Tracheal Stenosis in Open Versus Percutaneous Tracheostomy.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to investigate if there is an increased risk of developing tracheal stenosis after tracheostomy with an open versus percutaneous tracheostomy. METHODS: The patient cohort included patients receiving open or percutaneous tracheostomies at Catholic Health Initiatives Midwest facilities from January 2017 to June 2023. The primary aim was to compare the differences in the risk of developing tracheal stenosis between open and percutaneous tracheostomy techniques. Between-technique differences in the risk of developing tracheal stenosis were assessed via a Cox proportional hazard model. To account for death precluding patients from developing tracheal stenosis, death was considered a competing risk. RESULTS: A total of 828 patients met inclusion criteria (61.7% open, 38.3% percutaneous); 2.5% (N = 21) developed tracheal stenosis. The median number of days to develop tracheal stenosis was 84 (interquartile range: 60 to 243, range: 6 to 739). Tracheal stenosis was more frequent in patients who received a percutaneous tracheostomy (percutaneous: 3.5% vs. open: 2.0%); however, the risk of developing tracheal stenosis was statistically similar between open and percutaneous techniques (HR: 2.05, 95% CI: 0.86-4.94, p = 0.108). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates no significant difference in the development of tracheal stenosis when performing an open versus a percutaneous tracheostomy. Tracheal stenosis is a long-term complication of tracheostomy and should not influence the decision about the surgical technique used.

Cruroplasty with or without mesh? A systematic literature review with a novel time-organized proportion meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Improved outcomes with the use of non-absorbable mesh (NAM) for inguinal hernia repairs led to its rapid adoption for hiatal hernia (HH) repairs; however, feared complications occurred, and the trend shifted toward using absorbable mesh (AM). We aimed to analyze the literature assessing objective HH recurrence rates after primary laparoscopic cruroplasty with or without the use of different mesh types. METHODS: A systematic literature review with both pairwise and time-organized proportion meta-analyses of articles published between January 1993 and September 2022 was performed using the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Taylor & Francis databases to identify relevant studies comparing groups undergoing cruroplasty with suture repair (SR) alone, AM, NAM, or partially absorbable mesh (PAM). Studies documenting an objective follow-up ≥ 6 months were included. The primary outcome was the HH recurrence rate confirmed by barium esophagram or upper GI endoscopy. RESULTS: A total of 34 studies met the inclusion criteria, including 6 randomized clinical trials, 25 retrospectives studies, and 3 prospective cohort studies. A total of 2170 subjects underwent laparoscopic HH repair and completed an objective follow-up ≥ 6 months after surgery; the objective recurrence rate was 20.8% (99/477) at a mean follow-up of 25.8 ± 16.4 months for the SR group, 20.6% (244/1187) at 28.1 ± 13.8 months for the AM group, 13.7% (65/475) at 30.8 ± 15.3 months for the NAM group, and 0% (0/31) at 32.5 ± 13.5 months for the PAM group. However, the pairwise meta-analysis revealed that overall mesh use was not superior to SR in preventing long-term HH recurrence. CONCLUSION: The use of AM does not appear to reduce HH recurrence compared to SR alone. Although the data favors NAM to decrease objective HH recurrence in the mid-term, the long-term (≥ 48 months) recurrence rate was similar with or without any type of mesh.

Discharge disposition and clinical outcomes of patients hospitalized with COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: By better understanding the long-term effects of COVID-19 and assessing rehabilitation placement among the patients in our study, we hope to determine the predictors of rehabilitation needs in individuals suffering from the long-term sequelae of COVID-19. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed of adult patients with a positive COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction test among multiple hospitals in a regional health system. The main outcomes measured were discharge disposition, total length of hospital stay, and overall all-cause mortality and readmission rates within 30 and 90 days of discharge. RESULTS: Of the 2502 patients included in the study, we found that 65.2% were discharged to home, while the remaining patients were discharged to home healthcare (33.6%), skilled nursing facilities (31.7%), or long-term acute rehabilitation centers (11.6%). The overall all-cause mortality rate at 30 and 90 days were 2.7% and 4.4%, respectively. The overall all-cause 30-day and 90-day readmission rates were 7.0% and 7.6%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Younger age and shorter hospitalization stays were the most important predictors of home discharge. Discharge to home was also significantly associated with lower all-cause mortality rates at 30 and 90 days after discharge.

Strut Inversion During Valve-in-Valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: An Unknown Complication?

A 74-year-old man presented with failure of a bioprosthetic aortic valve implanted 7 years earlier, with a mean gradient of 44 mm Hg across the aortic valve. During valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement, we came across an unusual complication of strut inversion at the lower end of the valve. (Level of Difficulty: Advanced.).

Retrieval and repositioning of an embolized atrial septal defect closure device using a gooseneck snare.

BACKGROUND: Closure of all haemodynamically significant atrial septal defects (ASDs) is recommended irrespective of symptoms. Percutaneous device closure offers a favourable alternative to surgery with lower morbidity, shorter duration of hospital stays, and avoidance of a surgical scar. Though device closure is generally a safe procedure with high success rates, certain complications can arise including device embolization which poses a significant challenge for the treating team. We report one such case in which the ASD closure device got spontaneously released and embolized from the delivery cable into the left atrium prior to its deployment. We describe our approach for its retrieval and subsequently its successful deployment across the septal defect using a gooseneck snare. CASE PRESENTATION: A 5-year-old asymptomatic child was found to have a murmur on a routine check-up. Evaluation revealed a haemodynamically significant, 18-mm ostium secundum ASD with normal pulmonary pressures and suitable margins for device closure. A 20-mm ASD closure device was traversed via an 8-Fr delivery system. While manipulating the left atrial (LA) disc from the right upper pulmonary vein (RUPV) approach, the device got spontaneously released. The right atrial (RA) disc was caught across the ASD, into the left atrium. This was confirmed by intraoperative transthoracic echocardiography and fluoroscopy. The haemodynamics and rhythm were stable. A 20-mm gooseneck snare was immediately passed through the delivery sheath and an attempt was made to catch the screw. With difficulty, the RA screw was caught with the snare and multiple attempts to retrieve the device into the sheath were unsuccessful. However, while negotiating, we were able to secure a favourable position of the device across the atrial septal defect, and after fluoroscopic and echocardiographic confirmation, the device was released. The child remained stable thereafter and was discharged 2 days later. CONCLUSIONS: Gooseneck snare is a valuable tool in the management of embolized ASD closure device. Occasionally, like in the index case, one may be successful in retrieving the embolized device and repositioning it across the ASD using a gooseneck snare, thus obviating the need for emergency surgery.