Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
: 20 | 50 | 100
1 - 8 de 8
1.
Am Surg ; : 31348241256084, 2024 May 22.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38775262

BACKGROUND: The abdominal seat belt sign (SBS) is associated with an increased risk of hollow viscus injury (HVI). Older age is associated with worse outcomes in trauma patients. Thus, older trauma patients ≥65 years of age (OTPs) may be at an increased risk of HVI with abdominal SBS. Therefore, we hypothesized an increased incidence of HVI and mortality for OTPs vs younger trauma patients (YTPs) with abdominal SBS. STUDY DESIGN: This post hoc analysis of a multi-institutional, prospective, observational study (8/2020-10/2021) included patients >18 years old with an abdominal SBS who underwent abdominal computed tomography (CT) imaging. Older trauma patients were compared to YTPs (18-64 years old) with bivariate analyses. RESULTS: Of the 754 patients included in this study from nine level-1 trauma centers, there were 110 (14.6%) OTPs and 644 (85.4%) YTPs. Older trauma patients were older (mean 75.3 vs 35.8 years old, P < .01) and had a higher mean Injury Severity Score (10.8 vs 9.0, P = .02). However, YTPs had an increased abdominal abbreviated-injury scale score (2.01 vs 1.63, P = .02). On CT imaging, OTPs less commonly had intraabdominal free fluid (21.7% vs 11.9%, P = .02) despite a similar rate of abdominal soft tissue contusion (P > .05). Older trauma patients also had a statistically similar rate of HVI vs YTPs (5.5% vs 9.8%, P = .15). Despite this, OTPs had increased mortality (5.5% vs 1.1%, P < .01) and length of stay (LOS) (5.9 vs 4.9 days P < .01). CONCLUSION: Despite a similar rate of HVI, OTPs with an abdominal SBS had an increased rate of mortality and LOS. This suggests the need for heightened vigilance when caring for OTPs with abdominal SBS.

2.
J Am Coll Surg ; 238(6): 1148-1152, 2024 Jun 01.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38551241

BACKGROUND: The Hill classification characterizes the geometry of gastroesophageal junction and Hill grades (HGs) III and IV have a high association with pathologic reflux. This study aimed to understand the use of the Hill classification and correlate the prevalence of pathologic reflux across different HGs. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective review of 477 patients who underwent upper endoscopy and BRAVO pH monitoring between August 2018 and October 2021 was performed. These charts were reviewed for endoscopic findings for hiatal hernia and association of HGs with pathologic reflux, defined as an abnormal esophageal acid exposure time (AET) of ≥4.9%. RESULTS: Of 477 patients, 252 (52.8%) had an HG documented on the endoscopy report. Of the 252 patients, 61 had HG I (24.2%), 100 had HG II (39.7%), 61 had HG III (24.2%), and 30 had HG IV (11.9%). The proportion of patients with abnormal AET increases with increasing HGs (p < 0.001) as follows: I (39.3%), II (52.5%), III (67.2%), and IV (79.3%). The mean overall AET is as follows: HG I (5.5 ± 6%), HG II (7.0 ± 5.9%), HG III (10.2 ± 10.3%), and HG IV (9.5 ± 5.5%). The proportion of patients with hiatal hernia was 18% for HG I, 28% for HG II, 39.3% for HG III, and 80% for HG IV. CONCLUSIONS: Use of the Hill classification in clinical practice is low. There is an association of increasing HGs with increasing proportion of patients with abnormal AET. There is a high proportion of patients within HGs I and II with documented pathologic reflux and the presence of a hiatal hernia as observed on endoscopic examination. Our study suggests that endoscopic grading of the gastroesophageal junction may not adequately differentiate between normal vs abnormal reflux status, particularly for HGs I and II.


Esophagogastric Junction , Gastroesophageal Reflux , Hernia, Hiatal , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Gastroesophageal Reflux/etiology , Gastroesophageal Reflux/diagnosis , Male , Female , Middle Aged , Esophagogastric Junction/surgery , Esophagogastric Junction/pathology , Hernia, Hiatal/surgery , Hernia, Hiatal/complications , Hernia, Hiatal/diagnosis , Aged , Esophageal pH Monitoring , Adult
3.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38523130

BACKGROUND: To determine the clinical impact of wound management technique on surgical site infection (SSI), hospital length of stay (LOS) and mortality in emergent colorectal surgery. METHODS: A prospective observational study (2021-2023) of urgent or emergent colorectal surgery patients at 15 institutions was conducted. Pediatric patients and traumatic colorectal injuries were excluded. Patients were classified by wound closure technique: skin closed (SC), skin loosely closed (SLC), or skin open (SO). Primary outcomes were SSI, hospital LOS and in-hospital mortality rates. Multivariable regression was used to assess the effect of wound closure on outcomes after controlling for demographics, patient characteristics, ICU admission, vasopressor use, procedure details and wound class. A priori power analysis indicated that 138 patients per group were required to detect a 10% difference in mortality rates. RESULTS: In total, 557 patients were included (SC n = 262, SLC n = 124, SO n = 171). Statistically significant differences in BMI, race/ethnicity, ASA scores, EBL, ICU admission, vasopressor therapy, procedure details, and wound class were observed across groups (Table 1). Overall, average LOS was 16.9 ± 16.4 days, and rates of in-hospital mortality and SSI were 7.9% and 18.5%, respectively, with the lowest rates observed in the SC group (Table 2). After risk adjustment, SO was associated with increased risk of mortality (OR = 3.003, p = 0.028 in comparison to the SC group. SLC was associated with increased risk of superficial SSI (OR = 3.439, p = 0.014), after risk adjustment. CONCLUSION: When compared to the SC group, the SO group was associated with mortality, but comparable when considering all other outcomes, while the SLC was associated with increased superficial SSI. Complete skin closure may be a viable wound management technique in emergent colorectal surgery. STUDY TYPE: Level III Therapeutic/Care Management.

4.
J Am Coll Surg ; 237(1): 87-93, 2023 07 01.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37318137

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has had wide-ranging effects on management of medical conditions. Many hospitals encountered staffing shortages, limited operating room availability, and shortage of hospital beds. There was increased psychological stress and fear of contracting COVID-19 infection, leading to delay in medical care for various disease processes. The objective of this study was to examine changes in management and outcomes attributed to the COVID-19 pandemic in patients presenting with acute calculus cholecystitis at US academic centers. STUDY DESIGN: Using the Vizient database, patients with the diagnosis of acute calculus cholecystitis who underwent intervention during the 15 months before the pandemic (prepandemic, October 2018 to December 2019) were compared with 15 months during the pandemic (pandemic, March 2020 to May 2021). Outcomes measures included demographics, characteristics, type of intervention, length of stay, in-hospital mortality, and direct cost. RESULTS: There were 146,459 patients with acute calculus cholecystitis identified (prepandemic: 74,605 vs pandemic: 71,854). Patients in the pandemic group were more likely to undergo medical management (29.4% vs 31.8%; p < 0.001) or percutaneous cholecystostomy tube placement (21.5% vs 18%; p < 0.001) and less likely to undergo laparoscopic cholecystectomy (69.8% vs 73.0%; p < 0.001). Patients in the pandemic group who underwent procedural intervention had longer length of stay (6.5 days vs 5.9 days; p < 0.001), higher in-hospital death (3.1% vs 2.3%; p < 0.001), and higher cost ($14,609 vs $12,570; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis of patients with acute calculus cholecystitis, there were distinct changes in the management and outcomes of patients due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Changes in the type of intervention and outcomes are likely related to delayed presentation with increases in the severity and complexity of the disease.


COVID-19 , Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic , Cholecystitis, Acute , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Hospital Mortality , Pandemics , Cholecystitis, Acute/diagnosis , Cholecystitis, Acute/surgery
5.
Am Surg ; 89(12): 6053-6059, 2023 Dec.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37347234

BACKGROUND: California issued stay-at-home (SAH) orders to mitigate COVID-19 spread. Previous studies demonstrated a shift in mechanisms of injuries (MOIs) and decreased length of stay (LOS) for the general trauma population after SAH orders. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of SAH orders on geriatric trauma patients (GTPs), hypothesizing decreased motor vehicle collisions (MVCs) and LOS. METHODS: A post-hoc analysis of GTPs (≥65 years old) from 11 level-I/II trauma centers was performed, stratifying patients into 3 groups: before SAH (1/1/2020-3/18/2020) (PRE), after SAH (3/19/2020-6/30/2020) (POST), and a historical control (3/19/2019-6/30/2019) (CONTROL). Bivariate comparisons were performed. RESULTS: 5486 GTPs were included (PRE-1756; POST-1706; CONTROL-2024). POST had a decreased rate of MVCs (7.6% vs 10.6%, P = .001; vs 11.9%, P < .001) and pedestrian struck (3.4% vs 5.8%, P = .001; vs 5.2%, P = .006) compared with PRE and CONTROL. Other mechanisms of injury, LOS, mortality, and operations performed were similar between cohorts. However, POST had a lower rate of discharge to skilled nursing facility (SNF) (20% vs 24.5%, P = .001; and 20% vs 24.4%, P = .001). CONCLUSION: This retrospective multicenter study demonstrated lower rates of MVCs and pedestrian struck for GTPs, which may be explained by decreased population movement as a result of SAH orders. Contrary to previous studies on the generalized adult population, no differences in other MOIs and LOS were observed after SAH orders. However, there was a lower rate of discharge to SNF, which may be related to a lack of resources due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and thus potentially negatively impacted recovery of GTPs.Keywords.


COVID-19 , Pandemics , Adult , Humans , Aged , Retrospective Studies , COVID-19/epidemiology , California/epidemiology , Accidents, Traffic , Trauma Centers , Length of Stay
6.
JAMA Surg ; 157(11): 1017-1022, 2022 11 01.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36169943

Importance: It has been well established that female physicians earn less than their male counterparts in all specialties and ranks despite controlling for confounding variables. Objective: To investigate payments made from highest-grossing medical industry companies to female and male physicians and to assess compensation and engagement disparities based on gender. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective, population-based cross-sectional study used data from the Open Payments database for the 5 female and 5 male physicians who received the most financial compensation from each of the 15 highest-grossing medical supply companies in the US from January 2013 to January 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was total general payments received by female and male physicians from medical industry over time and across industries. The secondary outcome was trends in industry payment to female and male physicians from 2013 to 2019. Results: Among the 1050 payments sampled, 1017 (96.9%) of the 5 highest earners were men and 33 (3.1%) were women. Female physicians were paid a mean (SD) of $41 320 ($88 695), and male physicians were paid a mean (SD) of $1 226 377 ($3 377 957) (P < .001). On multivariate analysis, male gender was significantly associated with higher payment after adjusting for rank, h-index, and specialty (mean [SD], $1 025 413 [$162 578]; P < .001). From 2013 to 2019, the payment gap between female and male physicians increased from $54 343 to $166 778 (P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that male physicians received significantly higher payments from the highest-grossing medical industry companies compared with female physicians. This disparity persisted across all medical specialties and academic ranks. The health care industry gender payment gap continued to increase from 2013 to 2019, with a wider compensation gap in 2019.


Physicians, Women , Physicians , Humans , Female , Male , Retrospective Studies , Cross-Sectional Studies , Industry/economics , Physicians, Women/economics
7.
Am Surg ; 88(10): 2519-2524, 2022 Oct.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35603604

Introduction: Postoperative Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) has associated morbidity, but it is unknown how it impacts different operations. We sought to determine the incidence and postoperative morbidity following abdominal surgery.Method: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (2015-2019) was utilized to evaluate adult (≥18 years-old) patients who developed CDI following laparoscopic abdominal operations. Univariate and multivariate analysis were performed to evaluate outcomes.Results: A total of 973 338 patients were studied and the overall incidence of CDI was .3% within 30 days of operation. Colorectal surgery had the highest incidence of CDI (1601/167 949,1.0%) with significantly longer mean length of stay (LOS) (8.0 days± 9.0, P < .01) compared to other surgical procedures. CDI patients also had a longer mean length of stay (6.6± 8.0 vs 2.1 ± 3.6 days, P < .01) and increased mortality (1.8% vs .2%, AOR: 4.64, CI: 3.45-5.67, P < .01) compared to patients without CDI.Conclusions: This national analysis demonstrates that CDI is a significant complication following abdominal surgery and is associated with increased LOS and mortality. Furthermore, laparoscopic colorectal surgery appears to have the greatest risk of CDI. Future research is needed to determine the exact cause in order to decrease the incidence of CDI by reconsidering the protocol of antibiotic use within the high-risk population.


Clostridium Infections , Enterocolitis, Pseudomembranous , Laparoscopy , Adolescent , Adult , Anti-Bacterial Agents , Clostridium Infections/epidemiology , Humans , Incidence , Laparoscopy/adverse effects , Length of Stay , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , Treatment Outcome
8.
Surg Infect (Larchmt) ; 23(4): 321-331, 2022 May.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35522129

Background: Surgical stabilization of rib fractures is recommended in patients with flail chest or multiple displaced rib fractures with physiologic compromise. Surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) and surgical stabilization of sternal fractures (SSSF) involve open reduction and internal fixation of fractures with a plate construct to restore anatomic alignment. Most plate constructs are composed of titanium and presence of this foreign, non-absorbable material presents opportunity for implant infection. Although implant infection rates after SSRF and SSSF are low, they present a challenging clinical entity often requiring prolonged antibiotic therapy, debridement, and potentially implant removal. Methods: The Surgical Infection Society's Therapeutics and Guidelines Committee and Chest Wall Injury Society's Publication Committee convened to develop recommendations for antibiotic use during and after surgical stabilization of traumatic rib and sternal fractures. Clinical scenarios included patients with concomitant infectious processes (sepsis, pneumonia, empyema, cellulitis) or sources of contamination (open chest, gross contamination) incurred as a result of their trauma and present at the time of their surgical stabilization. PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for pertinent studies. Using a process of iterative consensus, all committee members voted to accept or reject each recommendation. Results: For patients undergoing SSRF or SSSF in the absence of pre-existing infectious process, there is insufficient evidence to suggest existing peri-operative guidelines or recommendations are inadequate. For patients undergoing SSRF or SSSF in the presence of sepsis, pneumonia, or an empyema, there is insufficient evidence to provide recommendations on duration and choice of antibiotic. This decision may be informed by existing guidelines for the concomitant infection. For patients undergoing SSRF or SSSF with an open or contaminated chest there is insufficient evidence to provide specific antibiotic recommendations. Conclusions: This guideline document summarizes the current Surgical Infection Society and Chest Wall Injury Society recommendations regarding antibiotic use during and after surgical stabilization of traumatic rib or sternal fractures. Limited evidence exists in the chest wall surgical stabilization literature and further studies should be performed to delineate risk of implant infection among patients undergoing SSSRF or SSSF with concomitant infectious processes.


Communicable Diseases , Rib Fractures , Sepsis , Thoracic Wall , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Humans , Postoperative Complications , Retrospective Studies , Rib Fractures/complications , Rib Fractures/surgery , Ribs , Sepsis/complications , Thoracic Wall/surgery
...