Fast-Track Nonelective Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy is Safe and Feasible.

INTRODUCTION: Ample evidence exists to support the safety of fast-track discharge after elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), but there is currently no data available to support the safety of fast-tracking patients undergoing nonelective LC. We sought to determine whether fast-tracking patients undergoing nonelective LC is safe and feasible. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort review of 661 consecutive patients undergoing LC at a single teaching institution from April 2018 to January 2020. Subjects were divided into two groups: elective LC (ELC) and fast-track nonelective LC (FTLC). FTLC was defined as nonelective LC with total length of stay <36 h. Patients undergoing nonelective LC with length of stay exceeding 36 h were excluded. The primary outcome of interest was readmission within 30 d. The secondary outcomes included incidences of return to emergency department within 30 d, retained stone, bile leak, and wound infection. RESULTS: Of 661 LC, 185 (27%) were ELC and 476 (72%) were nonelective. FTLC included 121 (25%) of the nonelective LC. Preoperative characteristics were similar among the groups. On final pathology, chronic cholecystitis was predominant in both groups, but FTLC exhibited higher rates of acute cholecystitis (P < 0.0001). There was no significant difference in the primary outcome among groups: readmission within 30 d occurred in 6 (3%) ELC patients and 4 (3%) FTLC patients (P = 1.0). There were no significant differences in rates of return to emergency department within 30 d, retained stone, bile leak, or wound infection. CONCLUSIONS: With comparable postoperative complication rates to ELC, FTLC can be safely used in select patients. Additional studies are needed to determine preoperative predictors of FTLC suitability to prospectively identify appropriate patients.

In-Person Clinic Visits After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Lessons Learned From COVID-19 Pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: The utility of routine in-person clinic appointments after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is uncertain, especially after the increase of telehealth visits during the COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the utility of routine in-person follow-up for patients undergoing LC prior to changes implemented during the pandemic and to determine whether a return to routine in-person follow-up is warranted. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed follow-up encounters for all patients undergoing LC from April 2018 to February 2020. All patients were routinely scheduled for in-person postoperative clinic follow-up 2-4 wk after discharge. Follow-up was considered nonroutine if new studies or medications were ordered, the patient was referred to the emergency department or readmitted, or malignancy was identified on pathology review. RESULTS: Of 661 patients undergoing LC, 449 (68%) attended their scheduled in-person postoperative appointment and 212 (32%) did not. The postoperative appointment was nonroutine for 39 patients (9% of clinic attenders). Readmission occurred in 42 patients, with no differences between clinic attenders and nonattenders (P = 0.12). Furthermore, attending a postoperative clinic visit did not affect odds of readmission (odds ratio: 0.705, 95% confidence interval: 0.368, 1.351; P = 0.29). Readmission occurred on median day 9 after discharge in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of nonroutine follow-up after LC is low, and attendance at follow-up clinic was not associated with reduced readmissions. A return to routinely scheduling in-person follow-up 2-4 wk after discharge may not be warranted. Telehealth visits within 1 wk of discharge after LC should be considered.

Per-oral endoscopic myotomy is a safe and effective treatment for Zenker's diverticulum: a retrospective multicenter study.

Zenker per-oral endoscopic myotomy (ZPOEM) has become a promising technique for Zenker's diverticulum (ZD). The aim of this study was to add to the limited body of literature evaluating the safety and efficacy of ZPOEM. A prospectively maintained database was retrospectively reviewed to identify patients who underwent ZPOEM at two separate institutions between January 2020 and January 2022. Demographics, preoperative and postoperative clinical data, intraoperative data, adverse events, and length of stay were analyzed. A total of 40 patients (mean age 72.5 years, 62.5% male) were included. Average operative time was 54.7 minutes and average length of stay was 1.1 days. There were three adverse events, and only one was related to the technical aspects of the procedure. Patients showed improvement in the Functional Oral Intake Scale (FOIS) scores at 1 month (5 vs 7, p < 0.0001). The median FOIS scores remained 7 at both 6 and 12 months, although this improvement was not statistically significant at these time intervals (p = 0.46 and 0.37, respectively). Median dysphagia scores were decreased at 1 (2.5 vs 0, p < 0.0001), 6 (2.5 vs 0, p < 0.0001), and 12 months (2.5 vs 0, p = 0.016). The number of patients reporting ≥1 symptom was also decreased at 1 (40 vs 9, p < 0.0001) and 6 months (40 vs 1, p = 0.041). Although the number of patients reporting ≥1 symptom remained consistent at 12 months, this was not statistically significant (40 vs 1, p = 0.13). ZPOEM is a safe and highly effective treatment for the management of ZD. .

The impact of COVID-19 on surgical cases at a large quaternary referral hospital.

Introduction: Coronavirus-19 (COVID) stressed healthcare systems by increasing hospital admissions and in-hospital mortality. The impact of COVID on surgical patients is unknown. The purpose of this study was to evaluate how the COVID pandemic affected surgical patients at a large quaternary referral hospital. Methods: A retrospective review of patients undergoing surgical procedures was performed to evaluate patients undergoing surgery. The impact of COVID on surgical patients was divided into four timeframes based on government regulations: pre-COVID (January 1, 2020 to March 15, 2020), suspended (March 16, 2020 to May 4, 2020), backlogged cases (May 5, 2020 to June 14, 2020), and restoration (June 15, 2020 to September 30, 2020). Differences between patient characteristics and outcomes during these timeframes were evaluated. Results: A total of 21,424 surgical cases were performed between January 1, 2020 and September 30, 2020. During the suspended timeframe (when all elective cases were cancelled), the percentage of surgeries increased in men (53.8% compared to 49.2% pre-COVID; P < 0.01), in Black and Hispanic patients (23.1% and 15.3%, respectively; P < 0.05), and in Medicaid and self-pay patients (16.3% compared to 9.9% pre-COVID; P < 0.01). All service lines experienced similar trends in overall case volume except obstetrics (constant), trauma, vascular, and thoracic (which increased during the suspended timeframe). Conclusions: COVID-19 induced stresses in surgical patients, altering payor mix and impacting minority groups at a large quaternary referral hospital.

Family History of GERD Does Not Predict Anti-Reflux Surgery Outcomes.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Gastroesophageal reflux disease is a common disease and there is little known about the role family history plays in its disease process and incidence. Our study was designed to compare the patients with first degree relatives with and without the disease and see if there was any difference in patients needing antireflux surgery, the outcomes after antireflux surgery, and whether they needed redo surgery. METHODS: An institutional review board approved registry for patients undergoing antireflux surgery at a single institution was used. Patients were asked specific questions about their family history of gastroesophageal reflux disease at their pre-operative visit. Patients with a family history and those without were compared. RESULTS: There was no statistical difference between the patients with family history of gastroesophageal reflux disease for likelihood to undergo surgery, outcomes from surgery, or the need for redo surgery. There were more females than males in the study and there were more patients with a positive family history in the study than those without. CONCLUSION: Since there is no impact of family history of gastroesophageal reflux disease on antireflux surgery, patients can be counseled that their decision to undergo antireflux surgery is independent from the response of their first degree relatives.

Effect of Anterior Anchor on Clinical Outcomes of Type II SLAP Repairs in an Active Population.

This study evaluated the role of anchor position in persistence of pain and/or revision biceps tenodesis after arthroscopic repair of type II superior labrum anterior and posterior (SLAP) lesions and assessed for patient- and injury-specific variables influencing clinical outcomes. Active-duty service members who underwent arthroscopic repair of type II SLAP lesions between March 1, 2007, and January 23, 2012, were identified. Patients with less than 2-year clinical follow-up; type I, III, and IV SLAP lesions; and primary treatment with biceps tenodesis and/or rotator cuff repair at the time of index surgery were excluded. Demographic, preoperative, and operative variables, including anchor positions, were reviewed and evaluated for association with outcomes. Total failure rate (defined as either surgical and/or clinical failure), anchor position, and return to military function were the primary outcomes of interest. Forty-nine patients underwent type II SLAP repairs with a mean follow-up of 52.3 months. Forty-eight (97.9%) were men, and mean age was 35.2 years. Eleven patients (22%) underwent subsequent subpectoral biceps tenodesis. Forty patients (82%) returned to military function, whereas 9 patients (18%) had medical discharge for significant, rate-limiting, shoulder pain. Age was a significant predictor of surgical failure. Patients with anchor position anterior to the biceps attachment had no increased risk of clinical or surgical failure compared with patients with only posterior-based anchors. Anchor placement anterior to the biceps tendon was not associated with inferior outcomes. Younger age was shown to be a poor prognostic factor in patients' ability to return to active duty. Revision with biceps tenodesis showed significant utility in achieving good clinical outcomes and return to duty in more than 90% of patients. Patient-, injury-, and surgery-specific variables need to be identified as prognostic indicators so that clinical outcomes can continue to be improved. [Orthopedics. 2019; 42(1):e32-e38.].

Management of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures in adolescent patients using intramedullary flexible nails: A case series.

INTRODUCTION: Clavicle fractures are common injuries in adolescent patients. In this study we present our technique and results for treating non-comminuted displaced midshaft clavicle fractures using flexible intra medullary nails. METHODS: A retrospective review of prospectively collected data using the electronic medical record was performed. Adolescent patients presenting to a level one pediatric trauma center with acute displaced non comminuted clavicular shaft fractures who were treated with intra medullary flexible nails were included in this study. RESULTS: Seven adolescent patients with non-comminuted displaced mid shaft clavicle fractures were treated with flexible nails over a period of five and half years with an average follow up time of 10 months. The average age was 14.6 years (range 14-16), and a 2 mm nail was used in all cases. Closed reduction was obtained in five cases with only two cases needing open reduction to pass the nail. One patient had skin breakdown over the nail entry and had the nail removed in clinic two months after surgery, all other patients healed with no complication. Sports and full shoulder activity were allowed when radiographic healing was seen at an average 8 weeks. Implant removal was performed four of the seven patients. CONCLUSION: Flexible intramedullary nailing is an effective minimally invasive method for the treatment of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures in the adolescent population. The surgeon should be aware that a 2 mm nail is likely the optimal diameter, and the nail is difficult to pass beyond the lateral 2-3 cm of the distal segment due to canal narrowing, but passage further than this is not necessary to achieve stability and union. Following these pearls will allow the surgeon to successfully perform the procedure.