Trial Participation and Outcomes Among English-Speaking and Spanish-Speaking Patients With Appendicitis Randomized to Antibiotics: A Secondary Analysis of the CODA Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Spanish-speaking participants are underrepresented in clinical trials, limiting study generalizability and contributing to ongoing health inequity. The Comparison of Outcomes of Antibiotic Drugs and Appendectomy (CODA) trial intentionally included Spanish-speaking participants. Objective: To describe trial participation and compare clinical and patient-reported outcomes among Spanish-speaking and English-speaking participants with acute appendicitis randomized to antibiotics. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study is a secondary analysis of the CODA trial, a pragmatic randomized trial comparing antibiotic therapy with appendectomy in adult patients with imaging-confirmed appendicitis enrolled at 25 centers across the US from May 1, 2016, to February 28, 2020. The trial was conducted in English and Spanish. All 776 participants randomized to antibiotics are included in this analysis. The data were analyzed from November 15, 2021, through August 24, 2022. Intervention: Randomization to a 10-day course of antibiotics or appendectomy. Main Outcomes and Measures: Trial participation, European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire scores (higher scores indicating a better health status), rate of appendectomy, treatment satisfaction, decisional regret, and days of work missed. Outcomes are also reported for a subset of participants that were recruited from the 5 sites with a large proportion of Spanish-speaking participants. Results: Among eligible patients 476 of 1050 Spanish speakers (45%) and 1076 of 3982 of English speakers (27%) consented, comprising the 1552 participants who underwent 1:1 randomization (mean age, 38.0 years; 976 male [63%]). Of the 776 participants randomized to antibiotics, 238 were Spanish speaking (31%). Among Spanish speakers randomized to antibiotics, the rate of appendectomy was 22% (95% CI, 17%-28%) at 30 days and 45% (95% CI, 38%-52%) at 1 year, while in English speakers, these rates were 20% (95% CI, 16%-23%) at 30 days and 42% (95% CI 38%-47%) at 1 year. Mean EQ-5D scores were 0.93 (95% CI, 0.92-0.95) among Spanish speakers and 0.92 (95% CI, 0.91-0.93) among English speakers. Symptom resolution at 30 days was reported by 68% (95% CI, 61%-74%) of Spanish speakers and 69% (95% CI, 64%-73%) of English speakers. Spanish speakers missed 6.69 (95% CI, 5.51-7.87) days of work on average, while English speakers missed 3.76 (95% CI, 3.20-4.32) days. Presentation to the emergency department or urgent care, hospitalization, treatment dissatisfaction, and decisional regret were low for both groups. Conclusions and Relevance: A high proportion of Spanish speakers participated in the CODA trial. Clinical and most patient-reported outcomes were similar for English- and Spanish-speaking participants treated with antibiotics. Spanish speakers reported more days of missed work. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02800785.

American Burn Association (ABA) Burn Care Quality Platform (BCQP) and Large Data Set Analysis Considerations: A Practical Guide to Investigating Clinical Questions in Burns via Large Data Sets.

The Burn Care Quality Platform (BCQP) consolidates data previously collected from the National Burn Repository and the Burn Quality Improvement Program into a single registry. Its data elements and their associated definitions are tailored to create consistency across other national trauma registries, namely the National Trauma Data Bank implemented by the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program (ACS TQIP). The BCQP now includes 103 participating burn centers and has captured data from 375,000 total patients as of 2021. With 12,000 patients entered under the current data dictionary, the BCQP represents the largest registry of its kind. On behalf of the American Burn Association Research Committee, the aim of this whitepaper is to provide a succinct overview of the BCQP, showcasing its unique features, strengths, limitations, and relevant statistical considerations. This whitepaper will highlight the resources available to the burn research community and offer insight on proper study design when preparing to conduct a large data set investigation for burn care. All recommendations herein were formulated through the consensus of a multidisciplinary committee and based on the available scientific evidence.

Targeted multi-omic analysis of human skin tissue identifies alterations of conventional and unconventional T cells associated with burn injury.

Burn injuries are a leading cause of unintentional injury, associated with a dysfunctional immune response and an increased risk of infections. Despite this, little is known about the role of T cells in human burn injury. In this study, we compared the activation and function of conventional T cells and unconventional T cell subsets in skin tissue from acute burn (within 7 days from initial injury), late phase burn (beyond 7 days from initial injury), and non-burn patients. We compared T cell functionality by a combination of flow cytometry and a multi-omic single-cell approach with targeted transcriptomics and protein expression. We found a significantly lower proportion of CD8+ T cells in burn skin compared to non-burn skin, with CD4+ T cells making up the bulk of the T cell population. Both conventional and unconventional burn tissue T cells show significantly higher IFN-γ and TNF-α levels after stimulation than non-burn skin T cells. In sorted T cells, clustering showed that burn tissue had significantly higher expression of homing receptors CCR7, S1PR1, and SELL compared to non-burn skin. In unconventional T cells, including mucosal-associated invariant T (MAIT) and γδ T cells, we see significantly higher expression of cytotoxic molecules GZMB, PRF1, and GZMK. Multi-omics analysis of conventional T cells suggests a shift from tissue-resident T cells in non-burn tissue to a circulating T cell phenotype in burn tissue. In conclusion, by examining skin tissue from burn patients, our results suggest that T cells in burn tissue have a pro-inflammatory rather than a homeostatic tissue-resident phenotype, and that unconventional T cells have a higher cytotoxic capacity. Our findings have the potential to inform the development of novel treatment strategies for burns.

Perception of Treatment Success and Impact on Function with Antibiotics or Appendectomy for Appendicitis: A Randomized Clinical Trial with an Observational Cohort.

OBJECTIVE: To compare secondary patient reported outcomes of perceptions of treatment success and function for patients treated for appendicitis with appendectomy vs. antibiotics at 30 days. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The Comparison of Outcomes of antibiotic Drugs and Appendectomy trial found antibiotics noninferior to appendectomy based on 30-day health status. To address questions about outcomes among participants with lower socioeconomic status, we explored the relationship of sociodemographic and clinical factors and outcomes. METHODS: We focused on 4 patient reported outcomes at 30 days: high decisional regret, dissatisfaction with treatment, problems performing usual activities, and missing >10 days of work. The randomized (RCT) and observational cohorts were pooled for exploration of baseline factors. The RCT cohort alone was used for comparison of treatments. Logistic regression was used to assess associations. RESULTS: The pooled cohort contained 2062 participants; 1552 from the RCT. Overall, regret and dissatisfaction were low whereas problems with usual activities and prolonged missed work occurred more frequently. In the RCT, those assigned to antibiotics had more regret (Odd ratios (OR) 2.97, 95% Confidence intervals (CI) 2.05-4.31) and dissatisfaction (OR 1.98, 95%CI 1.25-3.12), and reported less missed work (OR 0.39, 95%CI 0.27-0.56). Factors associated with function outcomes included sociodemographic and clinical variables for both treatment arms. Fewer factors were associated with dissatisfaction and regret. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, participants reported high satisfaction, low regret, and were frequently able to resume usual activities and return to work. When comparing treatments for appendicitis, no single measure defines success or failure for all people. The reported data may inform discussions regarding the most appropriate treatment for individuals. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02800785.

Using a National Burn Registry to Develop a Model for Risk-Adjusted Length of Stay Benchmarking.

Length of stay (LOS) is a frequently reported outcome after a burn injury. LOS benchmarking will benefit individual burn centers as a way to measure their performance and set expectations for patients. We sought to create a nationwide, risk-adjusted model to allow for LOS benchmarking based on the data from a national burn registry. Using data from the American Burn Association's Burn Care Quality Platform, we queried admissions from 7/2015 to 6/2020 and identified 130,729 records reported by 103 centers. Using 22 predictor variables, comparisons of unpenalized linear regression and Gradient boosted (CatBoost) regressor models were performed by measuring the R2 and concordance correlation coefficient on the application of the model to the test dataset. The CatBoost model applied to the bootstrapped versions of the entire dataset was used to calculate O/E ratios for individual burn centers. Analyses were run on 3 cohorts: all patients, 10-20% TBSA, >20% TBSA. The CatBoost model outperformed the linear regression model with a test R2 of 0.67 and CCC of 0.81 compared with the linear model with R2=0.50, CCC=0.68. The CatBoost was also less biased for higher and lower LOS durations. Gradient-boosted regression models provided greater model performance than traditional regression analysis. Using national burn data, we can predict LOS across contributing burn centers while accounting for patient and center characteristics, producing more meaningful O/E ratios. These models provide a risk-adjusted LOS benchmarking using a robust data source, the first of its kind, for burn centers.

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.

Burn related injuries: a nationwide analysis of adult inter-facility transfers over a six-year period in the United States.

BACKGROUND: US emergency department (ED) visits for burns and factors associated with inter-facility transfer are unknown and described in this manuscript. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of burn-related injuries from 2009-2014 using the Nationwide Emergency Department Sample (NEDS), the largest sample of all-payer datasets. We included all ED visits by adults with a burn related ICD-9 code and used a weighted multivariable logistic regression model to predict transfer adjusting for covariates. RESULTS: Between 2009-2014, 3,047,701 (0.4%) ED visits were for burn related injuries. A total of 108,583 (3.6%) burn visits resulted in inter-facility transfers occurred during the study period, representing approximately 18,097 inter-facility transfers per year. Burns with greater than 10% total body surface area (TBSA) resulted in a 10-fold increase in the probability of transfer, compared to burn visits with less than 10% TBSA burns. In the multivariable model, male sex (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.4, 95% CI 2.3-2.6) was associated with increased odds of transfer. Older adults were more likely to be transferred compared to all other age groups. Odds of transfer were increased for Medicare and self-pay patients (vs. private pay) but there was a significant interaction of sex and payer and the effect of insurance varied by sex. CONCLUSIONS: In a national sample of ED visits, burn visits were more than twice as likely to have an inter-facility transfer compared to the general ED patient population. Substantial sex differences exist in U.S. EDs that impact the location of care for patients with burn injuries and warrants further investigation.

Analysis of Outcomes Associated With Outpatient Management of Nonoperatively Treated Patients With Appendicitis.

Importance: In the Comparison of Outcomes of Antibiotic Drugs and Appendectomy (CODA) trial, which found antibiotics to be noninferior, approximately half of participants randomized to receive antibiotics had outpatient management with hospital discharge within 24 hours. If outpatient management is safe, it could increase convenience and decrease health care use and costs. Objective: To assess the use and safety of outpatient management of acute appendicitis. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study, which is a secondary analysis of the CODA trial, included 776 adults with imaging-confirmed appendicitis who received antibiotics at 25 US hospitals from May 1, 2016, to February 28, 2020. Exposures: Participants randomized to antibiotics (intravenous then oral) could be discharged from the emergency department based on clinician judgment and prespecified criteria (hemodynamically stable, afebrile, oral intake tolerated, pain controlled, and follow-up confirmed). Outpatient management and hospitalization were defined as discharge within or after 24 hours, respectively. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes compared among patients receiving outpatient vs inpatient care included serious adverse events (SAEs), appendectomies, health care encounters, satisfaction, missed workdays at 7 days, and EuroQol 5-dimension (EQ-5D) score at 30 days. In addition, appendectomy incidence among outpatients and inpatients, unadjusted and adjusted for illness severity, was compared. Results: Among 776 antibiotic-randomized participants, 42 (5.4%) underwent appendectomy within 24 hours and 8 (1.0%) did not receive their first antibiotic dose within 24 hours, leaving 726 (93.6%) comprising the study population (median age, 36 years; range, 18-86 years; 462 [63.6%] male; 437 [60.2%] White). Of these participants, 335 (46.1%; site range, 0-89.2%) were discharged within 24 hours, and 391 (53.9%) were discharged after 24 hours. Over 7 days, SAEs occurred in 0.9 (95% CI, 0.2-2.6) per 100 outpatients and 1.3 (95% CI, 0.4-2.9) per 100 inpatients; in the appendicolith subgroup, SAEs occurred in 2.3 (95% CI, 0.3-8.2) per 100 outpatients vs 2.8 (95% CI, 0.6-7.9) per 100 inpatients. During this period, appendectomy occurred in 9.9% (95% CI, 6.9%-13.7%) of outpatients and 14.1% (95% CI, 10.8%-18.0%) of inpatients; adjusted analysis demonstrated a similar difference in incidence (-4.0 percentage points; 95% CI, -8.7 to 0.6). At 30 days, appendectomies occurred in 12.6% (95% CI, 9.1%-16.7%) of outpatients and 19.0% (95% CI, 15.1%-23.4%) of inpatients. Outpatients missed fewer workdays (2.6 days; 95% CI, 2.3-2.9 days) than did inpatients (3.8 days; 95% CI, 3.4-4.3 days) and had similar frequency of return health care visits and high satisfaction and EQ-5D scores. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings support that outpatient antibiotic management is safe for selected adults with acute appendicitis, with no greater risk of complications or appendectomy than hospital care, and should be included in shared decision-making discussions of patient preferences for outcomes associated with nonoperative and operative care. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02800785.

Prior Antibiotic Exposure Is Associated With Reoperation After Elective Non-colorectal Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Recent antibiotic exposure has previously been associated with poor outcomes following elective surgery. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of prior recent antibiotic exposure in a multicenter cohort of Veterans Affairs patients undergoing elective non-colorectal surgery. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of the Veterans Affairs Surgical Quality Improvement Program, including elective, non-cardiovascular, non-colorectal surgery from 2013 to 2017. Outpatient antibiotic exposure within 90 days prior to surgery was identified from the Veterans Affairs outpatient pharmacy database and matched with each case. Primary outcomes included serious complication, any complication, any infection, or surgical site infection. Secondary outcomes included 30-day mortality, length of stay, and Clostridioides difficile infection. RESULTS: Of 21,112 eligible patients, 2885 (13.7%) were exposed to antibiotics within 90 days prior to surgery with a duration of 7 (IQR: 5-10) days and prescribed 42 (IQR: 21-64) days prior to surgical intervention. Compared to non-exposed patients, exposed patients had higher unadjusted complication rates, increased length of stay, and rates of return to the operating. Exposure was independently associated with return to the operating room (OR: 1.39; 99% CI: 1.05-1.84). CONCLUSIONS: Among Veterans, recent antibiotic exposure within 90 days of elective surgery was associated with a 39% increase in the odds of return to the operating room. Further work is needed to evaluate the effects of antibiotic exposure and dysbiosis on surgical outcomes.

Self-selection vs Randomized Assignment of Treatment for Appendicitis.

Importance: For adults with appendicitis, several randomized clinical trials have demonstrated that antibiotics are an effective alternative to appendectomy. However, it remains unknown how the characteristics of patients in such trials compare with those of patients who select their treatment and whether outcomes differ. Objective: To compare participants in the Comparison of Outcomes of Antibiotic Drugs and Appendectomy (CODA) randomized clinical trial (RCT) with a parallel cohort study of participants who declined randomization and self-selected treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: The CODA trial was conducted in 25 US medical centers. Participants were enrolled between May 3, 2016, and February 5, 2020; all participants were eligible for at least 1 year of follow-up, with all follow-up ending in 2021. The randomized cohort included 1094 adults with appendicitis; the self-selection cohort included patients who declined participation in the randomized group, of whom 253 selected appendectomy and 257 selected antibiotics. In this secondary analysis, characteristics and outcomes in both self-selection and randomized cohorts are described with an exploratory analysis of cohort status and receipt of appendectomy. Interventions: Appendectomy vs antibiotics. Main Outcomes and Measures: Characteristics among participants randomized to either appendectomy or antibiotics were compared with those of participants who selected their own treatment. Results: Clinical characteristics were similar across the self-selection cohort (510 patients; mean age, 35.8 years [95% CI, 34.5-37.1]; 218 female [43%; 95% CI, 39%-47%]) and the randomized group (1094 patients; mean age, 38.2 years [95% CI, 37.4-39.0]; 386 female [35%; 95% CI, 33%-38%]). Compared with the randomized group, those in the self-selection cohort were less often Spanish speaking (n = 99 [19%; 95% CI, 16%-23%] vs n = 336 [31%; 95% CI, 28%-34%]), reported more formal education (some college or more, n = 355 [72%; 95% CI, 68%-76%] vs n = 674 [63%; 95% CI, 60%-65%]), and more often had commercial insurance (n = 259 [53%; 95% CI, 48%-57%] vs n = 486 [45%; 95% CI, 42%-48%]). Most outcomes were similar between the self-selection and randomized cohorts. The number of patients undergoing appendectomy by 30 days was 38 (15.3%; 95% CI, 10.7%-19.7%) among those selecting antibiotics and 155 (19.2%; 95% CI, 15.9%-22.5%) in those who were randomized to antibiotics (difference, 3.9%; 95% CI, -1.7% to 9.5%). Differences in the rate of appendectomy were primarily observed in the non-appendicolith subgroup. Conclusions and Relevance: This secondary analysis of the CODA RCT found substantially similar outcomes across the randomized and self-selection cohorts, suggesting that the randomized trial results are generalizable to the community at large. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02800785.

Reactive oxygen species-degradable polythioketal urethane foam dressings to promote porcine skin wound repair.

Porous, resorbable biomaterials can serve as temporary scaffolds that support cell infiltration, tissue formation, and remodeling of nonhealing skin wounds. Synthetic biomaterials are less expensive to manufacture than biologic dressings and can achieve a broader range of physiochemical properties, but opportunities remain to tailor these materials for ideal host immune and regenerative responses. Polyesters are a well-established class of synthetic biomaterials; however, acidic degradation products released by their hydrolysis can cause poorly controlled autocatalytic degradation. Here, we systemically explored reactive oxygen species (ROS)-degradable polythioketal (PTK) urethane (UR) foams with varied hydrophilicity for skin wound healing. The most hydrophilic PTK-UR variant, with seven ethylene glycol (EG7) repeats flanking each side of a thioketal bond, exhibited the highest ROS reactivity and promoted optimal tissue infiltration, extracellular matrix (ECM) deposition, and reepithelialization in porcine skin wounds. EG7 induced lower foreign body response, greater recruitment of regenerative immune cell populations, and resolution of type 1 inflammation compared to more hydrophobic PTK-UR scaffolds. Porcine wounds treated with EG7 PTK-UR foams had greater ECM production, vascularization, and resolution of proinflammatory immune cells compared to polyester UR foam-based NovoSorb Biodegradable Temporizing Matrix (BTM)-treated wounds and greater early vascular perfusion and similar wound resurfacing relative to clinical gold standard Integra Bilayer Wound Matrix (BWM). In a porcine ischemic flap excisional wound model, EG7 PTK-UR treatment led to higher wound healing scores driven by lower inflammation and higher reepithelialization compared to NovoSorb BTM. PTK-UR foams warrant further investigation as synthetic biomaterials for wound healing applications.

Patient Factors Associated With Appendectomy Within 30 Days of Initiating Antibiotic Treatment for Appendicitis.

IMPORTANCE: Use of antibiotics for the treatment of appendicitis is safe and has been found to be noninferior to appendectomy based on self-reported health status at 30 days. Identifying patient characteristics associated with a greater likelihood of appendectomy within 30 days in those who initiate antibiotics could support more individualized decision-making. OBJECTIVE: To assess patient factors associated with undergoing appendectomy within 30 days of initiating antibiotics for appendicitis. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In this cohort study using data from the Comparison of Outcomes of Antibiotic Drugs and Appendectomy (CODA) randomized clinical trial, characteristics among patients who initiated antibiotics were compared between those who did and did not undergo appendectomy within 30 days. The study was conducted at 25 US medical centers; participants were enrolled between May 3, 2016, and February 5, 2020. A total of 1552 participants with acute appendicitis were randomized to antibiotics (776 participants) or appendectomy (776 participants). Data were analyzed from September 2020 to July 2021. EXPOSURES: Appendectomy vs antibiotics. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Conditional logistic regression models were fit to estimate associations between specific patient factors and the odds of undergoing appendectomy within 30 days after initiating antibiotics. A sensitivity analysis was performed excluding participants who underwent appendectomy within 30 days for nonclinical reasons. RESULTS: Of 776 participants initiating antibiotics (mean [SD] age, 38.3 [13.4] years; 286 [37%] women and 490 [63%] men), 735 participants had 30-day outcomes, including 154 participants (21%) who underwent appendectomy within 30 days. After adjustment for other factors, female sex (odds ratio [OR], 1.53; 95% CI, 1.01-2.31), radiographic finding of wider appendiceal diameter (OR per 1-mm increase, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.00-1.18), and presence of appendicolith (OR, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.28-3.10) were associated with increased odds of undergoing appendectomy within 30 days. Characteristics that are often associated with increased risk of complications (eg, advanced age, comorbid conditions) and those clinicians often use to describe appendicitis severity (eg, fever: OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.82-1.98) were not associated with odds of 30-day appendectomy. The sensitivity analysis limited to appendectomies performed for clinical reasons provided similar results regarding appendicolith (adjusted OR, 2.41; 95% CI, 1.49-3.91). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This cohort study found that presence of an appendicolith was associated with a nearly 2-fold increased risk of undergoing appendectomy within 30 days of initiating antibiotics. Clinical characteristics often used to describe severity of appendicitis were not associated with odds of 30-day appendectomy. This information may help guide more individualized decision-making for people with appendicitis.

Evaluating Discrepancies in Percent Total Body Surface Area Burn Assessments Between Prehospital Providers and Burn Center Physicians.

Burns are routinely assessed at the scene of the incident by prehospital or emergency medical services providers. The initial management of burns is based on the calculation of the extent of the injury, reported as percent total body surface area (TBSA). This study evaluates discrepancies in the estimation of TBSA between prehospital providers and burn team physicians over a 3-year period at an academic, university medical center serving as the regional burn center. A total of 120 adult and 27 pediatric patients (younger than age 16 years) were included in this study; 95 (65%) patients were male, 67 (46%) patients were Caucasian, 62 (42%) patients had no healthcare insurance, and the median age was 35 years (interquartile range [IQR] 27). The most common etiology of burns was hot liquid, 39 (26.5%). Median [IQR] and mean (SD) estimated TBSA (%) were 4 [1-10] and 8.6 (12.8) for prehospital providers and 2 [1-6] and 5.9 (9.9) for burn team physicians. Bland-Altman plots evaluating second- and third-degree burns separately and combined demonstrated that, as burns involved more surface area, agreement decreased between emergency medical service providers and burn physicians. Agreement between prehospital providers and burn physicians decreased as TBSA of burns increased. This finding reaffirms the need for more standardized education and training for all medical personnel.

A Randomized Trial Comparing Antibiotics with Appendectomy for Appendicitis.

BACKGROUND: Antibiotic therapy has been proposed as an alternative to surgery for the treatment of appendicitis. METHODS: We conducted a pragmatic, nonblinded, noninferiority, randomized trial comparing antibiotic therapy (10-day course) with appendectomy in patients with appendicitis at 25 U.S. centers. The primary outcome was 30-day health status, as assessed with the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire (scores range from 0 to 1, with higher scores indicating better health status; noninferiority margin, 0.05 points). Secondary outcomes included appendectomy in the antibiotics group and complications through 90 days; analyses were prespecified in subgroups defined according to the presence or absence of an appendicolith. RESULTS: In total, 1552 adults (414 with an appendicolith) underwent randomization; 776 were assigned to receive antibiotics (47% of whom were not hospitalized for the index treatment) and 776 to undergo appendectomy (96% of whom underwent a laparoscopic procedure). Antibiotics were noninferior to appendectomy on the basis of 30-day EQ-5D scores (mean difference, 0.01 points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.001 to 0.03). In the antibiotics group, 29% had undergone appendectomy by 90 days, including 41% of those with an appendicolith and 25% of those without an appendicolith. Complications were more common in the antibiotics group than in the appendectomy group (8.1 vs. 3.5 per 100 participants; rate ratio, 2.28; 95% CI, 1.30 to 3.98); the higher rate in the antibiotics group could be attributed to those with an appendicolith (20.2 vs. 3.6 per 100 participants; rate ratio, 5.69; 95% CI, 2.11 to 15.38) and not to those without an appendicolith (3.7 vs. 3.5 per 100 participants; rate ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.45 to 2.43). The rate of serious adverse events was 4.0 per 100 participants in the antibiotics group and 3.0 per 100 participants in the appendectomy group (rate ratio, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.67 to 2.50). CONCLUSIONS: For the treatment of appendicitis, antibiotics were noninferior to appendectomy on the basis of results of a standard health-status measure. In the antibiotics group, nearly 3 in 10 participants had undergone appendectomy by 90 days. Participants with an appendicolith were at a higher risk for appendectomy and for complications than those without an appendicolith. (Funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute; CODA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02800785.).

What score on the Vancouver Scar Scale constitutes a hypertrophic scar? Results from a survey of North American burn-care providers.

INTRODUCTION: Reliable characterization of a hypertrophic scar (HTS) is integral to epidemiologic studies designed to identify clinical and genetic risk factors for HTS. The Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) has been widely used for this purpose; however, no publication has defined what score on this scale corresponds to a clinical diagnosis of HTS. METHODS: In a survey of 1000 burn care providers, we asked respondents what VSS score indicates a HTS and asked them to score scar photos using the VSS. We used receiver-operating-characteristic (ROC) curves to evaluate VSS sub-scores and their combinations in diagnosis of HTS. RESULTS: Of 130 responses (13.5%), most were physicians (43.9%) who had worked in burn care for over 10 years (63.1%) and did not use the VSS in clinical practice (58.5%). There was no consensus as to what VSS score indicates a diagnosis of HTS. VSS height score (0-3) performed best for diagnosis of HTS; using a cut-off of ≥1, height score was 99.5% sensitive and 85.9% specific for HTS. CONCLUSIONS: Burn clinicians do not routinely use the VSS and perceptions vary widely regarding what constitutes a HTS. When a dichotomous variable is needed, the VSS height score with a cut-off of ≥1 may be optimal. Our findings underscore the need for an objective tool to reproducibly characterize HTS across burn centers.

Traumatic injury, early gene expression, and gram-negative bacteremia.

OBJECTIVES: Bacteremic trauma victims have a higher risk of death than their nonbacteremic counterparts. The role that altered immunity plays in the development of bacteremia is unknown. Using an existing dataset, we sought to determine if differences in early postinjury immune-related gene expression are associated with subsequent Gram-negative bacteremia. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study, a secondary analysis of the Glue Grant database. SETTING: Seven level I trauma centers across the United State. SUBJECTS: Severely injured blunt trauma patients. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Total leukocyte gene expression was compared between the subjects in whom Gram-negative bacteremia developed and those in whom it did not develop. We observed that Gram-negative bacteremia was an independent risk factor for death (odds ratio, 1.86; p = 0.015). We then compared gene expression at 12 and 96 hours after injury in 10 subjects in whom subsequently Gram-negative bacteremia developed matched to 26 subjects in whom it did not develop. At 12 hours, expression of 64 probes differed more than or equal to 1.5-fold; none represented genes related to innate or adaptive immunity. By 96 hours, 102 probes were differentially expressed with 20 representing 15 innate or adaptive immunity genes, including down-regulation of IL1B and up-regulation of IL1R2, reflecting suppression of innate immunity in Gram-negative bacteremia subjects. We also observed down-regulation of adaptive immune genes in the Gram-negative bacteremia subjects. CONCLUSIONS: By 96 hours after injury, there are differences in leukocyte gene expression associated with the development of Gram-negative bacteremia, reflecting suppression of both innate and adaptive immunity. Gram-negative bacteremia after trauma is, in part, consequence of host immunity failure and may not be completely preventable by standard infection-control techniques.