Stoma-less IPAA Is Not Associated With Increased Anastomotic Leak Rate or Long-term Pouch Failure in Patients With Ulcerative Colitis.

BACKGROUND: There is debate regarding the utility of diverting loop ileostomy with IPAA construction in patients requiring colectomy for ulcerative colitis. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine whether the omission of diverting loop ileostomy at the time of IPAA construction increases the risk of complications. DESIGN: This was a retrospective study. SETTINGS: The study was conducted in a high-volume, quaternary referral center with an IBD program. PATIENTS: The patients, who underwent IPAA with or without ileostomy, were diagnosed for ulcerative colitis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Anastomotic leak rate and pouch failure rates were determined between patients who either had a diverting ileostomy at the time of IPAA creation or had stoma-less IPAA. RESULTS: Of the 414 patients included in this study, 91 had stoma-less IPAA. When compared to IPAA with diverting loop ileostomy, patients with stoma-less IPAA were less likely to be taking prednisone and had decreased blood loss. Short- and long-term outcomes were similar when comparing stoma-less IPAA and IPAA with diverting loop ileostomy, with no significant difference in anastomotic leak rate and long-term pouch failure rates. Diverting loop ileostomy was associated with a 14.6% risk of complication at the time of stoma reversal. LIMITATIONS: The study is limited by its retrospective nature. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that the omission of a diverting ileostomy is feasible in select patients undergoing IPAA. Stoma-less IPAA does not have a statistically significant higher risk of anastomotic leak or pouch failure when compared to IPAA with diverting loop ileostomy in properly selected patients. Diverting loop ileostomies have their own risks, which partially offset their perceived safety. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B891 .LA ANASTOMÓSIS DE RESERVORIO ILEAL AL ANO SIN ESTOMA NO ESTÁ ASOCIADO CON UN AUMENTO EN LA TASA DE FUGA ANASTOMÓTICA O DISFUNCIÓN DE LA BOLSA A LARGO PLAZO EN PACIENTES CON COLITIS ULCERATIVA. ANTECEDENTES: Existe debate en lo que respecta a la utilidad de efectuar una ileostomía en asa en la construcción de una anastomosis de reservorio ileal al ano en pacientes que requieren colectomía para colitis ulcerativa. OBJETIVO: Determinar si el evitar una ileostomía de derivación en el momento de efectuar una anstomósis de reservorio ileal al ano aumenta el riesgo de complicaciones. DISEO: Estudio retrospectivo. REFERENCIA: Centro de referencia de cuarto nivel de grandes volúmenes con programa de enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal. PACIENTES: Con diagnóstico de colitis ulcerativa sometidos a anastomosis de reservorio ileal al ano con o sin ileostomía derivative. PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADOS: Tasa de fuga anastomótica y disfunción del reservorio en pacientes sometidos a anastomosis de reservorio ileal al ano con ileostomía derivativa en el mismo evento y aquellos sin derivación de protección. RESULTADOS: De los 414 pacientes incluídos en el estudio, 91 no contaban con ileostomía de protección de la anastomosis del reservorio ileal al ano. Al comprarse con aquellos con ileostomía derivativa, aquellos sin estoma requirieron menor dosis de prednisona y presentaron menor pérdida sanguínea. Los resultados a corto y largo plazo fueron similares al comprar ambos grupos sin haber evidencia significativa de fuga anastomótica o falla del reservorio a largo plazo. La derivación con ileostomía en asa se asoció en un 14.6% de riesgo de complicaciones al efectuar el cierre de la misma. LIMITACIONES: Es una revision retrospectiva. CONCLUSIONES: : Los resultados de este estudio sugieren que la omisión de una ileostomía de protección es posible en pacientes seleccionados sometidos a una anastomosis de reservorio ileoanal. La anastomosis sin derivación de protección no confiere un riesgo estadísticamente significativo de fuga anastomótica o disfunción de la misma al compararse con el procedimiento con estoma derivativo en pacientes seleccionados. Las ileostomías de derivación en asa tienen su propia morbilidad que cuestiona la perfección de su seguridad. Consulte Video Resumen at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B891 . (Traducción- Dr. Miguel Esquivel-Herrera ).

Dexmedetomidine Is an Equal Cost Alternative to Propofol in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement, With Equivalent In-Hospital and 30-Day Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with monitored anesthesia care (MAC) is well-tolerated and is growing in popularity. Differences in outcomes based on anesthetic agent choice with MAC has received less attention. The authors sought to determine whether differences in outcomes and cost exist based on whether patients receive dexmedetomidine or propofol when undergoing TAVR with MAC. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: The Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, Pennsylvania. PARTICIPANTS: The study comprised 161 patients who underwent TAVR with MAC between May 2014 and March 2019. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A propofol-only (n = 58) group and dexmedetomidine-only (n = 103) group were identified. No differences in in-hospital mortality or complication rate were identified when evaluating for stroke, transfusion, new arrhythmia, cardiac arrest, or bleeding and vascular complications (p > 0.05, all). Thirty-day outcomes were also equivalent, with no differences in mortality, stroke, vascular complication, new arrhythmia, or myocardial infarction (p > 0.05, all). The average amount of epinephrine, norepinephrine, or phenylephrine used intraoperatively was not significantly different. Overall median hospitalization costs were equivalent ($57,554.31 with dexmedetomidine v $58,538.08 with propofol, p = 0.97). CONCLUSIONS: There were no significant differences in in-hospital outcomes, 30-day outcomes, or total cost of the patient's hospitalization, based on the use of dexmedetomidine versus propofol in patients undergoing TAVR.

Lymphatic malformations: a 20-year single institution experience.

PURPOSE: Lymphatic malformations (LMs) are congenital abnormalities which result from disturbances in the embryologic development of the lymphatic system. We sought to determine the characteristics and treatment patterns for LMs in a rural setting, and the effect of a specialized vascular malformations clinic on triage and follow-up. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study at a single tertiary care institution. Sixty-two patients were identified; chart review was completed to obtain demographic, surgery/sclerotherapy session and follow-up information. RESULTS: The head/neck region was the most predominant LM location (N = 26, 41.9%), followed by trunk (N = 16, 25.8%), extremity (N = 11, 17.7%), and intraabdominal/retroperitoneal (N = 7, 11.3%). Twenty-eight patients were managed non-surgically, while 21, 7 and 6 patients required surgery, sclerotherapy, or both. Head/neck LMs were the most likely to recur (73%, p = 0.028). Patients seen in specialty clinic had similar duration of follow-up and time to intervention, but were more often below 1 year of age (p = 0.030). Average LM volume among patients with available imaging was much larger in those referred to specialty clinic (73.2 cm3 versus 14.8 cm3, p = 0.022). CONCLUSION: Our experience reiterates not only the wide variety of clinical presentations of lymphatic malformations, but also demonstrates the necessity of multiple subspecialties and their collaboration to achieve prompt and efficacious treatment.

Late Cardiac Tamponade 4 Years After Total Artificial Heart Implantation.

Cardiac tamponade after ventricular assist device or total artificial heart implantation can typically occur within days or weeks after surgery. This report describes the case of a woman who presented over 4 years after SynCardia 70cc total artificial heart implantation, with physiology consistent with right ventricular outflow tract obstruction. The cause was initially attributed to device membrane failure based on the device console waveform; however, during operative exploration, a large amount of proteinaceous exudate was surrounding the device and causing the obstruction. This report illustrates how tamponade can result years after device implantation, secondary to porosity of the outflow grafts.