Search

Background: Ventral hernia repair (VHR) is one of the most common general surgery procedures among older adults but is often deferred due to a higher risk of complications. This study compares postoperative quality of life (QOL) and complications between frail and non-frail patients undergoing elective VHR. We hypothesized that frail patients would have higher complication rates and smaller gains in quality of life compared to non-frail patients., Study Design: Patients 65 years of age and older, undergoing elective VHR between 2018 and 2022 were selected from the ACHQC (Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative) and grouped based on frailty scores obtained using the Modified Frailty Index (mFI-5). Logistic regression adjusting for hernia characteristics (size, recurrent, parastomal, incisional) were performed for 30-day outcomes including surgical site infections (SSI), surgical site occurrences (SSO), surgical site infections/occurrences requiring procedural intervention (SSOPI), and readmission. Multivariable analyses controlling for patient and procedure characteristics were performed comparing QOL scores (HerQLes scale, 0-100) at baseline, 30 days, 6 months and 1 year postoperatively., Results: A total of 4888 patients were included, 29.17% non-frail, 47.87% frail, and 22.95% severely frail. On adjusted analysis, severely frail patients had higher odds of SSO (most commonly seroma formation) but no evidence of a difference in SSI, SSOPI, readmission or mortality. Severely frail patients had lower median QOL scores at baseline (48.3/100, IQR 26.1-71.7, p ​= ​0.001) but reported higher QOL scores at both 30-days (68.3/100, IQR 41.7-88.3, p ​= ​0.01) and 6-months (86.7/100, IQR 65.0-93.3, p ​= ​0.005)., Conclusion: Severely frail patients reported similar increases in QOL and similar complications to their not frail counterparts. Our results demonstrate that appropriately selected older patients, even those who are severely frail, may benefit from elective VHR in the appropriate clinical circumstance., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest This research, through Dr. Collins, was supported by the National Institutes of HealthNational Institute of Aging (NIA) [grant number R03AG074072]. Dr. Benjamin Poulose has received research support from the Bard-Davol and Advanced Medical Solutions. He received consulting fees from Ethicon and receives salary support from the ACHQC as the ACHQC Director of Quality and Outcomes. ACHQC Foundation is supported by Bard-Davol, Allergan, Medtronic, W.L. Gore, Ethicon, and TelaBio. Dr. Benjamin Poulose received salary support from ACHQC and research grant support from BD Interventional and Advanced Medical Solutions. Dr. Alison Whalen, Savanah Renshaw, Molly Olson, and Sahana Holla have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The clinical and financial impact of surgical site infection after ventral hernia repair is significant. Here we investigate the impact of dual antibiotic irrigation on SSI after VHR., Methods: This was a multicenter, prospective randomized control trial of open retromuscular VHR with mesh. Patients were randomized to gentamicin ​+ ​clindamycin (G ​+ ​C) (n ​= ​125) vs saline (n ​= ​125) irrigation at time of mesh placement. Primary outcome was 30-day SSI., Results: No significant difference was seen in SSI between control and antibiotic irrigation (9.91 vs 9.09 ​%; p ​= ​0.836). No differences were seen in secondary outcomes: SSO (11.71 vs 13.64 ​%; p ​= ​0.667); 90-day SSO (11.1 vs 13.9 ​%; p ​= ​0.603); 90-day SSI (6.9 vs 3.8 ​%; p ​= ​0.389); SSIPI (7.21 vs 7.27 ​%, p ​= ​0.985); SSOPI (3.6 vs 3.64 ​%; p ​= ​0.990); 30-day readmission (9.91 vs 6.36 ​%; p ​= ​0.335); reoperation (5.41 vs 0.91 ​%; p ​= ​0.056)., Conclusion: Dual antibiotic irrigation with G ​+ ​C did not reduce the risk of surgical site infection during open retromuscular ventral hernia repair., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The following authors have outside financial interests: Intuitive (Warren, Beffa, Prabhu, Nikolian, Pauli, Carbonell), Johnson and Johnson/Ethicon (Warren), Surgimatrix (Petro, Prabhu), Bard-Davol (Petro, Horne, Poulose), Advanced Medical Solutions Group (Petro, Poulose), CMR Surgical (Prabhu), Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative (Rosen, Poulose), Ariste Medical (Rosen), Medtronic (Nikolian, Pauli, Carbonell), Caresyntax (Nikolian), Beckton-Dickson (Pauli), Boston Scientific (Pauli), Actuated Medical (Pauli), Cook Biotech (Pauli), Neptune Medical (Pauli), Noah Medical (Pauli), Allergan (Pauli), ERBE (Pauli), Integra (Pauli), Steris (Pauli), Vicarious (Pauli), UpToDate (Pauli), Springer (Pauli), Deep Blue Medical Advances (Carbonell). The authors used no AI or AI assisted technologies in the writing process. This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Hernia-Related Quality of Life Survey (HerQLes) assesses quality of life (QoL) after hernia repair, but the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is unknown., Methods: Using 2013-2019 data from the Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative, HerQLes summary scores were calculated for VHR patients at baseline and 1-year. MCID was calculated using distribution-based method. Multivariate regression identified factors associated with exceeding MCID at 1 year., Results: 1817 patients met criteria. MCID was identified as a change in HerQLes of at least 15.6 points. Mean 1-year post-op score was 74.9 (SD ± 26.2), which exceeded the MCID threshold (p < 0.001). Patients with increasing hernia width had higher odds of exceeding MCID at 1 year post-op (OR 1.04, p < 0.01), as did patients with greater ASA class (OR 8.9, p < 0.01)., Conclusion: Using MCID can help identify patients who may significantly improve QoL after VHR, as well as power clinical trials with QoL as primary outcome., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Delays to definitive care are associated with poor outcomes after trauma and medical emergencies. It is unknown whether inter-hospital transfer delays affect outcomes for nontraumatic acute surgical conditions., Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of patient transfers for acute surgical conditions within a regional transfer network from 2009 to 2013. Delay was defined as more than 24 hours from presentation to transfer request and categorized as 1 or 2+ days. The primary outcome was post-transfer death or hospice. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression were performed., Results: The cohort included 2,091 patient transfers. Delays of 2 or more days were associated with death or hospice in unadjusted analyses, but there was no difference after adjustment. Predictors of post-transfer death or hospice included older age, higher comorbidity scores, and greater severity of illness., Conclusions: Delays in transfer request were not associated with post-transfer mortality or discharge to hospice, suggesting effective triage of nontraumatic acute surgical patients., Competing Interests: Author Disclosures: Drs. Kummerow, Hayes, Ehrenfeld, Holzman, Sharp, Kripalani, Pierce, and Nealon, and Mrs. Phillips have no conflicts of interest to disclose. Dr. Poulose received research support from Bard-Davol and is a consultant to Ariste Medical and Pfizer., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Assessing incisional hernia recurrence typically requires a clinical encounter. We sought to determine if patient-reported outcomes (PROs) could detect long-term recurrence., Methods: Adult patients 1 to 5 years after incisional hernia repair were prospectively asked about recurrence, bulge, and pain at the original repair site. Using dynamic abdominal sonography for hernia to detect recurrence, performance of each PRO was determined. Multivariable regression was used to evaluate PRO association with recurrence., Results: Fifty-two patients enrolled with follow-up time 46 ± 13 months. A patient-reported bulge was 85% sensitive, and 81% specific to detect recurrence. Patients reporting no bulge and no pain had 0% chance of recurrence. In multivariable analysis, patients reporting a bulge were 18 times more likely to have a recurrence than those without (95% confidence interval, 3.7 to 90.0; P < .001)., Conclusions: This preliminary study demonstrates that PROs offer a promising means of detecting long-term recurrence after incisional hernia repair, which can help facilitate quality improvement and research efforts., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Some risk factors for anastomotic leak have been identified, but the effect of smoking is unknown., Methods: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of smoking on clinical leak after left-sided anastomoses. Adult patients who underwent elective left colectomy between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2012 were included. Those with stomas and inflammatory bowel diseases were excluded. Primary outcome was anastomotic leak requiring percutaneous drainage or operative intervention within 30 days., Results: There were 246 patients included; 56% were female. Most had a diagnosis of diverticular disease (53%) or cancer (37%). Anastomotic leak rate was 6.5% (n = 16). The rate in smokers was 17% versus 5% in nonsmokers (P = .01). Smokers had over 4 times greater chance of leak (odds ratio 4.2, 95% confidence interval 1.3 to 13.5, P = .02)., Conclusion: Smoking is a risk factor for leak after left colectomy. Consideration should be given to delaying elective left colectomy until smoking cessation is achieved., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Recommended procedure numbers for upper endoscopy (UE) and colonoscopy (C) are 35 and 50 for surgical residents, and 130 and 140 for gastroenterology fellows, respectively. The purpose of this study was to challenge the methods used to determine proficiency in flexible endoscopy., Methods: Global assessment of gastrointestinal endoscopic skills (GAGES) was used to evaluate 139 procedures. Scores for UE were compared using self-reported case numbers and grouped according to requirements for each discipline. C scores were compared using the requirements to define novice and experienced endoscopists. Procedure volumes were plotted against GAGES scores., Results: Three groups were compared for UE based on case volumes: fewer than 35 cases (group 1), 35 to 130 cases (group 2), and more than 130 cases (group 3). There was no difference between group 2 (17.8 +/- 1.8) and group 3 (19.1 +/- 1.1), but both scored higher than group 1 (14.4 +/- 3.7; P < .05). For C, the scores were 11.8 +/- 3.8 (novices) and 18.8 +/- 1.34 (experienced; P < .001) at a 50-case minimum and 12.4 +/- 4.2 and 18.8 +/- 1.3 (P < .001) for a 140-case proficiency cut-off level, respectively. The curve of procedures versus GAGES plateaued at 50 (UE) and 75 (C)., Conclusions: The surgical and gastroenterology case recommendations may not represent the experience needed to achieve proficiency. GAGES scores could help define proficiency in basic endoscopy.