Search

Background The Gallstone Pancreatitis: Admission vs Normal Cholecystectomy (Gallstone PANC) Trial demonstrated that cholecystectomy within 24 hours of admission (early) compared with after clinical resolution (control) for mild gallstone pancreatitis, significantly reduced 30-day length-of-stay (LOS) without increasing major postoperative complications. We assessed whether early cholecystectomy decreased 90-day healthcare use and costs. Study Design A secondary economic evaluation of the Gallstone PANC Trial was performed from the healthcare system perspective. Costs for index admissions and all gallstone pancreatitis-related care 90 days post-discharge were obtained from the hospital accounting system and inflated to 2020 USD. Negative binomial regression models and generalized linear models with log-link and gamma distribution, adjusting for randomization strata, were used. Bayesian analysis with neutral prior was used to estimate the probability of cost reduction with early cholecystectomy. Results Of 98 randomized patients, 97 were included in the analyses. Baseline characteristics were similar in early (n = 49) and control (n = 48) groups. Early cholecystectomy resulted in a mean absolute difference in LOS of -0.96 days (95% CI, -1.91 to 0.00, p = 0.05). Ninety-day mean total costs were $14,974 (early) vs $16,190 (control) (cost ratio [CR], 0.92; 95% CI, 0.73-1.15, p = 0.47), with a mean absolute difference of $1,216 less (95% CI, -$4,782 to $2,349, p = 0.50) per patient in the early group. On Bayesian analysis, there was an 81% posterior probability that early cholecystectomy reduced 90-day total costs. Conclusion In this single-center trial, early cholecystectomy for mild gallstone pancreatitis reduced 90-day LOS and had an 81% probability of reducing 90-day healthcare system costs.

The 2nd annual Health Equity Summer Research Summit organized by the Center of Excellence (COE) in Health Equity, Training and Research, Baylor College of Medicine (BCM), was a forum to catalyze the fertilization and exchange of cutting-edge ideas in the area of disparity research in medicine. The summit fosters understanding of current health equity research, training, clinical care, and outreach initiatives, in addition to offering an opportunity for connecting with allies and partners working in the field of health equity and health disparities. The summit provides opportunities for our COE Scholars (undergraduate/post-baccalaureate students and Baylor medical students, clinical fellows and junior faculty) to showcase their research findings which are reflective of their past year's endeavor as scholars at the center. Abstracts in this Book of Abstracts represent a summary of these research efforts. With this summit, BCM continues to build on its long history of educational outreach initiatives to promote diversity in medicine by focusing on programs aimed at increasing the number of diverse and highly qualified medical professionals ready to introduce effective and innovative approaches to reduce or eliminate health disparities. These programs will improve information resources, clinical education, curricula, research and cultural competence as they relate to minority health issues and social determinants of health.

Congenital cardiac malformations have been reported in 8% of patients with craniosynostosis undergoing cranial vault remodeling (CVR), but associations with surgical outcomes are unknown. This study evaluated postoperative complications in patients who underwent CVR for craniosynostosis with or without cardiac risk factors (CRF) using the National Safety Quality Improvement Program-Pediatric (NSQIP-P) database. NSQIP-P database was queried for patients

Background: Many surgeons utilize biologic mesh for elective complex ventral hernia repair (VHR; large hernias, contaminated fields, or patients with comorbid conditions). However, no randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have compared biologic and synthetic mesh. We hypothesize biologic mesh would result in fewer major complications at one-year post-operative compared with synthetic mesh. Patients and Methods: We performed a single-center, pilot RCT. All eligible patients undergoing complex, open VHR were randomly assigned to receive biologic or synthetic mesh placed in the retromuscular position. Primary outcome was major complications, namely, a composite of mesh infection, recurrence, or re-operation at one-year post-operative. Secondary outcomes included surgical site infections (SSI), seromas, hematomas, wound dehiscence, re-admissions, and Clavien-Dindo complication grade. Outcomes were assessed using Fisher exact test and Bayesian generalized linear models. Results: Of 87 patients, 44 were randomly assigned to biologic mesh and 43 to synthetic mesh. Most cases were wound class 2–4 (68%) and 75% had a hernia width >4 cm. Most patients were obese (70%) and had an American Society of Anesthesiogists (ASA) score of 3–4 (53%). Compared with patients in the synthetic mesh group, patients in the biologic mesh group had a higher percentage of: major complications at one-year post-operative (42.4% vs. 21.6%; relative risk [RR] = 1.96 [95% confidence interval {CI} = 0.94–4.08]; number needed to harm = 4.8; p = 0.071); SSI (15.9% vs. 9.3%; RR = 1.71 [95% CI = 0.54–5.42]; p = 0.362); wound dehiscence (25.0% vs. 14.0%; RR = 1.79 [95% CI = 0.73–4.41]; p = 0.205); and re-admissions (22.7% vs 9.3%; RR = 2.44 [95% CI = 0.83–7.20]; p = 0.105). Bayesian analysis demonstrated that compared with synthetic mesh, biologic mesh had a 95% probability of increased risk of major complications at one-year post-operative. No clear evidence of a difference was found on seromas, hematomas, or Clavien-Dindo complication grade. Conclusions: In elective complex open VHR, biologic mesh demonstrated no benefit compared with synthetic mesh in one-year outcomes. Moreover, Bayesian analysis suggests that biologic mesh may have an increased probability of major complications.

Early cholecystectomy shortly after admission for mild gallstone pancreatitis has been proposed based on observational data. We hypothesized that cholecystectomy within 24 hours of admission versus after clinical resolution of gallstone pancreatitis that is predicted to be mild results in decreased length-of-stay (LOS) without an increase in complications.Adults with predicted mild gallstone pancreatitis were randomized to cholecystectomy with cholangiogram within 24 hours of presentation (early group) versus after clinical resolution (control) based on abdominal exam and normalized laboratory values. Primary outcome was 30-day LOS including readmissions. Secondary outcomes were time to surgery, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) rates, and postoperative complications. Frequentist and Bayesian intention-to-treat analyses were performed.Baseline characteristics were similar in the early (n = 49) and control (n = 48) groups. Early group had fewer ERCPs (15% vs 29%, P = 0.038), faster time to surgery (16 h vs 43 h, P0.005), and shorter 30-day LOS (50 h vs 77 h, RR 0.68 95% CI 0.65 - 0.71, P0.005). Complication rates were 6% in early group versus 2% in controls (P = 0.613), which included recurrence/progression of pancreatitis (2 early, 1 control) and a cystic duct stump leak (early). On Bayesian analysis, early cholecystectomy has a 99% probability of reducing 30-day LOS, 93% probability of decreasing ERCP use, and 72% probability of increasing complications.In patients with predicted mild gallstone pancreatitis, cholecystectomy within 24 hours of admission reduced rate of ERCPs, time to surgery, and 30-day length-of-stay. Minor complications may be increased with early cholecystectomy. Identification of patients with predicted mild gallstone pancreatitis in whom early cholecystectomy is safe warrants further investigation.

ObjectiveTo determine whether robotic ventral hernia repair is associated with fewer days in the hospital 90 days after surgery compared with laparoscopic repair.DesignPragmatic, blinded randomized controlled trial.SettingMultidisciplinary hernia clinics in Houston, USA.Participants124 patients, deemed appropriate candidates for elective minimally invasive ventral hernia repair, consecutively presenting from April 2018 to February 2019.InterventionsRobotic ventral hernia repair (n=65) versus laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (n=59).Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was number of days in hospital within 90 days after surgery. Secondary outcomes included emergency department visits, operating room time, wound complications, hernia recurrence, reoperation, abdominal wall quality of life, and costs from the healthcare system perspective. Outcomes were pre-specified before data collection began and analyzed as intention to treat.ResultsPatients from both groups were similar at baseline. Ninety day follow-up was completed in 123 (99%) patients. No evidence was seen of a difference in days in hospital between the two groups (median 0 v 0 days; relative rate 0.90, 95% confidence interval 0.37 to 2.19; P=0.82). For secondary outcomes, no differences were noted in emergency department visits, wound complications, hernia recurrence, or reoperation. However, robotic repair had longer operative duration (141 v 77 min; mean difference 62.89, 45.75 to 80.01; P≤0.001) and increased healthcare costs ($15 865 (£12 746; €14 125) v $12 955; cost ratio 1.21, 1.07 to 1.38; adjusted absolute cost difference $2767, $910 to $4626; P=0.004). Among patients with robotic ventral hernia repair, two had an enterotomy compared none with laparoscopic repair. The median one month postoperative improvement in abdominal wall quality of life was 3 with robotic ventral hernia repair compared with 15 following laparoscopic repair.ConclusionThis study found no evidence of a difference in 90 day postoperative hospital days between robotic and laparoscopic ventral hernia repair. However, robotic repair increased operative duration and healthcare costs.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT03490266.

BACKGROUND: Financial interactions between industry and healthcare providers are reportable. Substantial discrepancies have been detected between industry and self-report of these conflicts of interest (COIs). OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to determine if authors who fail to disclose reportable COI are more likely to publish findings that are favorable to industry than authors with no COI. DESIGN: In this blinded, observational study of medical and surgical primary research articles in PubMed, 590 articles were reviewed. MAIN MEASURES: Reportable financial relationships between authors and industry were evaluated. COIs were considered to have relevance if they were associated with the product(s) mentioned by an article. Primary outcome was favorability, defined as an impression favorable to the product(s) discussed by an article and determined by 3 independent, blinded clinicians for each article. Primary analysis compared Incomplete Self-Disclosure to No COI. Two-level multivariable mixed-effects ordered logistic regression was used to assess factors associated with favorability. KEY RESULTS: A 69% discordance rate existed between industry and self-report in COI disclosure. When authors failed to disclose COI, their conclusions were more likely to favor industry partners than authors without COI (favorable ratings 73% versus 62%, RR 1.18, p =