conclusions, and more specifically the strength of their recommendations. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to reassess the LOE of articles published in plastic surgery journals. METHODS: To assess the overall LOE of publications from January 1 to December 31, 2021, a review of the following plastic surgery journals was performed: Aesthetic Surgery Journal (ASJ), Annals of Plastic Surgery (Annals), Journal of Plastic Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery (JRPAS), Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (PRS), and Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Global Open (PRS GO). RESULTS: Of 3698 PUBMED articles, 1649 original articles and systematic reviews were analyzed. The average LOE for each journal was: ASJ 3.02 ± 0.94, Annals 3.49 ± 0.62, JPRAS 3.33 ± 0.77, PRS 2.91 ± 0.77, and PRS GO 3.45 ± 0.70. The collective average LOE was 3.28 ± 0.78. Only 4.4% were LOE 1 and 7.3% were LOE 2. Compared to past studies, PRS showed a significant LOE improvement (P = .0254), while ASJ and JPRAS saw nonsignificant changes; Annals experienced a significant decrease (P = .0092). CONCLUSIONS: ASJ and PRS showed the highest LOE among the journals analyzed. Despite this, low LOE studies remain prevalent in plastic surgery. This paper serves as a call to action for both researchers and academic journals to elevate the standard, offering several strategies to help improve the LOE in plastic surgery.
Asunto(s)
Medicina Basada en la Evidencia , Publicaciones Periódicas como Asunto , Cirugía Plástica , Cirugía Plástica/normas , Cirugía Plástica/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Medicina Basada en la Evidencia/normas , Medicina Basada en la Evidencia/estadística & datos numéricos , Publicaciones Periódicas como Asunto/estadística & datos numéricos , Procedimientos de Cirugía Plástica/normas , Procedimientos de Cirugía Plástica/estadística & datos numéricos , BibliometríaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Recent studies have suggested that extended mesenteric excision (ME) may reduce surgical reintervention in Crohn's Disease (CD), but there remains clinical concerns regarding potential peri-operative morbidity. This retrospective study compares 30-day perioperative morbidity between limited and extended ME in segmental colectomies for CD. METHODS: Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement (ACS-NSQIP) colectomy-specific database, all patients with CD undergoing segmental colectomy for non-malignant indications between 2014-2019 were included. A lymph node harvest of 12 or more nodes was used as a surrogate for extended ME. The primary outcome was NSQIP major morbidity. Secondary outcomes included abdominal complications and perioperative bleeding. RESULTS: Of 3,709 patients included from the ACS-NSQIP database, 3,087 underwent limited ME and 622 underwent extended ME. On univariate analysis, those with limited mesenteric excision were less likely to be anemic (46.1% vs 55.0%, p < 0.001) and have undergone an open surgery (44.7% vs 34.7%, p < 0.001). On univariate comparison of limited and extended ME, there was no significant difference in major morbidity. On multiple logistic regression, controlling for age, sex, BMI, smoking, preoperative sepsis, preoperative anemia, surgical approach, emergency surgery, stoma creation, bowel preparation, and immunosuppression, the extent of ME was not an independent predictor of NSQIP major morbidity (OR 1.1, 95% CI 0.84-1.44). Likewise, the extent of ME was not associated with an increase in abdominal complications (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.76-1.19) or post-operative bleeding (OR 1.89, 95% CI 0.75-1.53). CONCLUSION: Extended ME for CD was not associated with an increase in 30-day perioperative major morbidity.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedad de Crohn , Humanos , Enfermedad de Crohn/cirugía , Enfermedad de Crohn/complicaciones , Estudios Retrospectivos , Mejoramiento de la Calidad , Colectomía/efectos adversos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/cirugíaRESUMEN
Wound healing complications present a significant burden on both patients and health-care systems, and understanding wound healing principles is crucial across medical and surgical specialties to help mitigate such complications. One of these longstanding principles, specifically delayed primary closure (DPC), described as mechanically closing a wound after several days of secondary intention healing, lacks clear consensus on its definition, indications, and outcomes. This practical review examines wound healing fundamentals, focusing on DPC, its execution, indications, and comparative outcomes. A PubMed literature search was conducted to retrieve studies on DPC. Inclusion criteria included comparative studies assessing outcomes and complications between DPC and other closure techniques, as well as articles investigating DPC's underlying physiology. Twenty-three comparative studies met inclusion criteria. DPC wounds have significantly higher partial pressure of oxygen, higher blood flow, and higher rates of collagen synthesis and remodeling activity, all of which help explain DPC wounds' superior mechanical strength. DPC seems most beneficial in contaminated wounds, such as complicated appendectomies, postcardiac surgery wounds, and complicated abdominal wall reconstructions, where it has been associated with lower rates of surgical site infections. This practical review provides an evidence-based approach to DPC, its physiology, technique, and indications. Based on the existing literature, the authors recommend that DPC wounds should be dressed in saline/betadine soaks, changed and irrigated daily, with delayed closure lasting between 3 and 5 days or until the infection has resolved. The clearest indications for DPC are in the context of contaminated abdominal surgery and sternal wound dehiscence post cardiac surgery.
RESUMEN
Pancreatic injury post blunt abdominal trauma is exceedingly rare. When complete major pancreatic duct (MPD) disruption occurs, a disconnection between the pancreas and the duodenum can take place, ultimately leading to fistula formation. We describe a case of MPD disruption following blunt abdominal trauma, complicated by a fistula between the pancreas and an open abdomen (pancreatico-atmospheric fistula). Although the fistula was managed using standard methods for treating pancreatic fistulas, wound care was a significant challenge in this case where the fistula exteriorized into an open abdomen.