Risk of Postpartum Hemorrhage in Hypertensive Disorders of Pregnancy: Stratified by Severity.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine the composite maternal hemorrhagic outcome (CMHO) among individuals with and without hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP), stratified by disease severity. Additionally, we investigated the composite neonatal adverse outcome (CNAO) among individuals with HDP who had postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) versus did not have PPH. STUDY DESIGN: Our retrospective cohort study included all singletons who delivered at a Level IV center over two consecutive years. The primary outcome was the rate of CMHO, defined as blood loss ≥1,000 mL, use of uterotonics, mechanical tamponade, surgical techniques for atony, transfusion, venous thromboembolism, intensive care unit admission, hysterectomy, or maternal death. A subgroup analysis was performed to investigate the primary outcome stratified by (1) chronic hypertension, (2) gestational hypertension and preeclampsia without severe features, and (3) preeclampsia with severe features. A multivariable regression analysis was performed to investigate the association of HDP with and without PPH on a CNAO which included APGAR <7 at 5 minutes, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, intraventricular hemorrhage, necrotizing enterocolitis, seizures, neonatal sepsis, meconium aspiration syndrome, ventilation >6 hours, hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy, or neonatal death. RESULTS: Of 8,357 singletons, 2,827 (34%) had HDP. Preterm delivery <37 weeks, induction of labor, prolonged oxytocin use, and magnesium sulfate usage were more common in those with versus without HDP (p < 0.001). CMHO was higher among individuals with HDP than those without HDP (26 vs. 19%; adjusted relative risk [aRR] 1.11, 95% CI 1.01-1.22). In the subgroup analysis, only individuals with preeclampsia with severe features were associated with higher CMHO (n = 802; aRR 1.52, 95% CI 1.32-1.75). There was a higher likelihood of CNAO in individuals with both HDP and PPH compared to those with HDP without PPH (aRR 1.49, 95% CI 1.06-2.09). CONCLUSION: CMHO was higher among those with HDP. After stratification, only those with preeclampsia with severe features had an increased risk of CMHO. Among individuals with HDP, those who also had a PPH had worse neonatal outcomes than those without hemorrhage. KEY POINTS: · Individuals with HDP had an 11% higher likelihood of CMHO.. · After stratification, increased CMHO was limited to those with preeclampsia with severe features.. · There was a higher likelihood of CNAO in those with both HDP and PPH compared to HDP without PPH..

Association of adverse outcomes with three-tiered risk assessment tool for obstetrical hemorrhage.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines promote stratification for the risk for postpartum hemorrhage among parturients, although the evidence for the associated differential morbidity among the groups remains inconsistent among published reports. OBJECTIVE: Using the California Maternal Quality Care Collaborative schema modified by the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology, we compared the composite maternal hemorrhagic outcome and the composite neonatal adverse outcome among singletons who were categorized after delivery by the researchers as low-, medium-, or high-risk for postpartum hemorrhage. We hypothesized that the composite outcomes would be significantly different among the individuals in the different 3-tiered categories. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study of all singleton parturients with a gestational age of at least 14 weeks who delivered at a single site within 1 year. The composite maternal hemorrhagic outcome included any of the following: estimated blood loss ≥1000 mL, use of uterotonics (excluding prophylactic oxytocin) or Bakri balloon, surgical management of postpartum hemorrhage, blood transfusion, hysterectomy, thromboembolism, admission to the intensive care unit, or maternal death. The composite neonatal adverse outcome included Apgar score <7 at 5 minutes, birth injury, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, intraventricular hemorrhage, neonatal seizure, sepsis, ventilation > 6 hrs., brachial plexus palsy, hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy, or neonatal death. Multivariable Poisson regression models with robust error variance were used to estimate the adjusted relative risks with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: Of the 4544 deliveries in the study period, 4404 (96.7%) met the inclusion criteria, and among them, 1745 (39.6%) were categorized as low, 1376 (31.2%) as medium, and 1283 (29.1%) as high risk. Overall, 941 (21.4%) participants experienced the composite maternal hemorrhagic outcome with 285 (16.4%) of those being in the low-risk group, 319 (23.2%) in the medium-risk group, and 337 (26.3%) in the high-risk group. Among all parturients, 95.7% in the low-, 89.4% in the medium-, and 85.3% in the high-risk group neither had an estimated blood loss or a quantified blood loss ≥1000 mL nor were transfused. After multivariable adjustment and when compared with the low-risk group, there was a significantly higher risk for the composite maternal hemorrhagic outcome in the medium-risk group (adjusted relative risk, 1.23; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-1.43) and in the high-risk group (adjusted relative risk, 1.51; 95% confidence interval, 1.31-1.75). Overall, 366 newborns (8.4%) developed the composite neonatal adverse outcome with 76 (4.2%) in of those being in the low-risk group, 153 (11.3%) in the medium-risk group, and 140 (11.1%) in the high-risk group. After multivariable adjustment and when compared with the low-risk group, there were no significant differences in the composite neonatal adverse outcome in the medium- (adjusted relative risk, 1.27; 95% confidence interval, 0.97-1.68) or the high-risk group (adjusted relative risk, 1.29; 95% confidence interval, 0.98-1.68). CONCLUSION: Although 8 of 10 parturients categorized as high risk neither had blood loss ≥1000 mL nor underwent transfusion, the risk stratification provides information regarding the composite maternal hemorrhagic outcome.

The Role of Biologic Mesh and Fundoplication in the Surgical Management of Hiatal Hernias: A Multicenter Evaluation.

INTRODUCTION: Hiatal hernia repair is associated with substantial recurrence of both hiatal hernia and symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux (GER). While small randomized controlled trials demonstrate limited differences in outcomes with use of mesh or fundoplication type, uncertainty remains. METHODS: A multicenter, retrospective review of patients undergoing surgical treatment of hiatal hernias between 2015 and 2020 was performed. Patients with mesh and with suture-only repair were compared, and partial versus complete fundoplication was compared. Primary outcomes were hernia recurrence and occurrence of postoperative GER symptoms and dysphagia. Multivariable regression was performed to assess the effect of each intervention on clinical outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 453 patients from four sites were followed for a median (IQR) of 17 (13) months. On multivariate analysis, mesh had no impact on hernia recurrence (odds ratio 0.993, 95% CI: 0.53-1.87, p = 0.982), and fundoplication type did not impact recurrence of postoperative GER symptoms (complete: odds ratio 0.607, 95% CI: 0.33-1.12, p = 0.112) or dysphagia (complete: odds ratio 1.17, 95% CI: 0.56-2.43, p = 0.677). CONCLUSION: During hiatal hernia repair, mesh and fundoplication type do not appear to have substantial impact on GER symptoms, dysphagia, or hernia recurrence. This multicenter study provides real-world evidence to support the findings of small RCTs.

Evaluation of ICARUS Guidelines and Recommendations Not Supported by Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: The ICARUS guidelines are a systematic review and Delphi process that provide recommendations in the treatment and management of patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Many of the recommendations were supported by randomized trials; some were not. This study assesses guidelines with limited evidence and weak endorsement. METHODS: Four ICARUS guidelines were chosen: the role of fundoplication for patients with BMI > 35, regurgitation, chest pain, and extra-esophageal symptoms. A multicenter database of patients undergoing fundoplication surgery for GERD between 2015 and 2020 was used. Outcomes assessed were anatomic failure and symptom recurrence. Multivariable regression was performed. RESULTS: Five institutions performed a fundoplication on 461 patients for GERD with a median of follow-up of 14.7 months (IQR 14.2). On multivariate analysis, patients with the chosen pre-operative comorbidities achieved comparable post-operative benefits. Patients with a BMI > 35 were not more likely to experience anatomic failure. Patients with pre-operative regurgitation had similar symptom recurrence rates to those without. Patients with non-cardiac chest pain had comparable rates of symptom recurrence to those without. Reporting a pre-operative chronic cough attributable to reflux was not associated with higher rates of post-operative symptom recurrence. DISCUSSION: Among the ICARUS guidelines and recommendations, a small proportion was lacking evidence at low risk for bias and endorsement. The results of this multicenter study evaluated outcomes of patients with various pre-operative conditions: BMI > 35, chest pain attributable to reflux, extra-esophageal symptoms attributable to reflux, and regurgitation. Our findings endorse patients with these characteristics as candidates for anti-reflux surgery.

Safety and Feasibility of Performing Antireflux Procedures at a Safety Net Hospital.

INTRODUCTION: One-half of Americans have limited access to health care; these patients often receive care through safety net hospitals, which are associated with worse medical outcomes. This study aims to compare the outcomes of patients who received foregut surgery at a safety net hospital to those at a private or university hospital. We hypothesized that patients treated at the safety net hospital will have a greater rate of radiographic recurrence and reoperations. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted on patients who underwent hiatal hernia repair or fundoplication for gastroesophageal reflux disease at an affiliated safety net, private, or university hospital from June 2015 to May 2020. The primary outcome was radiographic recurrence. The secondary outcomes included reoperation and symptom recurrence. Analysis was performed using analysis of variance, chi-square, and logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 499 patients were identified: 157 at a safety net hospital, 233 at a private hospital, and 119 at a university hospital. The median (interquartile range) follow-up was 16 (13) mo. The safety net hospital treated more Hispanics, females, and patients with comorbidities. Large hiatal hernias were more common at the safety net and private hospitals. Robotic surgery was more frequently at the university hospital. There was no difference in radiographic recurrence (13.4% versus 19.7% versus 17.6%; P = 0.269), reoperation (3.8% versus 7.2% versus 6.7%; P = 0.389), or postoperative dysphagia (15.3% versus 12.6% versus 15.1%; P = 0.696). On logistic regression, there were no differences in outcomes among institutions. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that despite the challenges faced at safety net hospitals, it could be feasible to safely perform minimally invasive foregut surgery with similar outcomes to private and university hospitals.

Systematic Review of Treatment of Patients with Achalasia: Heller Myotomy, Pneumatic Dilation, and Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this systematic review is to assess all comparative randomized controlled trials evaluating Heller myotomy, pneumatic dilation, and peroral endoscopic myotomy. STUDY DESIGN: Achalasia is an esophageal motility disorder associated with degeneration of the myenteric plexus; it causes significant symptoms and impacts patient quality of life (QOL). The optimal treatment for patients with achalasia and the impact of these interventions on QOL remain unclear. PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane were searched from inception to April 2020. Randomized controlled trials that compared the 3 interventions were included. Primary outcome was QOL at 12 to 36 months after the operation. Secondary outcomes included reintervention, dysphagia, leak/perforation, and GERD recurrence. RESULTS: Nine publications of 6 studies were included. Of the 9 publications, there was no significant difference in QOL at 12 to 36 months except for one study in which QOL was significantly higher in patients who underwent Heller myotomy as opposed to pneumatic dilation at 3 years; however, at 5 years there was no difference. Pneumatic dilation was associated with the highest rates of dysphagia recurrence and reintervention, but peroral endoscopic myotomy had the lowest. CONCLUSIONS: The treatment of achalasia should be chosen in accordance with patient goals. After any of the 3 interventions, QOL appears to be similar. However, peroral endoscopic myotomy may be associated with the lowest rates of perforation/leak, dysphagia, and reintervention and may be the lowest risk option. However, there are barriers to widespread use due to challenges in training and adoption.

The Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) 510(k) Process: A Systematic Review of 1000 Cases.

BACKGROUND: The vast majority of devices cleared by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) are through the 510(k) process, which allows medical devices to be quickly introduced into the market. The FDA 510(k) process is designed to minimize the burden and expense of bringing new devices to market; however, as a result, the FDA may be limited in its ability to establish the safety of these devices. METHODS: The FDA 510(k) online archives were searched for devices cleared from 2013 to 2014. One thousand devices were randomly selected. PubMed was searched for each device to identify publications about the devices. The primary outcome was the percentage of devices cleared through the 510(k) process with no published research. Secondary outcomes included: conflict of interest (COI) of authors and outcomes of published studies on the devices. RESULTS: A total of 6152 devices were cleared through the 510(k) process in 2013-2014. Of the 1000 randomly selected devices, 17.8% had published research. There were 375 manuscripts, of which 47 (12.5%) were randomized controlled trials. One-fourth (25.1%) of studies had a clearly identifiable COI, while COI was unclear for half (49.9%). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: There is limited evidence examining the safety and effectiveness of devices cleared via the 510(k) process. Thousands of devices are cleared through the FDA's 510(k) process each year with limited or no evidence publicly available. This has led to the market being introduced to potentially costly, nonbeneficial, or harmful devices. Devices, like prescription drugs, should undergo a more rigorous clearance process.

Association of Patient Belief About Success of Antibiotics for Appendicitis and Outcomes: A Secondary Analysis of the CODA Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: A patient's belief in the likely success of a treatment may influence outcomes, but this has been understudied in surgical trials. Objective: To examine the association between patients' baseline beliefs about the likelihood of treatment success with outcomes of antibiotics for appendicitis in the Comparison of Outcomes of Antibiotic Drugs and Appendectomy (CODA) trial. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a secondary analysis of the CODA randomized clinical trial. Participants from 25 US medical centers were enrolled between May 3, 2016, and February 5, 2020. Included in the analysis were participants with appendicitis who were randomly assigned to receive antibiotics in the CODA trial. After informed consent but before randomization, participants who were assigned to receive antibiotics responded to a baseline survey including a question about how successful they believed antibiotics could be in treating their appendicitis. Interventions: Participants were categorized based on baseline survey responses into 1 of 3 belief groups: unsuccessful/unsure, intermediate, and completely successful. Main Outcomes and Measures: Three outcomes were assigned at 30 days: (1) appendectomy, (2) high decisional regret or dissatisfaction with treatment, and (3) persistent signs and symptoms (abdominal pain, tenderness, fever, or chills). Outcomes were compared across groups using adjusted risk differences (aRDs), with propensity score adjustment for sociodemographic and clinical factors. Results: Of the 776 study participants who were assigned antibiotic treatment in CODA, a total of 425 (mean [SD] age, 38.5 [13.6] years; 277 male [65%]) completed the baseline belief survey before knowing their treatment assignment. Baseline beliefs were as follows: 22% of participants (92 of 415) had an unsuccessful/unsure response, 51% (212 of 415) had an intermediate response, and 27% (111 of 415) had a completely successful response. Compared with the unsuccessful/unsure group, those who believed antibiotics could be completely successful had a 13-percentage point lower risk of appendectomy (aRD, -13.49; 95% CI, -24.57 to -2.40). The aRD between those with intermediate vs unsuccessful/unsure beliefs was -5.68 (95% CI, -16.57 to 5.20). Compared with the unsuccessful/unsure group, those with intermediate beliefs had a lower risk of persistent signs and symptoms (aRD, -15.72; 95% CI, -29.71 to -1.72), with directionally similar results for the completely successful group (aRD, -15.14; 95% CI, -30.56 to 0.28). Conclusions and Relevance: Positive patient beliefs about the likely success of antibiotics for appendicitis were associated with a lower risk of appendectomy and with resolution of signs and symptoms by 30 days. Pathways relating beliefs to outcomes and the potential modifiability of beliefs to improve outcomes merit further investigation. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02800785.

Review of SAGES GERD guidelines and recommendations.

BACKGROUND: The Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) developed evidence-based guidelines for the management of patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The aim of this study is to evaluate guidelines lacking agreement among experts (grades B-D) or lacking support from randomized controlled trials (levels II-III). METHODS: Six guidelines were chosen for evaluation. A retrospective review of a multicenter database of patients undergoing fundoplication surgery for treatment of GERD between 2015 and 2020 was performed. Patients that underwent a concurrent gastrectomy or were diagnosed with pre-operative achalasia were excluded. Demographics, pre-operative, intra-operative, and post-operative variables were collected. Post-operative outcomes were evaluated based on selected SAGES guidelines. Outcomes were assessed using multivariable regression or stratified analysis for each guideline. RESULTS: A total of 444 patients from four institutions underwent surgery for the management of GERD with a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 16 (13) months. Guidelines supported by our data were (1) robotic repair has similar short-term outcomes to laparoscopic repair, (2) outcomes in older patients are similar to outcomes of younger patients undergoing antireflux surgery, and (3) following laparoscopic antireflux surgery, dysphagia has been reported to significantly improve from pre-operative values. Guidelines that were not supported were (1) mesh reinforcement may be beneficial in decreasing the incidence of wrap herniation, (2) a bougie has been found to be effective, and (3) the long-term effectiveness of fundoplication in obese individuals (BMI > 30) has been questioned due to higher failure rates. CONCLUSION: Many SAGES GERD guidelines not receiving Grade A or Level I recommendation are supported by large, multicenter database findings. However, further studies at low risk for bias are needed to further refine these guidelines.

Patient quality of life before and after ventral hernia repair.

BACKGROUND: Recurrence is often reported as the primary outcome among studies of patients with hernias; however, there is growing interest in patient quality of life. The relationship between quality of life and recurrence is poorly understood. This study evaluates this relationship. METHODS: A secondary analysis of 3 prospective clinical trials was performed. The modified Activities Assessment Scale, a validated, abdominal wall-specific quality of life tool was used (1 = poor quality of life and 100 = perfect quality of life). Patients with and without a hernia recurrence were compared. Baseline quality of life, follow-up quality of life, and change in quality of life were measured. The relationship between quality of life and clinical outcomes was examined. RESULTS: A total of 238 patients were followed for median (range) 30 (14-44) months, of whom 31 (13.0%) had a clinical recurrence, whereas 207 (87.0%) had no clinical recurrence. Patients with recurrence were more likely to have a lower mean baseline quality of life (14 vs 26; P = .035), follow-up quality of life (42 vs 82; P < .001), and change in quality of life (19 vs 33; P < .018). The majority of patients with or without recurrence still experienced an improvement in quality of life (68% vs 79%; P = .142). CONCLUSION: Patients with lower baseline quality of life are likely to experience a recurrence following repair; however, most still report substantial improvements in quality of life. Assessing follow-up quality of life without accounting for baseline quality of life is incomplete; follow-up quality of life should be assessed with appropriate adjustment for baseline quality of life.