Incidence of venous thromboembolism in coronavirus disease 2019: An experience from a single large academic center.

BACKGROUND: Infection with the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 has been associated with a hypercoagulable state. Emerging data from China and Europe have consistently shown an increased incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE). We aimed to identify the VTE incidence and early predictors of VTE at our high-volume tertiary care center. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of 147 patients who had been admitted to Temple University Hospital with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) from April 1, 2020 to April 27, 2020. We first identified the VTE (pulmonary embolism [PE] and deep vein thrombosis [DVT]) incidence in our cohort. The VTE and no-VTE groups were compared by univariable analysis for demographics, comorbidities, laboratory data, and treatment outcomes. Subsequently, multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the early predictors of VTE. RESULTS: The 147 patients (20.9% of all admissions) admitted to a designated COVID-19 unit at Temple University Hospital with a high clinical suspicion of acute VTE had undergone testing for VTE using computed tomography pulmonary angiography and/or extremity venous duplex ultrasonography. The overall incidence of VTE was 17% (25 of 147). Of the 25 patients, 16 had had acute PE, 14 had had acute DVT, and 5 had had both PE and DVT. The need for invasive mechanical ventilation (adjusted odds ratio, 3.19; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-9.55) and the admission D-dimer level ≥1500 ng/mL (adjusted odds ratio, 3.55; 95% confidence interval, 1.29-9.78) were independent markers associated with VTE. The all-cause mortality in the VTE group was greater than that in the non-VTE group (48% vs 22%; P = .007). CONCLUSIONS: Our study represents one of the earliest reported from the United States on the incidence rate of VTE in patients with COVID-19. Patients with a high clinical suspicion and the identified risk factors (invasive mechanical ventilation, admission D-dimer level ≥1500 ng/mL) should be considered for early VTE testing. We did not screen all patients admitted for VTE; therefore, the true incidence of VTE could have been underestimated. Our findings require confirmation in future prospective studies.

American College of Surgeons NSQIP Risk Calculator Accuracy for Emergent and Elective Colorectal Operations.

BACKGROUND: The American College of Surgeons NSQIP has developed a risk calculator (RC) to assist patients and surgeons with difficult decisions. The aim of this analysis was to determine the accuracy of the RC in patients undergoing elective and emergent colorectal operations. STUDY DESIGN: From January 2013 through December 2015, seventy-five patients undergoing emergent colorectal operations were paired by date with 75 patients having elective colorectal operations. Patient data were entered into the RC. Actual postoperative outcomes, derived from NSQIP data, were compared with those predicted by the RC. RESULTS: Emergent and elective patients differed (p < 0.05) with respect to age, functional status, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, steroid use, wound class, COPD, and chronic renal insufficiency. The RC accurately predicted outcomes in elective patients. Outcomes were significantly worse (p < 0.05) after the emergent operations. In emergent cases, the RC underestimated serious complications and length of stay and overestimated discharge to a skilled nursing facility (all p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The American College of Surgeons NSQIP RC accurately predicts outcomes for elective colorectal operations. Predicted and actual outcomes are significantly better in patients undergoing elective colon operations compared with those undergoing emergent procedures. The RC should be used with caution in emergent cases, as it has the potential to underestimate serious complications and length of stay, and overestimate discharge to skilled nursing facility. Refinement of the tool to include procedure complexity and diagnosis terms might improve its accuracy in emergent cases.

Venous thromboembolism after major venous injuries: Competing priorities.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) after major vascular injury (MVI) is particularly challenging because the competing risk of thrombosis and embolization after direct vessel injury must be balanced with risk of bleeding after surgical repair. We hypothesized that venous injuries, repair type, and intraoperative anticoagulation would influence VTE formation after MVI. METHODS: A multi-institution, retrospective cohort study of consecutive MVI patients was conducted at three urban, Level I centers (2005-2013). Patients with MVI of the neck, torso, or proximal extremities (to elbows/knees) were included. Our primary study endpoint was the development of VTE (DVT or pulmonary embolism [PE]). RESULTS: The 435 major vascular injury patients were primarily young (27 years) men (89%) with penetrating (84%) injuries. When patients with (n = 108) and without (n = 327) VTE were compared, we observed no difference in age, mechanism, extremity injury, tourniquet use, orthopedic and spine injuries, damage control, local heparinized saline, or vascular surgery consultation (all p > 0.05). VTE patients had greater Injury Severity Score (ISS) (17 vs. 12), shock indices (1 vs. 0.9), and more torso (58% vs. 35%) and venous (73% vs. 48%) injuries, but less often received systemic intraoperative anticoagulation (39% vs. 53%) or postoperative enoxaparin (47% vs. 61%) prophylaxis (all p < 0.05). After controlling for ISS, hemodynamics, injured vessel, intraoperative anticoagulation, and postoperative prophylaxis, multivariable analysis revealed venous injury was independently predictive of VTE (odds ratio, 2.7; p = 0.002). Multivariable analysis of the venous injuries subset (n = 237) then determined that only delay in starting VTE chemoprophylaxis (odds ratio, 1.3/day; p = 0.013) independently predicted VTE after controlling for ISS, hemodynamics, injured vessel, surgical subspecialty, intraoperative anticoagulation, and postoperative prophylaxis. Overall, 3.4% of venous injury patients developed PE, but PE rates were not related to their operative management (p = 0.72). CONCLUSION: Patients with major venous injuries are at high risk for VTE, regardless of intraoperative management. Our results support the immediate initiation of postoperative chemoprophylaxis in patients with major venous injuries. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/care management, level IV.

Acute right heart failure after hemorrhagic shock and trauma pneumonectomy-a management approach: A blinded randomized controlled animal trial using inhaled nitric oxide.

BACKGROUND: Hemorrhagic shock and pneumonectomy causes an acute increase in pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR). The increase in PVR and right ventricular (RV) afterload leads to acute RV failure, thus reducing left ventricular (LV) preload and output. Inhaled nitric oxide (iNO) lowers PVR by relaxing pulmonary arterial smooth muscle without remarkable systemic vascular effects. We hypothesized that with hemorrhagic shock and pneumonectomy, iNO can be used to decrease PVR and mitigate right heart failure. METHODS: A hemorrhagic shock and pneumonectomy model was developed using sheep. Sheep received lung protective ventilatory support and were instrumented to serially obtain measurements of hemodynamics, gas exchange, and blood chemistry. Heart function was assessed with echocardiography. After randomization to study gas of iNO 20 ppm (n = 9) or nitrogen as placebo (n = 9), baseline measurements were obtained. Hemorrhagic shock was initiated by exsanguination to a target of 50% of the baseline mean arterial pressure. The resuscitation phase was initiated, consisting of simultaneous left pulmonary hilum ligation, via median sternotomy, infusion of autologous blood and initiation of study gas. Animals were monitored for 4 hours. RESULTS: All animals had an initial increase in PVR. PVR remained elevated with placebo; with iNO, PVR decreased to baseline. Echo showed improved RV function in the iNO group while it remained impaired in the placebo group. After an initial increase in shunt and lactate and decrease in SvO2, all returned toward baseline in the iNO group but remained abnormal in the placebo group. CONCLUSION: These data indicate that by decreasing PVR, iNO decreased RV afterload, preserved RV and LV function, and tissue oxygenation in this hemorrhagic shock and pneumonectomy model. This suggests that iNO may be a useful clinical adjunct to mitigate right heart failure and improve survival when trauma pneumonectomy is required.