Surgical Site Infection after Primary Closure of High-Risk Surgical Wounds in Emergency General Surgery Laparotomy and Closed Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy.

BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that the universal adoption of closed wounds with negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) in emergency general surgery patients would result in low superficial surgical infection (SSI) rates. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a retrospective observational study using primary wound closure with external NPWT, from May 2017 to May 2018. Patients with active soft tissue infection of the abdominal wall were excluded. Data were analyzed by Fisher's exact tests and Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney tests, with significance is set at a value of p < 0.05. RESULTS: Eighty-five patients (53% female) with a median age of 65 years (range 19 to 98 years) underwent laparotomies. Four patients were excluded for active soft tissue infection. Wounds were classified as dirty (n = 18), contaminated (n = 52), and clean contaminated (n = 11). Median BMI was 27 kg/m2 (interquartile range [IQR] 23.4 to 33.0 kg/m2). Median antibiotic therapy was 4 days (IQR 1 to 7 days). Twenty-six patients had open abdomen management. Patient follow-up was a median of 20 days (range 14 to 120 days). Six patients (7%) developed superficial SSI requiring conversion to open wound management. No patients developed fascial dehiscence. There were no statistically significant associations between SSI and wound class (p = 0.072), antibiotic duration (p = 0.702), open abdomen management, or preoperative risk factors (p < 0.1). Overall morbidity was 38% and mortality was 6%. CONCLUSIONS: Primary closure of high risk incisions combined with NPWT is associated with acceptably low SSI rates. Due to the low morbidity and decreased cost associated with this technique, primary closure with NPWT should replace open wound management in the emergency general surgery population.

Comparison of a standardized negative pressure wound therapy protocol after midline celiotomy to primary skin closure and traditional open wound vacuum-assisted closure management.

A negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) protocol using Hydrofera Blue® bacteriostatic foam wicks and silver-impregnated foam overlay to close midline skin incisions after emergency celiotomy was compared to primary skin closure only and traditional open wound vacuum-assisted closure management as part of a quality improvement initiative. This single-institution retrospective cohort study assessed all consecutive emergency celiotomies from July 2013 to June 2014 excluding clean wounds. Included variables were demographics, wound classification, NPWT days, and surgical site occurrences (SSOs). Primary outcome was days of NPWT. Secondary outcomes included SSOs (surgical site infections, fascial dehiscence, return to operating room). Analysis used exact chi-square between categorical variables, Kruskal-Wallis for analysis of variance for ordinal and categorical variables, and Wilcoxon rank sum for total days of NPWT. One hundred fifty-eight patients underwent emergency celiotomy with primary skin closure (n = 51), open NPWT (n = 63), or the NPWT protocol (n = 44). There was no difference in American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status score, body mass index, wound classification, or SSO between the three groups. Total NPWT days were reduced in protocol versus open NPWT (median 3 vs 20.5 days, range 3-51 vs 3-405 days, P = 0.001). Primary skin closure and NPWT protocol had fewer patients discharged with NPWT than open NWPT (0% and 14% vs 63.5%, P < 0.0001, odds ratio = 10.7, 95% confidence interval 3.7-35.1). Primary skin closure and NPWT protocol decrease NPWT usage days and maintain low SSOs in emergency midline celiotomy incisions.

Open vs Closed Negative Pressure Wound Therapy for Contaminated and Dirty Surgical Wounds: A Prospective Randomized Comparison.

BACKGROUND: A new proprietary negative pressure wound device has been developed to apply negative pressure therapy to closed wounds (closed-NPWT). We postulated that closed-NPWT management of contaminated and dirty wounds would lead to faster wound healing and no significant difference in wound complications. STUDY DESIGN: An IRB approved, prospective randomized trial was performed. Patients were consented preoperatively, but not entered nor assigned treatment until intraoperative findings were known. Patients were randomly assigned to either open-NPWT or a wound closed with skin staples and external closed-NPWT. Primary outcome was time to complete wound healing, defined as complete epithelization of the wound. Secondary outcomes were wound complications including wound infection, seroma, and dehiscence. Statistical analysis was performed using chi-square test, Fisher exact test, t-test, and Wilcoxon Rank-Sum test with significance of p < 0.05. RESULTS: Twenty-five closed-NPWT and 24 open-NPWT patients were analyzed. There were no significant differences in sex, mean age, BMI, smoking history, steroid use, comorbidities, or indication for surgery in the 2 groups. One patient in the open-NPWT group and 2 patients in the closed-NPWT group developed a wound infection (p = 1.0). Four open-NPWT and 3 closed-NPWT patients died from complications unrelated to the wound. Wound healing occurred at a median of 48 days (range 6 to 126 days) for the open-NPWT group vs a median of 7 days (range 6 to 12 days) for the closed-NPWT group (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Wound healing was significantly faster in contaminated and dirty wounds when managed with closed-NPWT. There was no difference in wound complications between the 2 treatment groups. This approach shows promise for closed management of contaminated and dirty wounds and warrants additional prospective studies with larger patient groups.

Protocol-Driven Management of Suspected Common Duct Stones.

BACKGROUND: Common duct stones can be diagnosed by magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP), endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)/ERCP, and intraoperative cholangiogram (IOC). In 2015, our group adopted a standard approach of preoperative EUS/ERCP followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy for patients with an admission bilirubin >4.0 mg/dL. For bilirubin <4.0 mg/dL, laparoscopic cholecystectomy with IOC was the initial procedure. Postoperative EUS/ERCP with endoscopic sphincterotomy was pursued for positive IOC. Exclusions included clinical suspicion of malignancy and surgically altered anatomy making endoscopic management impractical. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective comparison of protocol and pre-protocol (baseline) patients was performed, looking at patient demographics, presence of pancreatitis, common duct stone risk factors, comorbidities, length of hospitalization, and postoperative morbidity. Statistical analysis was performed with t-test, chi-square, and Wilcoxon rank-sum test with significance at p < 0.05. RESULTS: There were 56 patients in each group, with a mean ± SD age of 50.5 ± 20.88 years and 49.3 ± 20.92 years, respectively (p = NS). There were no significant differences between baseline and protocol patients with respect to individual and cumulative preoperative comorbidities, pancreatitis, elevation of liver function tests, bilirubin, common duct size, and postoperative morbidity. There were fewer endoscopies (22 vs 35; p = 0.014), and shorter length of stay in protocol patients (2.8 days vs 3.8 days; p = 0.025). CONCLUSIONS: Protocol-driven management of patients with suspected common duct stones reduced the number of endoscopies and length of hospitalization, with no change in postoperative morbidity. This approach has the potential to decrease endoscopy-related morbidity and overall cost without affecting quality of care.

Fast track pathway for perforated appendicitis.

BACKGROUND: Perforated appendicitis is associated with an increased morbidity and length of stay. "Fast track" protocols have demonstrated success in shortening hospitalization without increasing morbidity for a variety of surgical processes. This study evaluates a fast track pathway for perforated appendicitis. METHODS: In 2013, a treatment pathway for perforated appendicitis was adopted by the Acute Care Surgery Service for patients having surgical management of perforated appendicitis. Interval appendectomy was excluded. Patients were treated initially with intravenous antibiotics and transitioned to oral antibiotics and dismissed when medically stable and tolerating oral intake. A retrospective review of patients managed on the fast track pathway was undertaken to analyze length of stay, morbidity, and readmissions. RESULTS: Thirty-four males and twenty-one females with an average age of 46.8 years underwent laparoscopic appendectomy for perforated appendicitis between January 2013 and December 2014. Pre-existing comorbidities included hypertension 42%, diabetes mellitus 11%, COPD 5% and heart disease 2%. No patient had conversion to open appendectomy. Average length of stay was 2.67 days and ranged from 1 to 12 days (median 2 days). Postoperative morbidity was 20% and included abscess (6 patients), prolonged ileus (3 patients), pneumonia (1 patient), and congestive heart failure (1 patient). Five patients were readmitted for abscess (3 patients), congestive heart failure (1 patient), and pneumonia (1 patient). CONCLUSION: A fast track pathway for perforated appendicitis produced shorter length of stay and acceptable postoperative morbidity and readmission. This offers the potential for significant cost savings over current national practice patterns.

Patient Satisfaction After Outpatient Appendectomy.

BACKGROUND: Outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy has been shown to be safe, with low morbidity and readmission rates, but whether outpatient appendectomy produces poorer patient satisfaction has been questioned. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Preoperatively, patients with uncomplicated appendicitis were counselled regarding outpatient management and instructed on postoperative care, follow-up appointments, and contact information. Telephone surveys of patients who underwent an outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated appendicitis from January through October 2013 were performed. A Likert scale from very dissatisfied (1) to very satisfied (5) was employed. Patients were also queried that if, given the opportunity, they would have chosen to stay in the hospital. RESULTS: Qualified patients included 41 men and 31 women with an average age of 36 years (range 19-79 years). Fifty-four (75%) were reached for satisfaction surveys. Patients were dismissed from the recovery room following a previously published protocol for outpatient management from 6 a.m. to noon (24%), noon to 6 p.m. (17%), 6 p.m. to midnight (22%), and midnight to 6 a.m. (37%). The average satisfaction score for outpatient management was 4.6 (range 2-5). Six patients (11%) stated that they would have preferred hospitalization, if given the opportunity. The reasons included inadequate pain control (2 patients); lack of home assistance (2 patients); nausea and vomiting (1 patient); and prolonged drowsiness (1 patient). Four of these patients violated the outpatient management guidelines (pain controlled on oral analgesics and adequate home assistance). CONCLUSION: Outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy can be performed with high patient satisfaction, but adherence to protocol guidelines for outpatient management is important to properly select patients for outpatient management and to maximize patient satisfaction.

Outpatient Laparoscopic Appendectomy: Is It Time to End the Discussion?

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic appendectomy is typically associated with inpatient hospitalization averaging between 1 and 2 days. In July 2010, a prospective protocol for outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy was adopted at our institution. Patients were dismissed from the post-anesthesia recovery room or day surgery if they met certain predefined criteria. Patients admitted to a hospital room as either full admission or observation status were considered failures of outpatient management. STUDY DESIGN: An IRB-approved, retrospective review of a prospective database was performed on all patients having laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated appendicitis from July 2010 through December 2014. Study exclusions included age younger than 17 years, pregnancy, interval appendectomy, and gangrenous or perforated appendicitis. Patient demographics, success with outpatient management, morbidity, and readmissions were analyzed. RESULTS: Five hundred and sixty-three patients underwent laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated appendicitis during this time frame. There were 281 men and 282 women, with a mean age of 35.5 years. Four hundred and eighty-four patients (86%) were managed as outpatients. Seventy-nine patients were admitted for pre-existing conditions (32 patients), postoperative morbidity (10 patients), physician discretion (6 patients), or lack of transportation or support at home (31 patients). Thirty-eight patients (6.7%) experienced postoperative morbidity. Seven patients (1.2%) were readmitted after outpatient management for transient fever, nausea/vomiting, migraine headache, urinary tract infection, partial small bowel obstruction, and deep venous thrombosis. There were no mortalities or reoperations. Including the readmissions, overall success with outpatient management was 85%. CONCLUSIONS: Outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy can be performed with a high rate of success, low morbidity, and low readmission rate. This protocol has withstood the test of time. Widespread adoption has the potential for substantial health care savings.

Cracks in Martian boulders exhibit preferred orientations that point to solar-induced thermal stress.

The origins of fractures in Martian boulders are unknown. Here, using Mars Exploration Rover 3D data products, we obtain orientation measurements for 1,857 cracks visible in 1,573 rocks along the Spirit traverse and find that Mars rock cracks are oriented in statistically preferred directions similar to those compiled herein for Earth rock cracks found in mid-latitude deserts. We suggest that Martian directional cracking occurs due to the preferential propagation of microfractures favourably oriented with respect to repeating geometries of diurnal peaks in sun-induced thermal stresses. A numerical model modified here with Mars parameters supports this hypothesis both with respect to the overall magnitude of stresses as well as to the times of day at which the stresses peak. These data provide the first direct field and numerical evidence that insolation-related thermal stress potentially plays a principle role in cracking rocks on portions of the Martian surface.

Concurrent chart review provides more accurate documentation and increased calculated case mix index, severity of illness, and risk of mortality.

BACKGROUND: Case mix index (CMI) is calculated to determine the relative value assigned to a Diagnosis-Related Group. Accurate documentation of patient complications and comorbidities and major complications and comorbidities changes CMI and can affect hospital reimbursement and future pay for performance metrics. STUDY DESIGN: Starting in 2010, a physician panel concurrently reviewed the documentation of the trauma/acute care surgeons. Clarifications of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services term-specific documentation were made by the panel, and the surgeon could incorporate or decline the clinical queries. A retrospective review of trauma/acute care inpatients was performed. The mean severity of illness, risk of mortality, and CMI from 2009 were compared with the 3 subsequent years. Mean length of stay and mean Injury Severity Score by year were listed as measures of patient acuity. Statistical analysis was performed using ANOVA and t-test, with p < 0.05 for significance. RESULTS: Each year demonstrated an increase in severity of illness, risk of mortality, and CMI compared with baseline values (p < 0.05). Length of stay was not significantly different, reflecting similar patient populations throughout the study. Injury Severity Score decreased in 2011 and 2012 compared with 2009, reflecting a lower level of injury in the trauma population. CONCLUSIONS: A concurrent documentation review significantly increases severity of illness, risk of mortality, and CMI scores in a trauma/acute care service compared with pre-program levels. These changes reflect more accurate key word documentation rather than a change in patient acuity. The increased scores might impact hospital reimbursement and more accurately stratify outcomes measures for care providers.

Should clopidogrel be discontinued before laparoscopic cholecystectomy?

BACKGROUND: The perioperative management of clopidogrel remains an area of controversy. METHODS: An institutional review board-approved retrospective review of patients undergoing a laparoscopic cholecystectomy while on clopidogrel from 2008 to 2012 was performed. These patients were then matched with a nonclopidogrel cohort based on American Society of Anesthesiologists score and emergent or elective surgery. Intraoperative estimated blood loss, operative time, length of stay, and 30-day morbidity were compared. RESULTS: Thirty-six clopidogrel and 36 control patient records were analyzed. There were no significant differences in age, body mass index, sex, or incidence of coronary artery disease, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, and congestive heart failure. Estimated blood loss averaged 50 mL in the clopidogrel group and 47 mL in the control group (P = nonsignificant). There were no significant differences in operative time, 30-day morbidity, or length of stay between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy performed on patients maintained on clopidogrel during the perioperative period did not produce an increase in blood loss, operative time, 30-day morbidity, or length of stay.

Outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy should be the standard of care for uncomplicated appendicitis.

BACKGROUND: In 2012, a protocol for routine outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated appendicitis was published reflecting high success, low morbidity, and significant cost savings. Despite this, national data reflect that the majority of laparoscopic appendectomies are performed with overnight admission. This study updates our experience with outpatient appendectomy since our initial report, confirming the efficacy of this approach. METHODS: In July 2010, a prospective protocol for outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy was adopted at our institution. Patients were dismissed from the postanesthesia recovery room or day surgery if they met predefined criteria for dismissal. Patients admitted to a hospital room as either full admission or observation status were considered failures of outpatient management. An institutional review board-approved retrospective review of patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated appendicitis from July 2010 through December 2012 was performed to analyze success of outpatient management, postoperative morbidity and mortality, as well as readmission rates. RESULTS: Three hundred forty-five patients underwent laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated appendicitis during this time frame. There were 166 men and 179 women, with a mean age of 35 years. Three hundred five patients were managed as outpatients, with a success rate of 88%. Forty patients (12%) were admitted for preexisting comorbidities (15 patients), postoperative morbidity (6 patients), or lack of transportation or home support (19 patients). Twenty-three patients (6.6%) experienced postoperative morbidity. There were no mortalities. Four patients (1%) were readmitted for transient fever, nausea/vomiting, partial small bowel obstruction, and deep venous thrombosis. CONCLUSION: Outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy can be performed with a high rate of success, a low morbidity, and a low readmission rate. This study reaffirms our original pilot study and should serve as the basis for a change in the standard of care for appendicitis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, level V.

Are commercial negative pressure systems worth the cost in open abdomen management?

BACKGROUND: A commercial negative pressure product is compared with the Barker technique (sterile x-ray cassette cover, lap pads, adhesive drape with negative pressure) for temporary abdominal closure in open abdomen management. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a retrospective review of 37 open abdomen patients who had temporary abdominal closure with a commercial negative pressure device (ABThera, KCI) from 2010 to 2011. These patients were compared with the most recent 37 patients having open abdomen management using the Barker technique from 2009 to 2010. Patient demographics, body mass index (BMI), preoperative albumin, indication for open abdomen management, number of operations, use of sequential closure, and success with closure were analyzed. Patients were compared using chi square, t-test, and logistic regression analysis with significance of p < 0.05. RESULTS: Mean age and BMI were significantly higher in the ABThera patients. No statistically significant differences were seen in male:female ratio, indication for open abdomen management, preoperative albumin, number of operations, and use of sequential closure. In 33 patients (89%) ultimate midline fascial closure was achieved with the ABThera vs in 22 patients (59%) using the Barker technique (p < 0.05). Logistic regression analysis was performed on the 3 significant variables identified on bivariate analysis. Only the type of temporary abdominal closure proved significant, with an odds ratio of 7.97 favoring ABThera (95% CI 1.98 to 32.00). CONCLUSIONS: A commercially available negative pressure device for temporary abdominal closure had significantly greater success with ultimate closure after open abdomen management compared with the Barker technique. The added cost of the device is offset by improved patient results and savings from successful closure.

The number of operations negatively influences fascia closure in open abdomen management.

BACKGROUND: Open abdomen management applies to a variety of traumatic and inflammatory abdominal conditions. One complication of this technique is inability to achieve primary closure of the abdominal wall. The aim of this study was to determine if the number of abdominal reexplorations influences the success of abdominal closure. METHODS: A review of patients undergoing open abdomen management from January 2007 to 2010 was performed. The indication for surgery, number of operations, and success at primary fascia closure were tabulated. A synthetic or biologic mesh bridge was considered failure to achieve closure. RESULTS: One hundred four patients underwent open abdomen management for trauma, postoperative hemorrhage, infected pancreatic necrosis, and perforated viscus or anastomotic leak. Reoperations ranged from 2 to 25, with a mean of 4.5 reoperations. Primary fascia closure was achieved in 82 patients (79%). Fascia closure was successful in 93% of patients with ≤4 reoperations, whereas closure occurred in 32% of patients having ≥5 reoperations (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Greater than 4 reoperations is significantly associated with failure of the primary fascia closure. Efforts to obtain closure should be undertaken within 4 reoperations.

A prospective treatment protocol for outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis.

BACKGROUND: Many laparoscopic procedures are currently performed on an outpatient basis. Laparoscopic appendectomy, however, continues to require postoperative hospitalization at most institutions. A treatment protocol for outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy was developed to determine if this could be successfully performed without increasing postoperative complications. We hypothesized that adopting an outpatient protocol for laparoscopic appendectomy will significantly increase the rate of outpatient management for uncomplicated appendicitis, without an increase in morbidity or mortality. STUDY DESIGN: We initiated a prospective outpatient protocol for laparoscopic appendectomy in July 2010 at our institution. All patients having laparoscopic appendectomy from July 2010 to March 2011 were included as protocol patients and were retrospectively reviewed. A separate group of patients having laparoscopic appendectomy from January to September 2009 were analyzed as historical controls. These 2 groups were compared for demographics, preoperative comorbidities, outpatient management, and postoperative morbidity by chi-square analysis, with a 0.95 confidence level for statistical significance. RESULTS: A total of 116 protocol patients were compared with 119 historical control patients. There were no significant differences in patient demographics, preoperative comorbidities, and pathologic findings between protocol patients and historical controls. Ninety-nine protocol patients (85.3%) had procedures as outpatients compared with 42 historical control patients (35.3%; p < 0.05). Postoperative morbidity occurred in 6 protocol patients (5.2%) and 10 historical controls (8.4%; p = NS). There were no readmissions or mortalities in the protocol group. CONCLUSIONS: An outpatient protocol for laparoscopic appendectomy significantly increased the rate of outpatient management with no increase in morbidity or mortality. This practice has now become standard of care at our institution.

Outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis.

Laparoscopic appendectomy is the widely accepted treatment for acute appendicitis. This approach offers the potential of less pain, shorter hospital stay, and quicker return to activities. Traditionally, patients are hospitalized for 24 hours after laparoscopic appendectomy. This practice can be questioned due to the good results of other outpatient laparoscopic surgery. A retrospective review of 119 patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated acute appendicitis was undertaken from January through September 2009; outpatient and inpatient laparoscopic appendectomies were compared. Patients were selected for outpatient management based upon physician discretion and their clinical course in operation and recovery rooms. Forty-two patients were dismissed on the day of surgery and 77 were admitted for 1 to 5 days postoperatively. No significant differences in age, gender, and preoperative comorbidities between outpatient and inpatient groups were found. Postoperative complications occurred in 2.4 per cent of outpatients and 11.7 per cent of inpatients (P = 0.16). Complications included superficial wound infections, urinary retention, urinary tract infection, intra-abdominal bleeding, pneumonia, and infected hematoma. Based upon this study, outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy can be performed safely in selected patients. This study provides the background for the present prospective protocol for routine outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy at our institution.