Preoperative Hospitalization Is Independently Associated With Increased Risk for Venous Thromboembolism in Patients Undergoing Colorectal Surgery: A National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database Study.

BACKGROUND: An important factor in the pathophysiology of venous thromboembolism is blood stasis, thus, preoperative hospitalization length of stay may be contributory to risk. OBJECTIVE: We assessed preoperative hospital length of stay as a risk factor for venous thromboembolism. DESIGN: We performed a retrospective review of patients who underwent colorectal operations using univariate and multivariable propensity score analyses. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at a tertiary referral hospital. PATIENTS: Data on patients was obtained from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program 2005-2011 Participant Use Data Files. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Short-term (30-day) postoperative venous thromboembolism was measured. RESULTS: Our analysis included 242,670 patients undergoing colorectal surgery (mean age, 60 years; 52.9% women); of these, 72,219 (29.9%) were hospitalized preoperatively. The overall rate of venous thromboembolism was 2.07% (1.4% deep vein thrombosis, 0.5% pulmonary embolism, and 0.2% both). On multivariable analysis, the most predictive independent risk factors for venous thromboembolism were return to the operating room (OR, 1.62 (95% CI, 1.44-1.81); p < 0.001) and chronic steroid use (OR, 1.59 (95% CI, 1.41-1.80); p < 0.001); preoperative hospitalization also independently predicted venous thromboembolism (OR, 1.39 (95% CI, 1.28-1.51); p < 0.001), whereas the use of laparoscopy was protective (OR, 0.75 (95% CI, 0.67-0.83); p < 0.001). Propensity score stratification (capped at 7 days, 100 strata, area under the curve = 0.73) indicated that each day of preoperative hospitalization increased the odds of venous thromboembolism (OR, 1.42 (95% CI, 1.32-1.53); p < 0.001). All of the analyses showed a dose-response relationship between preoperative lengths of stay and risk of postoperative venous thromboembolism (p < 0.001). Patients who experienced venous thromboembolism had a higher 30-day mortality rate (3.7% vs 8.9%; p < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: This study has limited potential generalizability and a retrospective design. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative hospitalization is an independent risk factor for venous thromboembolism and its associated increase in mortality after colorectal surgery, whereas laparoscopy is a strong protective variable. Further research into preoperative screening for highest-risk patients is indicated.

Cilostazol is associated with improved outcomes after peripheral endovascular interventions.

OBJECTIVE: Although cilostazol is commonly used as an adjunct after peripheral vascular interventions, its efficacy remains uncertain. We assessed the effect of cilostazol on outcomes after peripheral vascular interventions using meta-analytic techniques. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE (1946-2012), Cochrane CENTRAL (1996-2012), and trial registries for studies comparing cilostazol in combination with antiplatelet therapy to antiplatelet therapy alone after peripheral vascular interventions. Treatment effects were reported as pooled risk/hazard ratio (HR) with random-effects models. RESULTS: Two randomized trials and four retrospective cohorts involving 1522 patients met inclusion criteria. Across studies, mean age ranged from 65 to 76 years, and the majority of patients were male (64%-83%); mean follow-up ranged from 18 to 37 months. Most interventions were in the femoropopliteal segment, and overall, 68% of patients had stents placed. Pooled estimates demonstrated that the addition of cilostazol was associated with decreased restenosis (relative risk [RR], 0.71; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60-0.84; P < .001), improved amputation-free survival (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.47-0.85; P = .002), improved limb salvage (HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.27-0.66; P < .001), and improved freedom from target lesion revascularization (RR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.14-1.61; P < .001). There was no significant reduction in mortality among those receiving cilostazol (RR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.45-1.19; P = .21). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of cilostazol to antiplatelet therapy after peripheral vascular interventions is associated with a reduced risk of restenosis, amputation, and target lesion revascularization in our meta-analysis of six studies. Consideration of cilostazol as a medical adjunct after peripheral vascular interventions is warranted, presuming these findings are broadly generalizable.

A Simulation-based PPE orientation training curriculum for novice physicians.

Background: Personal protective equipment (PPE) is effective in preventing coronavirus disease (COVID-19) infection. Resident knowledge of proper use and effective training methods is unknown. We hypothesise that contamination decreases and knowledge increases after a formalised PPE educational session. Methods: Participants included first year interns during their residency orientation in June 2020. Before training, participants took a knowledge test, donned PPE, performed a simulated resuscitation, and doffed. A standardised simulation-based PPE training of the donning and doffing protocol was conducted, and the process repeated. Topical non-toxic highlighter tracing fluid was applied to manikins prior to each simulation. After doffing, areas of contamination, defined as discrete fluorescent areas on participants' body, was evaluated by ultraviolet light. Donning and doffing were video recorded and asynchronously rated by two emergency medicine (EM) physicians using a modified Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) protocol. The primary outcome was PPE training effectiveness defined by contamination and adherence to CDC sequence. Results: Forty-eight residents participated: 24 internal medicine, 12 general surgery, 6 EM, 3 neurology, and 3 psychiatry. Before training, 81% of residents were contaminated after doffing; 17% were contaminated after training (P<0.001). The most common contamination area was the wrist (50% pre-training vs. 10% post-training, P<0.001). Donning sequence adherence improved (52% vs. 98%, P<0.001), as did doffing (46% vs. 85%, P<0.001). Participant knowledge improved (62%-87%, P <0.001). Participant confidence (P<0.001) and preparedness (P<0.001) regarding using PPE increased with training. Conclusion: A simulation-based training improved resident knowledge and performance using PPE.

Acute and Delayed Intracranial Hemorrhage in Head-Injured Patients on Warfarin versus Direct Oral Anticoagulant Therapy.

INTRODUCTION: Direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) use for thrombosis treatment and prophylaxis is a popular alternative to warfarin. This study compares rates of traumatic intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) for patients on anticoagulant therapies and the effect of combined anticoagulant and antiplatelet therapies. METHODS: A retrospective observational study of trauma patients was conducted at two level I trauma centers. Patients aged ≥18 years with preinjury use of an anticoagulant (warfarin, rivaroxaban, apixaban, or dabigatran) who sustained a blunt head injury within the past day were included. Patients were evaluated by head CT to evaluate for ICH. RESULTS: Three hundred and eighty-eight patients were included (140 on warfarin, 149 on a DOAC, and 99 on combined anticoagulant and antiplatelet therapies). Seventy-nine patients (20.4%) had an acute ICH, while 16 patients (4.1%) had a delayed ICH found on routine repeat CT. Those on combination therapy were not at increased risk of acute ICH (relative risk [RR] 0.90, confidence interval [CI]: 0.56-1.44; P > 0.5) or delayed ICH (RR 2.19, CI: 0.84-5.69; P = 0.10) compared to anticoagulant use only. Those on warfarin were at increased risk of acute ICH (RR 1.75, CI: 1.10-2.78, P = 0.015), but not delayed ICH (RR 0.99, CI 0.27-3.59, P > 0.5), compared to those on DOACs. No delayed ICH patients died or required neurosurgical intervention. CONCLUSION: Patients on warfarin had a higher rate of acute ICH, but not delayed ICH, compared to those on DOACs. Given the low rate of delayed ICH with no resultant morbidity or mortality, routine observation and repeat head CT on patients with no acute ICH may not be necessary.

Antiplatelet therapy is associated with a high rate of intracranial hemorrhage in patients with head injuries.

BACKGROUND: Antiplatelet agents are increasingly used in cardiovascular treatment. Limited research has been performed into risks of acute and delayed traumatic intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) in these patients who sustain head injuries. Our goal was to assess the overall odds and identify factors associated with ICH in patients on antiplatelet therapy. METHODS: A retrospective observational study was conducted at two level I trauma centers. Adult patients with head injuries on antiplatelet agents were enrolled from the hospitals' trauma registries. Acute ICH was diagnosed by head CT. Observation and repeat CT to evaluate for delayed ICH was performed at clinicians' discretion. Patients were stratified by antiplatelet type and analyzed by ICH outcome. RESULTS: Of 327 patients on antiplatelets who presented with blunt head trauma, 133 (40.7%) had acute ICH. Three (0.9%) had delayed ICH on repeat CT, were asymptomatic and did not require neurosurgical intervention. One with delayed ICH was on clopidogrel and two were on both clopidogrel and aspirin. Patients with delayed ICH compared with no ICH were older (94 vs 74 years) with higher injury severity scores (15.7 vs 4.4) and trended towards lower platelet counts (141 vs 216). Patients on aspirin had a higher acute ICH rate compared with patients on P2Y12 inhibitors (48% vs 30%, 18% difference, 95% CI 4 to 33; OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.15 to 4.13). No other group comparison had significant differences in ICH rate. CONCLUSIONS: Patients on antiplatelet agents with head trauma have a high rate of ICH. Routine head CT is recommended. Patients infrequently developed delayed ICH. Routine repeat CT imaging does not appear to be necessary for all patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, prognostic.

Neoadjuvant Radiotherapy: A Risk Factor for Short-Term Wound Complications after Radical Resection for Rectal Cancer?

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant radiotherapy (RT) for rectal cancer may increase wound complications after oncologic proctectomy. We aimed to assess the relationship between neoadjuvant RT and 30-day wound complications after radical surgery for rectal cancer. STUDY DESIGN: We identified rectal cancer patients (International Classification of Diseases, revision-9 [ICD-9] code 154.1) who underwent radical resection, using NSQIP from 2005 to 2010. Patients were stratified into preoperative radiation vs no radiation groups. Our primary outcome was any wound complication. The association between preoperative RT and postoperative wound complication rate was assessed by univariate, multivariable, and propensity score analyses. RESULTS: Of 242,670 colorectal cases, 6,297 patients were included. Of these, 2,476 (39%) received RT within 90 days preoperatively. The RT group, compared with the no RT group, received more chemotherapy within 30 days preoperatively (15.0% vs 2.5%, p < 0.0001), and had less laparoscopic (18.9% vs 25.1%, p < 0.0001) or sphincter-preserving surgery (61.8% vs 67.1%, p < 0.0001). In the univariate analyses, there was no difference in wound complications (19.6% vs 18.7%, p = 0.42) between groups. Similarly, there was no difference in overall complications (29.6% vs 29.8%, p = 0.89), return to operating room (6.7% vs 6.7%, p = 0.96), or length of stay (8.4 vs 8.4 days, p = 0.72) between the RT and no RT groups, respectively. The mortality rate in the RT group was lower on univariate analysis (0.7% vs 1.4%, p = 0.008), but was not significantly different in the multivariable analyses. Multivariable and propensity score analyses were consistent with the lack of association between preoperative RT and postoperative wound complications. CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant radiotherapy does not appear to be an independent risk factor for wound complications after radical surgery for rectal cancer.