Historical Observations on Clamshell Thoracotomy.

Bilateral transverse thoracosternotomy, known colloquially as "clamshell thoracotomy," provides quick and extensive exposure to the thoracic organs. The origins of the radical incision are unclear, and its influence on historical developments in surgery has not been elaborated. Transsternal extension to bilateral thoracotomy likely occurred during World War I and was designated as Tuffier's method by 1922. Théodore Tuffier had already solidified his reputation as a trailblazing thoracic surgeon in Paris when the French army summoned him to design triage systems for trauma patients during the Great War. Following World War II, cardiac surgery grew tremendously during the 1950s, and many pioneering open-heart procedures utilized the bilateral incision for safe exposures with satisfactory results. Median sternotomy became the incision of choice for open-heart surgery by the early 1960s; however, thoracotomy remained important to the trauma surgeon's repertoire. Transsternal conversion was only briefly mentioned in trauma literature through the 1980s, although up to one-half of reported emergency thoracotomies at busy trauma centers were clamshells. The moniker clamshell thoracotomy came in 1994 when thoracic surgical oncology and lung transplantation flourished with complex operations requiring larger incisions. The twenty-first century has brought two iterations of evidence-based guidelines for emergency thoracotomy, but incision choice has not been formally discussed. Renewed conversation in recent years has advocated for the clamshell as arguably the best approach for patients in extremis. Given these trends, the tortuous history of this controversial incision deserves attention.

Venous Thromboembolism Chemoprophylaxis in Trauma and Emergency General Surgery Patients: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Appropriate venous thromboembolism (VTE) chemoprophylaxis in trauma and emergency general surgery (EGS) patients is crucial. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to review the recent literature and offer recommendations for VTE chemoprophylaxis in trauma and EGS patients. METHODS: We conducted a literature search from 2000 to 2021 for articles investigating VTE chemoprophylaxis in adult trauma and EGS patients. This study was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. RESULTS: Our search resulted in 34 articles. Most studies showed low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) is similar to unfractionated heparin (UFH) for VTE prevention; however, LMWH was more commonly used. Adjusted chemoprophylaxis dosing did not change the VTE rate but the timing did. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have been shown to be safe and effective in trauma and traumatic brain injury (TBI)/spinal cord injury (SCI). Studies showed VTE prophylaxis in EGS can be inconsistent and improves with guidelines that lower VTE events. CONCLUSIONS: There may be no benefit to receiving LMWH over UFH in trauma patients. In addition, different drugs under the class of LMWH do not change the incidence of VTE. Adjusted dosing of enoxaparin does not seem to affect VTE incidence. The use of DOACs in the trauma TBI and SCI setting has been shown to be safe and effective in reducing VTE. One important consideration with VTE prophylaxis may be the timing of prophylaxis initiation, specifically as it relates to TBI, with a higher likelihood of developing VTE as time progresses. EGS patients are at a high risk of VTE. Improved compliance with clinical guidelines in this population is correlated with decreased thrombotic events.

SARS-CoV-2 pharmacologic therapies and their safety/effectiveness according to level of evidence.

INTRODUCTION: There is a pressing need for COVID-19 transmission control and effective treatments. We aim to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 pharmacologic therapies as of August 2, 2020 according to study level of evidence. METHODS: PubMed, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, JAMA Network and PNAS were searched. The following keywords were used: ((COVID-19) OR (SARS-CoV-2)) AND ((((((therapeutics) OR (treatment)) OR (vaccine)) OR (hydroxychloroquine)) OR (antiviral)) OR (prognosis)). Results included peer-reviewed studies published in English. RESULTS: 15 peer-reviewed articles met study inclusion criteria, of which 14 were RCTs and one was a systematic review with meta-analysis. The following pharmacologic therapies were evaluated: chloroquine (CQ), hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), antivirals therapies, plasma therapy, anti-inflammatories, and a vaccine. CONCLUSION: According to level 1 evidence reviewed here, the most effective SARS-Co-V-2 pharmacologic treatments include remdesivir for mild to severe disease, and a triple regimen therapy consisting of lopinavir-ritonavir, ribavirin and interferon beta-1b for mild to moderate disease. Also, dexamethasone significantly reduced mortality in those requiring respiratory support. However, there is still a great need for detailed level 1 evidence on pharmacologic therapies.

Gender, Race, Age, Allopathic Degree, Board Score, and Research Experience Among Applicants Matching to General and Orthopedic Surgery Residencies, 2015-2019.

BACKGROUND: Surgical fields are historically dominated by male physicians. Increasing the diversity of the physician workforce improves training and patient experiences. We aim to investigate any differences in qualifications and match rates between male and female applicants to general surgery (GS) and orthopedic surgery (OS) residencies in the United States. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis was performed utilizing the Association of American Medical Colleges data regarding Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) applicants and matched Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) residents into GS and OS residencies from 2015 to 2019. Descriptive statistics and independent sample T-tests were performed with significance defined as P < .05. RESULTS: 26 568 GS and 7076 OS ERAS applicants matched at a rate of 25.2% and 55.3%, respectively. Men and women matched into GS at rates of 23.0% and 29.2%, respectively. Men and women matched into OS at rates of 55.2% and 56.2%, respectively. Men aged ≥36 years matched into OS at a significantly higher rate than women aged years ≥36 (11.9% vs. 1.4%, P = .009). Female GS ERAS applicants and entering ACGME residents had a higher mean number of research experiences than male GS ERAS applicants (2.66 vs. 2.26, P < .001) and entering male GS ACGME residents (2.96 vs. 2.56, P = .008). CONCLUSIONS: Male and female GS and OS applicants have similar qualifications. Women match into GS and OS at higher rates than men but comprise disproportionately lower numbers of applicants. Greater mentorship opportunities and recruitment of female applicants are needed to expand, diversify, and increase representation of women in surgery.

The Impact of Hospital/University Affiliation on Research Productivity Among US-Based Authors in the Fields of Trauma, Surgical Critical Care, Acute Care, and Emergency General Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Research productivity is critical to academic surgery and essential for advancing surgical knowledge and evidence-based practice. We aim to determine if surgeon affiliation with top US universities/hospitals (TOPS) is associated with increased research productivity measured by numbers of peer-reviewed publications in PubMed (PMIDs). METHODS: A bibliometric analysis was performed for PMIDs. Affiliated authors who published in trauma surgery (TS), surgical critical care (SCC), acute care surgery (ACS), and emergency general surgery (EGS) were evaluated for publications between 2015 and 2019, and lifetime productivity. Our analysis included 3443 authors from 443 different institutions. Our main outcome was PMIDs of first author (FA) and senior author (SA) in each field (2015-2019) and total lifetime publications. RESULTS: Significant differences exist between PMIDs from TOPS vs non-TOPS in FA-TS (1.34 vs 1.23, P = .001), SA-TS (1.71 vs 1.46, P < .001), total SA-PMIDs (44.10 vs 26.61, P < .001), and SA-lifetime PMIDs (90.55 vs 59.03, P < .001). There were no significant differences in PMIDs for FA or SA-SCC, FA or SA-ACS, FA or SA-EGS, FA-total PMIDs 2015-2019, or FA-lifetime PMIDs (P > .05 for all). CONCLUSION: There were significantly higher TS PMIDs among FAs and SAs affiliated with top US institutions in 2015-2019, along with higher total PMIDs (2015-2019) and lifetime PMIDs. These findings are of significance to future graduate medical applicants and academic surgeons who need to make decisions about training and future career opportunities.

Perforated proximal jejunal gastrointestinal stromal tumor pT4N0M0 presenting with severe sepsis: A case report and literature review.

INTRODUCTION: Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are mesenchymal tumors that occur along the alimentary tract, and are most commonly found in the stomach. Rarely, these tumors can occur in the small bowel, and when located in the duodenum or proximal jejunum, they may require challenging reconstruction of the alimentary tract. Patients with GISTs often present with non-specific abdominal pain or symptoms of obstruction, hemorrhage, and less commonly perforation. PRESENTATION OF CASE: A 46-year-old male presented to the hospital with a one-day history of left upper quadrant pain with fevers and chills. Physical examination was significant for signs of peritonitis, and laboratory results revealed leukocytosis and lactic acidosis. CT abdomen showed a large soft tissue mass in the proximal jejunum. In the operating theater he was found to have a perforated jejunal tumor. Pathology report revealed a 13cm GIST, pT4N0M0, Stage IIIa. He had an uneventful recovery and was discharged nine days after surgery. DISCUSSION: Proximal jejunal GISTs are a rare entity and when present, perforation is unlikely. Pathological diagnosis of GISTs are relies on immunohistochemistry demonstrating c-KIT or CD34 positivity. The prognosis of GISTs are dependent on the size and the mitotic index. Definitive treatment of non-metastatic GISTs is R0 resection. When located in the duodenum or proximal jejunum, resection can be very challenging and may require clinical expertise in order to safely perform complex alimentary tract reconstruction. CONCLUSION: Further investigation is required in order to determine best practice management for patients who present with proximal GISTs.