Time Thresholds for Using Pressure Reactivity Index in Neuroprognostication for Patients With Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI) represents a diffuse, heterogeneous disease where therapeutic targets for optimizing clinical outcome remain unclear. Mean pressure reactivity index (PRx) values have demonstrated associations with clinical outcome in sTBI. However, the retrospective derivation of a mean value diminishes its bedside significance. We evaluated PRx temporal profiles for patients with sTBI and identified time thresholds suggesting optimal neuroprognostication. METHODS: Patients with sTBI and continuous bolt intracranial pressure monitoring were identified. Outcomes were dichotomized by disposition status ("good outcome" was denoted by home and acute rehabilitation). PRx values were obtained every minute by taking moving correlation coefficients of intracranial pressures and mean arterial pressures. Average PRx trajectories for good and poor outcome groups were calculated by extending the last daily averaged PRx value to day 18. Each patient also had smoothed PRx trajectories that were used to generate "candidate features." These "candidate features" included daily average PRx's, cumulative first-order changes in PRx and cumulative second-order changes in PRx. Changes in sensitivity over time for predicting poor outcome was then evaluated by generating penalized logistic regression models that were derived from the "candidate features" and maximized specificity. RESULTS: Among 33 patients with sTBI, 18 patients achieved good outcome and 15 patients had poor outcome. Average PRx trajectories for the good and poor outcome groups started on day 6 and consistently diverged at day 9. When targeting a specificity >83.3%, an 85% maximum sensitivity for determining poor outcome was achieved at hospital day 6. Subsequent days of PRx monitoring showed diminishing sensitivities. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that in a population of sTBI, PRx sensitivities for predicting poor outcome was maximized at hospital day 6. Additional study is warranted to validate this model in larger populations.

Outcomes among trauma patients with duodenal leak following primary versus complex repair of duodenal injuries: An Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma multicenter trial.

BACKGROUND: Duodenal leak is a feared complication of repair, and innovative complex repairs with adjunctive measures (CRAM) were developed to decrease both leak occurrence and severity when leaks occur. Data on the association of CRAM and duodenal leak are sparse, and its impact on duodenal leak outcomes is nonexistent. We hypothesized that primary repair alone (PRA) would be associated with decreased duodenal leak rates; however, CRAM would be associated with improved recovery and outcomes when leaks do occur. METHODS: A retrospective, multicenter analysis from 35 Level 1 trauma centers included patients older than 14 years with operative, traumatic duodenal injuries (January 2010 to December 2020). The study sample compared duodenal operative repair strategy: PRA versus CRAM (any repair plus pyloric exclusion, gastrojejunostomy, triple tube drainage, duodenectomy). RESULTS: The sample (N = 861) was primarily young (33 years) men (84%) with penetrating injuries (77%); 523 underwent PRA and 338 underwent CRAM. Complex repairs with adjunctive measures were more critically injured than PRA and had higher leak rates (CRAM 21% vs. PRA 8%, p < 0.001). Adverse outcomes were more common after CRAM with more interventional radiology drains, prolonged nothing by mouth and length of stay, greater mortality, and more readmissions than PRA (all p < 0.05). Importantly, CRAM had no positive impact on leak recovery; there was no difference in number of operations, drain duration, nothing by mouth duration, need for interventional radiology drainage, hospital length of stay, or mortality between PRA leak versus CRAM leak patients (all p > 0.05). Furthermore, CRAM leaks had longer antibiotic duration, more gastrointestinal complications, and longer duration until leak resolution (all p < 0.05). Primary repair alone was associated with 60% lower odds of leak, whereas injury grades II to IV, damage control, and body mass index had higher odds of leak (all p < 0.05). There were no leaks among patients with grades IV and V injuries repaired by PRA. CONCLUSION: Complex repairs with adjunctive measures did not prevent duodenal leaks and, moreover, did not reduce adverse sequelae when leaks did occur. Our results suggest that CRAM is not a protective operative duodenal repair strategy, and PRA should be pursued for all injury grades when feasible. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.

A multicenter, citywide report on recurrent violent injury.

INTRODUCTION: The incidence of and risk factors for recurrent violent trauma are not well known. This information is needed to focus violence prevention efforts on at-risk cohorts. The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence of and risk factors for recurrence following violent injury in a large urban setting. We hypothesize that the overall incidence of recurrent violent injury is low but there are specific at-risk cohorts. METHODS: A retrospective, citywide study of patients who sustained blunt assault or penetrating trauma from 2013 to 2019 was performed. Patients were tracked across all trauma centers using their name and date of birth. The primary outcome was incidence of recurrent violent injury, which was calculated by dividing the number of readmitted patients by the number who survived previous admissions due to penetrating trauma or blunt assault. Associations between readmission and injury severity score, abbreviated injury score, age, sex, hospital, mechanism of injury (MOI), and disposition were determined. Kaplan-Meier curves were plotted to determine the incidence of recurrent injury over time. A multivariable Cox proportional hazard model was used to examine the relationships between characteristics at first admission and time-to-readmission. RESULTS: The recurrent injury rate was 836 patients (6.33%) out of 13,211 injured patients. Male, age 14-45 years old, discharge to jail or left against medical advice, and moderate/severe head injury were associated with re-injury. There was no association between recurrence and mechanism of injury or overall injury severity. Discharge to home was associated with a lower re-injury rate. CONCLUSION: The low recurrent injury rate despite high injury prevalence suggests injury prevention efforts should target this demographic and their non-injured peers.

Code Critical Airway: A Collaborative Solution to a Catastrophic Problem.

BACKGROUND: In 2006, a multi-disciplinary "Code Critical Airway" (CCA) Team was created at our institution. The objective of this study is to examine the demographics and outcomes of the patients for whom a CCA is activated. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of patients for whom a CCA was activated from 2008-2020. Data from 2006-2008 was not available due to timing of the implementation of the hospital's electronic medical record system. The early period of the experience with CCAs (2008-2014) was compared to the later period (2015-2020) CCA activations. RESULTS: There were 953 CCA activations. Over time, there was a statistically significantly increase in the number of CCA activations. CCAs occurred in the emergency department in 274 (29.0%), intensive care unit in 255 (27.0%), step-down unit in 60 (6.4%), wards in 294 (31.1%), and elsewhere in 61 (6.5%) cases. CCAs were managed with direct laryngoscopy in 97 patients (10.2%), video laryngoscope in 160 patients (16.8%), fiberoptic bronchoscopy in 179 patients (18.8%), bougie in 7 patient (0.7%), replacement of a prior tracheostomy in 262 patients (27.5%), and creation of a new surgical airway in 95 patients (10.0%). The definitive management of the CCA was not recorded in 76 patients (8.0%). Seven patients required removal of a foreign body (0.7%). There was no intervention in 70 patients (7.3%). There was an increase in successful first attempts at obtaining an airway comparing our experience in the early period (2008-2014) compared to the later period (2015-2020) (P < 0 .001). There was also a decrease in number of CCAs requiring a surgical airway (P = .030). CONCLUSION: Inculcation of aggressive early escalation of airway emergencies through implementation of a CCA Team has resulted in significant improvement in first attempt airway stabilization and a decrease in surgical airways.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on injury prevalence and pattern in the Washington, DC Metropolitan Region: a multicenter study by the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma, Washington, DC.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has had far-reaching effects on healthcare systems and society with resultant impact on trauma systems worldwide. This study evaluates the impact the pandemic has had in the Washington, DC Metropolitan Region as compared with similar months in 2019. DESIGN: A retrospective multicenter study of all adult trauma centers in the Washington, DC region was conducted using trauma registry data between January 1, 2019 and May 31, 2020. March 1, 2020 through May 31, 2020 was defined as COVID-19, and January 1, 2019 through February 28, 2020 was defined as pre-COVID-19. Variables examined include number of trauma contacts, trauma admissions, mechanism of injury, Injury Severity Score, trauma center location (urban vs. suburban), and patient demographics. RESULTS: There was a 22.4% decrease in the overall incidence of trauma during COVID-19 compared with a 3.4% increase in trauma during pre-COVID-19. Blunt mechanism of injury decreased significantly during COVID-19 (77.4% vs. 84.9%, p<0.001). There was no change in the specific mechanisms of fall from standing, blunt assault, and motor vehicle crash. The proportion of trauma evaluations for penetrating trauma increased significantly during COVID-19 (22.6% vs. 15.1%, p<0.001). Firearm-related and stabbing injury mechanisms both increased significantly during COVID-19 (11.8% vs. 6.8%, p<0.001; 9.2%, 6.9%, p=0.002, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The overall incidence of trauma has decreased since the arrival of COVID-19. However, there has been a significant rise in penetrating trauma. Preparation for future pandemic response should include planning for an increase in trauma center resource utilization from penetrating trauma. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Epidemiological, level III.

Utility of erector spinae plane block in thoracic surgery.

BACKGROUND: Thoracic surgeons have been incorporating enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols into their practices, not only to reduce narcotic usage but also to improve complication rates and decrease lengths of stay. Here, we describe the utility of a regional block technique that can be used for patients undergoing urgent or elective thoracic surgical procedures or suffering from rib fractures. METHODS: We report our initial one-year experience with these erector spinae plane (ESP) blocks. RESULTS: ESP blocks were placed in 42 patients. The procedure was performed by a trained team of anesthesiologists and certified nurse practitioners. It included placement of a catheter on the ipsilateral chest, followed by a 20 ml of 0.2% ropivacaine bolus and continuous infusion. Patients were then followed by the regional team, as long as the catheter was in place. While it had some technical challenges, the block was effective in 83.3% of patients with no reported mortality or major complications. However, given the confounding factors of the study (such as simultaneous implementation of ERAS protocol) and heterogeneity of the patient population, a control group was difficult to ascertain and meaningful opioid consumption analysis was difficult to perform. CONCLUSIONS: Regional blocks, such as the ESP block, complement fundamental ERAS principles and serve as an adjunct to the available armamentarium for non-narcotic ways to control pain in thoracic surgical and chest trauma patients. Continued collaboration between the thoracic surgeons and anesthesiologists is needed for its success.

Pylephlebitis and acute mesenteric ischemia in a young man with inherited thrombophilia and suspected foodborne illness.

We report on a young man who developed complicated pylephlebitis after foodborne illness. Despite antibiotics and resection of the focus of infectious colitis, he developed extensive small bowel infarction. He was treated with anticoagulation, local thrombolytic infusion, and resection of irreversibly ischemic small bowel. Thrombophilia workup demonstrated heterozygosity for factor V Leiden and the prothrombin G20210A mutation. The complications of pylephlebitis can be minimized by using systemic anticoagulation, thrombectomy, and/or local thrombolytic infusion along with antibiotics and surgical management of the infection. Evaluation for thrombophilic states should be considered, particularly if a patient does not respond to initial therapy.

Sensitivity of computed tomography in detection of perirectal abscess.

Most patients with anorectal abscess are diagnosed clinically based on pain, erythema, warmth, and fluctuance. Some patients, however, present with subtle or atypical signs. CT is easily accessible and is commonly used for diagnosis and delineation of anorectal abscess. The purpose of this study is to determine the sensitivity of CT scan in detecting perirectal abscesses and to see if immune status impacts the accuracy of CT. A retrospective study was conducted to identify patients from 2000 to 2009 with International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision code 566 (anal or rectal abscess). Patients included had a CT scan less than 48 hours before drainage. Patients with CT-positive abscess were compared with patients with CT-negative abscess. Patients were categorized as either immunocompetent or immunosuppressed based on documentation of diabetes mellitus, cancer, human immunodeficiency virus, or end-stage renal disease. One hundred thirteen patients were included in this study. Seventy-four (65.5%) were male and the average age was 47 years. Eighty-seven of 113 (77%) patients were positive on CT for anorectal abscess. Sixty of 113 (53%) patients included in this study were immunocompromised. CT missed 26 of 113 (23%) patients with confirmed perirectal abscess. Eighteen (69%) of these patients were immunocompromised compared with CT-positive patients (42 [48%], P = 0.05). The overall sensitivity of CT in identifying abscess was 77 per cent. CT lacks sensitivity in detecting perirectal abscess, particularly in the immunocompromised patient.

July--as good a time as any to be injured.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have suggested worse outcomes for patients hospitalized during the beginning of the academic calendar, though these findings have not been reproduced among trauma patients. This study compares outcomes of patients during the beginning of the academic year with those at the end of the academic year. METHODS: Retrospective trauma registry analysis of a large urban level I trauma center. Patients admitted during April/May (ENDYEAR group) or July/August (FRESH group) between 1998 and 2007 were included. Demographic and injury parameters were recorded, and outcomes compared including crude mortality, complication rate, length of stay (LOS), and intensive care unit LOS (ICU-LOS). TRISS methodology was used to evaluate risk-adjusted performance. RESULTS: Three thousand sixty-seven patients were included in the FRESH group and 3626 in the ENDYEAR group. Groups were similar in age (36 +/- 17 years and 36 +/- 17 years, p = 0.39) and mean Injury Severity Score (8 +/- 11 and 8 +/- 10, p = 0.85). There was no difference in LOS (4.6 +/- 0.2 days versus 4.5 +/- 0.2 days, p = 0.92) or ICU-LOS (5.6 +/- 0.2 days versus 5.3 +/- 0.2 days, p = 0.96). Per patient complication rates for the FRESH and ENDYEAR groups were 6% and 6% (p = 0.8), total complication rates were 12% and 13% (p = 0.07), and crude mortality was 7% and 6% (p = 0.11), respectively. FRESH and ENDYEAR groups had similar W-Statistics (1.0 and 1.2) and z scores (3.5 and 4.4). CONCLUSION: Outcomes were similar between patients injured at the beginning of the academic year compared with the end of the academic year. Our data does not support the concept of a July effect in level I trauma centers.