Search

Patients who require mechanical ventilation secondary to severe COVID-19 infection have poor survival. It is unknown if the benefit of tracheostomy extends to COVID-19 patients. If so, what is the optimal timing?Retrospective cohort study within a large hospital system in the United States. The population included patients with COVID-19 from January 1, 2020 to September 30, 2020. In total, 93,918 cases were identified. They were excluded if no intubation or tracheostomy, underwent tracheostomy before intubation,18 years old, hospice patients before admission, and bacterial pneumonia. In total, 5,911 patients met the criteria. Outcomes between patients who underwent endotracheal intubation only versus tracheostomy were compared. The primary outcome was inpatient mortality. All patients who underwent tracheostomy versus intubation only were compared. Three cohort analysis compared early (10 days) versus late (10 days) tracheostomy versus control. Eight cohort analysis compared days 0-2, days 3-6, days 7-10, days 11-14, days 15-18, days 19-22, and days 23+ to tracheostomy versus control.There was an overall inpatient mortality rate of 37.5% in the tracheostomy cohort compared to 54.4% in the control group (P.0001). There was an early tracheostomy group inpatient mortality rate of 44.7% (adjusted odds ratio 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.52-1.01) compared to 33.1% (adjusted odds ratio 0.44, 95% confidence interval 0.34-0.58) in the late tracheostomy group.COVID-19 patients with tracheostomy had a significantly lower mortality rate compared to intubated only. Optimal timing for tracheostomy placement for COVID-19 patients is 11 days or later. Future studies should focus on early tracheostomy patients.

Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) can be utilized for hemodynamic monitoring and resuscitation. In order to study the pattern of TEE use in trauma patients, a multi-institutional retrospective cohort study was performed comparing adult trauma patients who underwent TEE or those who underwent traditional invasive hemodynamic monitoring (TIHM). TIHM was defined as the use of arterial line, central venous line, or pulmonary artery catheter without TEE. Mortality rates were obtained and multivariable logistic regression was used to risk adjust for age, gender, race, insurance status, Glasgow coma scale (GCS), ICD Injury severity score (ICISS). Compared to TIHM group, more patients in TEE group had a history of congestive heart failure (CHF) or chronic pulmonary disease (CPD). Mortality rate was lower in the TEE group 7 versus 23% ( P-value < .0001). After adjusting for GCS and ICISS in multivariable analysis, inpatient mortality was significantly lower in the TEE cohort.

The emphasis on high-quality care has spawned the development of quality programs, most of which focus on broad outcome measures across a diverse group of providers. Our aim was to investigate the clinical outcomes for a department of surgery with multiple service lines of patient care using a relational database. Mortality, length of stay (LOS), patient safety indicators (PSIs), and hospital-acquired conditions were examined for each service line. Expected values for mortality and LOS were derived from University HealthSystem Consortium regression models, whereas expected values for PSIs were derived from Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality regression models. Overall, 5200 patients were evaluated from the months of January through May of both 2011 (n = 2550) and 2012 (n = 2650). The overall observed-to-expected (O/E) ratio of mortality improved from 1.03 to 0.92. The overall O/E ratio for LOS improved from 0.92 to 0.89. PSIs that predicted mortality included postoperative sepsis (O/E:1.89), postoperative respiratory failure (O/E:1.83), postoperative metabolic derangement (O/E:1.81), and postoperative deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolus (O/E:1.8). Mortality and LOS can be improved by using a relational database with outcomes reported to specific service lines. Service line quality can be influenced by distribution of frequent reports, group meetings, and service line-directed interventions.

Impalement injuries are relatively uncommon during vehicular trauma. We present a dual case report of patients sustaining simultaneous impalement injuries during a high-speed motor vehicle collision in a rural (austere) environment. After Institutional Review Board approval, we performed a review of the patients' medical records. Two young men were traveling in an automobile at high speed when the driver lost control of the vehicle, causing it to strike a wooden fence. Portions of the fence were dislodged, penetrated the windshield, and impaled both the driver and passenger. Both patients were extricated rapidly and transported to our trauma center. Multidisciplinary teams consisting of trauma, thoracic, plastic, and hepatobiliary surgeons addressed the injuries of both patients. Both survived their injuries and have since returned to their homes. This case of dual impalements highlights three key points: first, the principles of management of thoracoabdominal impalement injuries; second, the importance of rapid action of first responders in complex traumas; and finally, the value of using a multidisciplinary surgical team in complicated trauma cases.

Hyaluronate carboxymethylcellulose (Seprafilm; Genzyme Corp., Cambridge, MA) has been demonstrated to be safe and efficacious for the prevention of abdominal and pelvic adhesions; however, information is scarce regarding its use in children and adolescents. We wanted to characterize our experience with Seprafilm in a pediatric surgical population. After Institutional Review Board approval, we searched our hospital and pediatric surgery database for cases in which Seprafilm was used and retrospectively reviewed medical records for demographic and clinical information. Between July 2000 and October 2005, 18 patients had Seprafilm placed. Patients ranged in age from 0.25 to 18 years. Seven patients had not undergone any previous operations. Of patients having undergone prior surgery, the most common preceding intervention was a Ladd's procedure. Seprafilm was applied in a variety of scenarios, the most frequently being adhesiolysis for bowel obstruction. No patient required reoperation for obstruction. Two patients underwent subsequent operations for unrelated reasons; one was noted to have no significant adhesions, but the other had extensive adhesions. No patient demonstrated signs or symptoms of small bowel obstruction, intraperitoneal abscess, or localized inflammatory reaction to Seprafilm. Seprafilm was successfully used in our pediatric surgical population without complications.