Open abdominal aortic repair in the current era has more complications for occlusive disease than for aneurysm repair.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular intervention has become the first-line treatment of patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) or aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD). However, open abdominal aortic repair remains a valuable treatment option for patients who are younger, those with unfavorable anatomy, and patients for whom endovascular intervention has failed. The cohort of patients undergoing open repair has become highly selected; nevertheless, updated outcomes or patient selection recommendations have been unavailable. In the present study, we explored and compared the characteristics and postoperative outcomes of patients who had undergone open abdominal aortic repair from 2009 to 2018. METHODS: Patients who had undergone open AAA (n = 9481) or AIOD (n = 9257) repair were collected from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. The primary outcome was the 30-day mortality. The secondary outcomes included 30-day return to the operating room, total operative time, total hospital stay, and postoperative complications. Unmatched and matched differences between the two groups and changes over time were analyzed. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were conducted to assess the risk factors predicting for 30-day mortality. RESULTS: After propensity matching (n = 4980), those in the AIOD group had had a higher 30-day mortality rate (5.1% vs 4.1%; P = .021), a higher incidence of wound complications (7.4% vs 5.1%; P<.0001) and an increased 30-day return to the operating room (14.2% vs 9.1%; P < .0001). More open AIOD cases (P = .02) and fewer open AAA cases (P = .04) had been treated in the second half of the decade than in the first. The factors associated with an increased odds of 30-day mortality included advanced age, American Society of Anesthesiologists score ≥III, functional dependence, blood transfusion <72 hours before surgery, weight loss in previous 6 months, and a history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. CONCLUSIONS: From 2009 to 2018, the number of open AAA repairs decreased and the proportion of open abdominal AIOD cases increased. Open AIOD surgery was associated with higher 30-day mortality, increased return to the operating room, and increased wound complications vs open AAA repair. Multiple risk factors increased the odds for perioperative mortality. Thus, open abdominal aortic repair should be selectively applied to patients with fewer risk factors.

Rapid Adoption of an Interdisciplinary Care Team Model for Surgical Residents Managing Coronavirus Disease-19.

Introduction: Patients infected with SARS-Cov-2, the causative virus behind the coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic, have been increasing rapidly in New York City. New York City has the highest incidence in the United States and fully 45% of all deaths from COVID-19. Our medical center is located within a high-density region of cases in south Brooklyn and, in fact, three of our neighborhood zip codes are in the top seven in New York in incidence. As a result, our center has experienced a dramatic increase in hospitalizations, particularly respiratory distress secondary to COVID-19, which rapidly exceeded the capacity of our internal medicine service. This necessitated the formation of new COVID-19 units throughout the hospital, replacing all former service lines. These units employed management teams composed of residents from many medical and surgical disciplines, including general surgery residents. Methods: Our general surgery residency program established a surgical COVID-19 (SCOVID) management team. Initially, 4 surgical residents (2 senior and 2 junior), 1 attending surgeon, and 1 attending internal medicine physician were allocated to the initial SCOVID team. On day 3 of implementation, to achieve more rapid competence in the complex management of these patients, a senior medicine resident with direct experience in the care of COVID-19 patients was added in an advisory capacity. Results: The addition of an experienced senior medical resident and attending allowed for the quick adoption of uniform management protocols by surgical residents and attendings. Discussion: We describe a protocol for the establishment of COVID-19 management teams staffed with general surgical residents, as well as a strategy for the achievement of rapid increases in competency. The addition of a senior internal medicine resident and attending to our SCOVID team allowed for rapid achievement of competency in the care of COVID-19 patients in our large institution at the epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Appraising the uptake and use of the IDEAL Framework and Recommendations: A review of the literature.

INTRODUCTION: Evaluation of new surgical innovations is complex and variably regulated, and historically the quality of surgical studies has been criticized. The IDEAL (Idea, Development, Exploration, Assessment, Long-term monitoring) Framework was established to provide a pathway for evaluating surgical innovations at each stage of their development in order to produce high quality surgical research. Since the inception of IDEAL in 2009, there has been no assessment of its use. In this review, we look at the uptake and usage of IDEAL by examining the published literature. METHODS: We conducted a literature search to identify all of the publications that cited IDEAL and included only those papers that intentionally used IDEAL as part of the study methodology. We then characterized these publications by year of publication, specialty, and geographical location. We performed a critical appraisal of Stage 1, 2a, and 2b studies in order to assess the degree to which authors have correctly followed the Framework and Recommendations. RESULTS: We found 790 citations of IDEAL publications, and after abstract and full-text screening, 38 prospective studies for a surgical innovation that used IDEAL remained. We saw an overall increase in the uptake of IDEAL, with a predominance in urology and origin in the United Kingdom. The critical appraisal showed that although authors identified their project as using IDEAL, they often failed to include key IDEAL characteristics; this was especially true for the features unique to IDEAL Stages 2a and 2b. CONCLUSION: It is evident from the large number of studies citing IDEAL that the importance and challenges of reporting surgical research is well recognized among researchers. There is growing enthusiasm for using IDEAL but the current level of understanding of the Recommendations is low. Clearer and more comprehensive explanation of the application of the IDEAL Framework and Recommendations is needed to guide surgical researchers undertaking IDEAL based studies of surgical innovations.

A protocol for the development of reporting guidelines for IDEAL stage studies.

BACKGROUND: New surgical procedures, devices and other complex interventions need robust evaluation for safety, efficacy and effectiveness. The IDEAL Framework and Recommendations lay out a pathway to achieve this and offer general guidance on how studies at each stage should be reported. However, researchers require some assistance in translating theory into practice. We will develop a set of reporting guidelines for each IDEAL stage where deemed necessary through Delphi consensus methodology. METHODS: For each IDEAL stage requiring a new set of reporting guidelines, we will use the following process. We will search for the relevant reporting guidelines already in existence and use principles developed by the IDEAL Collaboration to compile the initial long list of potential checklist items. In each round, the participants will rate the importance of reporting each element on a nine-point Likert scale as proposed by the GRADE group. Sequential rounds and questionnaire administration and completion will take place until a final set of items is produced. There will then be a final consensus meeting of a working group to condense and refine the final recommendations for the reporting guidelines.