Functional outcome after resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta of the proximal and distal thoracic aorta in a swine model of controlled hemorrhage.

BACKGROUND: Noncompressible torso hemorrhage remains an ongoing problem for both military and civilian trauma. Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) has been characterized as a potentially life-saving maneuver. The objective of this study was to determine the functional outcomes, paraplegia rates, and survival of 60-min balloon occlusion in the proximal and distal thoracic aorta in a porcine model of controlled hemorrhage. METHODS: Swine (Sus scrofa, 70-110 kg) were subjected to class IV hemorrhagic shock and underwent 60 min of REBOA. Devices were introduced from the left carotid artery and positioned in the thoracic aorta in either the proximal location (pREBOA [n = 8]; just past takeoff of left subclavian artery) or distal location (dREBOA [n = 8]; just above diaphragm). After REBOA, animals were resuscitated with whole blood, crystalloid, and vasopressors before a 4-day postoperative period. End points included evidence of spinal cord ischemia (clinical examination, Tarlov gait score, bowel and bladder dysfunction, and histopathology), gross ischemia-reperfusion injury (clinical examination and histopathology), and mortality. RESULTS: The overall mortality was similar between pREBOA and dREBOA groups at 37.5% (n = 3). Spinal cord-related mortality was 12.5% for both pREBOA and dREBOA groups. Spinal cord symptoms without death were present in 12.5% of pREBOA and dREBOA groups. Average gait scores improved throughout the postoperative period. CONCLUSIONS: REBOA placement in the proximal or distal thoracic aorta does not alter mortality or paraplegia rates as compared with controlled hemorrhage alone. Functional recovery improves in the presence or the absence of REBOA, although at a slower rate after REBOA as compared with negative controls. Additional research is required to determine the ideal placement of REBOA in an uncontrolled hemorrhage model to achieve use compatible with survival outcomes and quality of life.

The modern surgery department chairman: the job description as identified by chairmen.

IMPORTANCE: The role of the chairman of a surgery department is critical in academic surgery. However, little is known about the variability of job responsibilities. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate chairmen's responsibilities, methods of support, determinants of job performance success, and concerns. DESIGN: Internet-based survey. SETTING: Electronic survey system. PARTICIPANTS: Seventy-two chairmen. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Survey data on job responsibilities, methods of support, determinants of job performance success, and concerns. RESULTS: Of 168 chairmen who received the survey, 72 (43%) responded. The mean age of chairmen was 57 years (range, 44-78 years). Of 72 chairmen who responded, 69 (96%) were men, 67 (93%) were white, 65 (90%) were professors, 11 (15%) held a previous chair, 35 (49%) have advanced degrees, and 19 (26%) are program directors. Respondents are responsible for an average of 8.7 divisions, 60 (83%) spent 1 to 10 hours per week in the clinic, 45 (63%) performed surgery 1 to 10 hours per week, 54 (75%) took less than 6 call days per month, 44 (61%) published 1 to 6 papers per year and attended a mean (SD) of 4.3 (1.7) essential meetings per year, and 48 (67%) took 1 to 3 weeks of vacation annually. Chair salary support includes (from least to most) faculty tax, grants, endowment, school, and hospital. Compensation correlates with age, additional degree, specialty, location, contract, and tenure but not clinical hours. Reported compensation was consistent with data from the Association of American Medical Colleges, but 24 (33%) felt undercompensated. Incentives for job performance were given for clinical productivity (34 chairmen [47%]), department performance (50 [70%]), institutional performance (27 [38%]), and personal accomplishment (14 [19%]). Of 72 chairmen, 30 (42%) were concerned about personal liability related to the job, 15 (21%) had purchased personal liability insurance, and 20 (28%) have defended a lawsuit related to nonclinical responsibilities. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Academic surgery department chairmen have a wide array of responsibilities that have changed from historic standards. Success in the role of chairman may improve by appreciating the responsibilities, time allocation, methods of support, and concerns of other chairmen.