Search

Objective: We hypothesized that academic adult cardiac surgeons (CSs) and general thoracic surgeons (GTSs) would have distinct practice patterns of, not just case-mix, but also time devoted to outpatient care, involvement in critical care, and work relative value unit (wRVU) generation for the procedures they perform., Methods: We queried the University Health System Consortium-Association of American Medical Colleges Faculty Practice Solution Center database for fiscal years 2007-2008, 2008-2009, and 2009-2010 for the frequency of inpatient and outpatient current procedural terminology coding and wRVU data of academic GTSs and CSs. The Faculty Practice Solution Center database is a compilation of productivity and payer data from 86 academic institutions., Results: The greatest wRVU generating current procedural terminology codes for CSs were, in order, coronary artery bypass grafting, aortic valve replacement, and mitral valve replacement. In contrast, open lobectomy, video-assisted thoracic surgery wedge, and video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy were greatest for GTSs. The 10 greatest wRVU-generating procedures for CSs generated more wRVUs than those for GTSs (P<.001). Although CSs generated significantly more hospital inpatient evaluation and management (E & M) wRVUs than did GTSs (P<.001), only 2.5% of the total wRVUs generated by CSs were from E & M codes versus 18.8% for GTSs. Critical care codes were 1.5% of total evaluation and management billing for both CSs and GTSs., Conclusions: Academic CSs and GTSs have distinct practice patterns. CSs receive greater reimbursement for services because of the greater wRVUs of the procedures performed compared with GTSs, and evaluation and management coding is a more important wRVU generator for GTSs. The results of our study could guide academic CS and GTS practice structure and time prioritization., (Copyright © 2014 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Study Objective: We determine whether intra-abdominal injury is rarely diagnosed after a normal abdominal computed tomography (CT) scan result in a large, generalizable sample of children evaluated in the emergency department (ED) after blunt torso trauma., Methods: This was a planned analysis of data collected during a prospective study of children evaluated in one of 20 EDs in the Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network. The study sample consisted of patients with normal results for abdominal CT scans performed in the ED. The principal outcome measure was the negative predictive value of CT for any intra-abdominal injury and those undergoing acute intervention., Results: Of 12,044 enrolled children, 5,380 (45%) underwent CT scanning in the ED; for 3,819 of these scan the results were normal. Abdominal CT had a sensitivity of 97.8% (717/733; 95% confidence interval [CI] 96.5% to 98.7%) and specificity of 81.8% (3,803/4,647; 95% CI 80.7% to 82.9%) for any intra-abdominal injury. Sixteen (0.4%; 95% CI 0.2% to 0.7%) of the 3,819 patients with normal CT scan results later received a diagnosis of an intra-abdominal injury, and 6 of these underwent acute intervention for an intra-abdominal injury (0.2% of total sample; 95% CI 0.06% to 0.3%). The negative predictive value of CT for any intra-abdominal injury was 99.6% (3,803/3,819; 95% CI 99.3% to 99.8%); and for injury undergoing acute intervention, 99.8% (3,813/3,819; 95% CI 99.7% to 99.9%)., Conclusion: In a multicenter study of children evaluated in EDs after blunt torso trauma, intra-abdominal injuries were rarely diagnosed after a normal abdominal CT scan result, suggesting that safe discharge is possible for the children when there are no other reasons for admission., (Copyright © 2013 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Study Objective: We derive a prediction rule to identify children at very low risk for intra-abdominal injuries undergoing acute intervention and for whom computed tomography (CT) could be obviated., Methods: We prospectively enrolled children with blunt torso trauma in 20 emergency departments. We used binary recursive partitioning to create a prediction rule to identify children at very low risk of intra-abdominal injuries undergoing acute intervention (therapeutic laparotomy, angiographic embolization, blood transfusion for abdominal hemorrhage, or intravenous fluid for ≥2 nights for pancreatic/gastrointestinal injuries). We considered only historical and physical examination variables with acceptable interrater reliability., Results: We enrolled 12,044 children with a median age of 11.1 years (interquartile range 5.8, 15.1 years). Of the 761 (6.3%) children with intra-abdominal injuries, 203 (26.7%) received acute interventions. The prediction rule consisted of (in descending order of importance) no evidence of abdominal wall trauma or seat belt sign, Glasgow Coma Scale score greater than 13, no abdominal tenderness, no evidence of thoracic wall trauma, no complaints of abdominal pain, no decreased breath sounds, and no vomiting. The rule had a negative predictive value of 5,028 of 5,034 (99.9%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 99.7% to 100%), sensitivity of 197 of 203 (97%; 95% CI 94% to 99%), specificity of 5,028 of 11,841 (42.5%; 95% CI 41.6% to 43.4%), and negative likelihood ratio of 0.07 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.15)., Conclusion: A prediction rule consisting of 7 patient history and physical examination findings, and without laboratory or ultrasonographic information, identifies children with blunt torso trauma who are at very low risk for intra-abdominal injury undergoing acute intervention. These findings require external validation before implementation., (Copyright © 2012 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The goal of this study is to determine the clinical value of multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) study for enhancing pathogen detection in patients with suspected septicemia after trauma, emergency, and burn surgery. PCR-based pathogen detection quickly reveals occult bloodstream infections in these high-risk patients and may accelerate the initiation of targeted antimicrobial therapy., Methods: We conducted a prospective observational study comparing results for 30 trauma and emergency surgery patients to 20 burn patients. Whole-blood samples collected with routine blood cultures (BCs) were tested using a new multiplex, PCR-based, pathogen detection system. PCR results were compared to culture data., Results: PCR detected rapidly more pathogens than culture methods. Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II), Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA), and Multiple Organ Dysfunction (MODS) scores were greater in PCR-positive versus PCR-negative trauma and emergency surgery patients (P ≤ .033). Negative PCR results (odds ratio, 0.194; 95% confidence interval, 0.045-0.840; P = .028) acted as an independent predictor of survival for the combined surgical patient population., Conclusion: PCR detected the presence of pathogens more frequently than blood culture. These PCR results were reported faster than blood culture results. Severity scores were significantly greater in PCR-positive trauma and emergency surgery patients. The lack of pathogen DNA as determined by PCR served as a significant predictor of survival in the combined patient population. PCR testing independent of traditional prompts for culturing may have clinical value in burn patients. These results warrant further investigation through interventional trials., (Copyright © 2012 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Study Objective: We validate the accuracy of a previously derived clinical prediction rule for the identification of children with intra-abdominal injuries after blunt torso trauma., Methods: We conducted a prospective observational study of children with blunt torso trauma who were evaluated for intra-abdominal injury with abdominal computed tomography (CT), diagnostic laparoscopy, or laparotomy at a Level I trauma center during a 3-year period to validate a previously derived prediction rule. The emergency physician providing care documented history and physical examination findings on a standardized data collection form before knowledge of the results of diagnostic imaging. The clinical prediction rule being evaluated included 6 "high-risk" variables, the presence of any of which indicated that the child was not at low risk for intra-abdominal injury: low age-adjusted systolic blood pressure, abdominal tenderness, femur fracture, increased liver enzyme levels (serum aspartate aminotransferase concentration >200 U/L or serum alanine aminotransferase concentration >125 U/L), microscopic hematuria (urinalysis >5 RBCs/high powered field), or an initial hematocrit level less than 30%., Results: One thousand three hundred twenty-four children with blunt torso trauma were enrolled, and 1,119 (85%) patients had the variables in the decision rule documented by the emergency physician and therefore made up the study sample. The prediction rule had the following test characteristics: sensitivity=149 of 157, 94.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] 90.2% to 97.7%) and specificity=357 of 962, 37.1% (95% CI 34.0 to 40.3%). Three hundred sixty-five patients tested negative for the rule; thus, strict application would have resulted in a 33% reduction in abdominal CT scanning. Of the 8 patients with intra-abdominal injury not identified by the prediction rule, 1 underwent a laparotomy. This patient had a serosal tear and a mesenteric hematoma at laparotomy, neither of which required specific surgical intervention., Conclusion: A clinical prediction rule consisting of 6 variables, easily available to clinicians in the ED, identifies most but not all children with intra-abdominal injury. Application of the prediction rule to this sample would have reduced the number of unnecessary abdominal CT scans performed but would have failed to identify 1 child undergoing (a nontherapeutic) laparotomy. Thus, further refinement of this prediction rule in a large, multicenter cohort is necessary before widespread implementation.

Study Objective: We derive and validate clinical prediction rules to identify adult patients at very low risk for intra-abdominal injuries after blunt torso trauma., Methods: We prospectively enrolled adult patients (>or=18 years old) after blunt torso trauma for whom diagnostic testing for intra-abdominal injury was performed. In the derivation phase, we used binary recursive partitioning to create a rule to identify patients with intra-abdominal injury who were undergoing acute intervention (including therapeutic laparotomy or angiographic embolization) and a separate rule for identifying patients with any intra-abdominal injury present. We considered only clinical variables readily available with acceptable interrater reliability. The prediction rules were then prospectively validated in a separate cohort of patients., Results: In the derivation phase, we enrolled 3,435 patients, including 311 (9.1%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 8.1% to 10.1%) with intra-abdominal injury and 109 (35.0%; 95% CI 29.7% to 40.6%) with intra-abdominal injury requiring acute intervention. In the validation study, we enrolled 1,595 patients, including 143 (9.0%; 95% CI 7.6% to 10.5%) with intra-abdominal injury. The derived rule for patients with intra-abdominal injuries who were undergoing acute intervention consisted of hypotension, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score less than 14, costal margin tenderness, abdominal tenderness, hematuria level greater than or equal to 25 red blood cells/high powered field, and hematocrit level less than 30% and identified all 44 patients in the validation phase with intra-abdominal injury who were undergoing acute intervention (sensitivity 44/44, 100%; 95% CI 93.4% to 100%). The derived rule for the presence of any intra-abdominal injury consisted of GCS score less than 14, costal margin tenderness, abdominal tenderness, femur fracture, hematuria level greater than or equal to 25 red blood cells/high powered field, hematocrit level less than 30%, and abnormal chest radiograph result (pneumothorax or rib fracture). In the validation phase, the rule for any intra-abdominal injury present had the following test performance: sensitivity 137 of 143 (95.8%; 95% CI 91.1% to 98.4%), specificity 434 of 1,452 (29.9%; 95% CI 27.5% to 32.3%), and negative predictive value 434 of 440 (98.6%; 95% CI 97.1% to 99.5%)., Conclusion: These derived and validated clinical prediction rules can aid physicians in the evaluation of adult patients after blunt torso trauma. Patients without any of these variables are at very low risk for having intra-abdominal injury, particularly intra-abdominal injury requiring acute intervention, and are unlikely to benefit from abdominal computed tomography scanning.

Study Objective: We determine whether all patients with pain or tenderness to the left lower ribs after blunt traumatic injury require abdominal computed tomography (CT) scanning for the detection of splenic injury., Methods: This was a prospective, observational cohort of all blunt-trauma patients who had pain or tenderness to the left lower ribs and presented to the emergency department (ED) of a Level I trauma center. Patients were enrolled if they had a Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score greater than 13 and pain or tenderness to the left lower ribs (ribs 7 to 12). Patients with pain or tenderness to the left lower ribs were considered to have pleuritic pain if the pain increased with inspiration or cough. All hemodynamically stable patients underwent abdominal CT scanning for detection of intraabdominal injuries. Data forms collecting information on the medical history and physical examination of all patients were completed before radiographic imaging. Patients with left lower rib pain or tenderness were considered to have "isolated" left lower rib injury if they were without all of the following: ED or out-of-hospital systolic blood pressure less than 90 mm Hg, abdominal or flank tenderness, pelvic or femur fractures, and gross hematuria., Results: Eight hundred seventy-five patients had left lower rib pain or tenderness, 63 (7.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 5.6% to 9.1%) patients had splenic injuries, and 20 (2.3%; 95% CI 1.4% to 3.5%) patients had left renal injuries. Five hundred seventy-four patients had additional indications for abdominal imaging, leaving 301 patients with "isolated" left lower rib injury. Of the 301 patients, 9 (3.0%; 95% CI 1.4% to 5.6%) had splenic injuries. All 9 patients had a pleuritic component to their rib tenderness, and 3 (33%) patients underwent splenectomy., Conclusion: A small but important percentage of patients with pain or tenderness to the left lower ribs has splenic injuries. All patients with splenic injury had pleuritic pain.

Study Objective: We describe the performance of helical abdominal computed tomography (CT) scan without oral contrast for the detection of blunt gastrointestinal injuries., Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the records of a consecutive series of patients who underwent helical abdominal CT scanning for evaluation of blunt intra-abdominal injury and were admitted to a Level I trauma center from May 1996 to September 2001. Abdominal CT scans were performed with intravenous contrast but without oral contrast. Patients were considered to have gastrointestinal injuries if an injury was identified to the gastrointestinal tract from the duodenum to the sigmoid colon or associated mesentery and considered to have major gastrointestinal injuries if gastrointestinal perforation, active mesenteric hemorrhage, or mesenteric devascularization occurred. All gastrointestinal injuries were confirmed by laparotomy, autopsy, or additional imaging studies., Results: Six thousand fifty-two patients underwent abdominal CT scan (mean age 35.5 +/- 21.1 years), and 106 (1.8%) patients had gastrointestinal injuries identified by laparotomy, autopsy, or additional (nonabdominal CT) imaging studies. Abdominal CT scan result was abnormal in 91 (86%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 78% to 92%) of the 106 patients with gastrointestinal injuries and revealed findings suggestive of gastrointestinal injury in 81 (76%; 95% CI 67% to 84%) patients. Abdominal CT scan demonstrated findings suggestive of gastrointestinal injury in 58 of 64 (91%; 95% CI 81% to 96%) patients with major gastrointestinal injuries. Two hundred thirty-eight (4.0%) patients had findings suspicious for gastrointestinal injuries on abdominal CT scan, but gastrointestinal injury was never confirmed., Conclusion: Helical abdominal CT scan without oral contrast identified nearly three fourths of patients with blunt gastrointestinal injuries who were selected for abdominal CT scanning. Sensitivity of this diagnostic test improves in the subset of patients with major gastrointestinal injuries.

Study Objective: To determine how frequently oral contrast medium (OC) is essential for computed tomography (CT) diagnosis of blunt intraabdominal injury and to quantify the delay associated with OC administration and the incidence of adverse effects., Methods: This retrospective chart review, with prospective reevaluation of CT scans for diagnostic value of OC, took place in a university teaching hospital and Level l trauma center. Participants were blunt-trauma victims admitted between June 1, 1988, and November 1, 1993, who had abdominal CT as part of their initial evaluation. Trauma registry records were used to identify study patients. Available charts and CTs were reviewed for all patients with intestinal/mesenteric and pancreatic injuries. Randomly selected cases of liver injury, spleen injury, and no intraabdominal injury were also reviewed. Blinded CT scans were reevaluated for quality of bowel opacification and value of OC to diagnostic impression., Results: During the study period, 2,162 blunt-trauma patients had an abdominal CT; 297 intraabdominal injuries were diagnosed in 248 patients. Full review was done on 124 charts, and 70 CT scans were reevaluated. Thirty-one (100%) of 31 liver and spleen injuries were diagnosed on CT, and OC was considered essential in none of these studies. One (4.5%) of 22 intestinal and mesenteric injuries was seen on CT, but this was the only such injury treated nonoperatively. None of 21 surgically confirmed intestinal/mesenteric injuries was seen on CT. Free air or free OC was seen in none of 7 cases of intestinal perforation. OC was judged essential in none of 20 scans in patients without intraabdominal injury. On 2 scans. OC was considered essential for the radiographic diagnosis. One of these was a normal pancreas at exploration (radiographic false-positive result). The only pancreatic injury requiring specific surgical treatment was missed on CT. Twenty-one percent of patients required placement of nasogastric tube for contrast administration after failing oral administration, and 23% vomited OC. One of 124 had documented aspiration of OC. Average additional time incurred in the ED for administration of OC was 144 minutes., Conclusion: OC is rarely essential for CT diagnosis of intraabdominal injury. It may improve sensitivity for pancreatic injury, but it does not help identify injuries requiring surgical treatment. Even with OC, CT is insensitive for intestinal injury. Vomiting and aspiration are significant risks. Use of OC adds a significant amount of time to ED evaluation. Adverse effects of OC administration, in this setting, may outweigh its benefits.

Background: Arginine vasopressin V1 receptor antagonist (AVPRA) was administered to investigate the influence of vasopressin blockade on hemodynamics and metabolism during endotoxin shock., Methods: Anesthetized rats were divided into four groups: control (0.9% saline solution, n = 5), drug control (AVPRA, n = 5), endotoxin (endotoxin, 5 mg/kg, n = 10), and pretreatment (AVPRA and endotoxin, n = 10). Hemodynamics and oxygen transport were evaluated for 2 hours. Terminal arterial and portal venous concentrations of endotoxin, pyruvate, lactate, and ketone bodies were determined., Results: The endotoxin group maintained blood pressure levels similar to those of control animals. AVPRA pretreatment decreased vascular resistance and resulted in lower blood pressure than endotoxin alone. Endotoxin decreased oxygen consumption and the oxygen extraction ratio and increased arterial lactate concentration and the lactate/pyruvate ratio. Endotoxin also decreased arterial ketone body concentration and markedly decreased ketone body availability in the mesenteric circulation. AVPRA pretreatment improved oxygen consumption, oxygen extraction ratio, and ketone body availability; arterial lactate concentration, lactate/pyruvate ratio, and arterial ketone body concentration were not affected. Pretreatment with AVPRA also decreased arterial and portal venous concentrations of endotoxin., Conclusions: Vasopressin receptor blockade during endotoxemia resulted in lower blood pressure than endotoxin alone. Vasopressin receptor blockade also maintained oxygen extraction ratio and ketone body availability in the mesenteric circulation. Vasopressin may play a key role in the response to endotoxemia.

Study Objective: This study was undertaken to determine whether flight nurses can perform surgical cricothyrotomies with acceptable success and complication rates., Methods: This case series examined the survival, success, and complication rates of surgical cricothyrotomy. A specially trained flight nurse retrospectively reviewed all prehospital, emergency department, inpatient, autopsy, and outpatient follow-up records., Results: Fifty-five consecutive patients in whom surgical cricothyrotomy was attempted by a flight nurse during a two-and-one-half-year period were studied. Patients ranged in age from 9 to 76 years. The airway was not cannulated successfully by a flight nurse in two patients. In two patients, the tube was not in the cricothyroid space (one in the upper tracheal rings, and the other in the larynx). In three patients, packing was insufficient to stop bleeding from around the operative site; and in three the tube became occluded by blood in the emergency department. Finally, two patients developed subglottic stenosis., Conclusion: Surgical cricothyrotomy in the field can be performed reliably by specially trained nurses. Because only the most critically ill or injured patients with unmanageable airways are subjected to this procedure, a significant complication rate can be anticipated.