Search

Objectives Children admitted with stridor and respiratory distress comprise a complex patient group that requires the otolaryngologist to decide when to assess and intervene with direct laryngoscopy and bronchoscopy (DLB). Historically, the diagnosis of viral upper respiratory tract infection (URTI) can lead to postponement of surgery due to concerns of perioperative complications related to acute illness. Respiratory viral panels (RVP) are often used to confirm the presence of recent or active viral infection and can affect the differential diagnosis of upper airway obstruction. This study examined whether positive RVP testing is associated with perioperative complications and operative findings in pediatric patients undergoing inpatient DLB. Methods A retrospective chart review of 132 pediatric patient encounters was performed. Viral testing results, DLB indication, DLB findings, and perioperative complications were compared. Results Sixty encounters (45.5%) involved a positive RVP, and 72 (54.5%) involved a negative RVP. Those with positive RVP were less likely to have a preoperative structural airway diagnosis (P =.0250) and more likely to have a history of recurrent upper respiratory infections (P =.0464). The most common reason for DLB was the need to assess the airway due to concern for structural pathology. Anatomic abnormalities were seen in a majority of encounters (77.3%) Laryngospasm occurred in 1 (1.7%) RVP positive and 1 (1.4%) RVP negative encounter, and 2 (2.8%) RVP negative encounters required reintubation. No other major complications were observed. No association was noted between RVP results and incidence of major or minor complication. Conclusions Major perioperative complications after surgical intervention with DLB for the management of complex, inpatient children with stridor and respiratory distress are rare. RVP positivity, specific pathogens identified on RVP, and presence of URI symptoms were not associated with perioperative complications.

Domino liver transplantation (DLT) utilizes the explanted liver of one liver transplant recipient as a donor graft in another patient. While there may be unique risks associated with DLT, it is unclear if DLT has less favorable long-term outcomes than deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). We used a propensity score matching approach to compare the outcomes of DLT recipients to DDLT recipients. The United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) registry was queried for patients undergoing DLT or DDLT in 2002-2016. Each DLT recipient was matched to a unique DDLT recipient to compare mortality and graft failure. There were 126 DLT and 62 835 DDLT recipients meeting inclusion criteria. After propensity score matching on recipient pre-transplant characteristics, 123 DLT cases were matched to DDLT controls from the same UNOS region. On stratified Cox proportional hazards regression, DLT incurred no increase in the hazard of mortality [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.4; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.8, 2.7; P = 0.265] or graft failure (HR = 1.2; 95% CI: 0.7, 2.1; P = 0.556) compared to DDLT. Using a large national registry, a propensity-matched analysis found no increased risk of mortality or graft failure associated with DLT compared to DDLT.

Combined heart–liver transplantation (CHLT) has resulted in acceptable survival rates compared to orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) alone and orthotopic heart transplantation alone. Using the US transplant registry, we compared outcomes following sequential and combined HLT. We conducted a retrospective cohort study. De-identified data were obtained from the United Network Organ Sharing Registry. The primary outcome was patient survival from the date of OLT. Secondary outcomes included liver allograft survival and heart allograft survival. The study cohort included 301 CHLT recipients and six sequential heart–liver transplantation (SHLT) recipients. Patient survival after CHLT was 88% at 1 year, 84% at 3 years, and 82% at 5 years compared to 83%, 67%, and 50% in the SHLT group (p = 0.010). Liver allograft survival at 1, 3, and 5 years was 88%,83% and 82%, respectively, in the CHLT group compared to 83% and 67%, and 50%, respectively, in the SHLT group (p = 0.009). After OLT, heart allograft survival at 1, 3, and 5 years was 86%, 79%, and 74% in the CHLT group, respectively, compared to 83%, 67%, and 50% in the SHLT group (p = 0.037). Despite the limited size of the SHLT cohort, we found that CHLT was superior to SHLT in survival rate and graft survival. The better outcomes noted in CHLT may relate to immunoprotection provided by liver transplantation from the same donor.

Background and Objectives Perineural dexamethasone has been demonstrated to extend postsurgical analgesia after peripheral nerve blockade in adults. The mechanism of action of dexamethasone as a regional anesthetic adjuvant is unclear as intravenous dexamethasone has been shown to have similar analgesic efficacy as perineural dexamethasone. The efficacy of perineural dexamethasone has not been previously explored in the pediatric population. Methods After obtaining informed consent, children (aged 10–18 years) presenting for arthroscopic knee surgery with a femoral nerve block were randomized to 1 of 3 groups: ropivacaine 0.5% and intramuscular saline (group R), ropivacaine 0.5% plus perineural dexamethasone 0.1 mg/kg (maximum 4 mg) and intramuscular saline (group D), and ropivacaine 0.5% and intramuscular dexamethasone 0.1 mg/kg (maximum 4 mg) (group M). The primary outcome was the number of doses of analgesic agents in the first 48 hours after hospital discharge. The number of doses was compared across study groups using Wilcoxon rank sum tests. Results Seventy-seven patients were enrolled in the study, of whom 4 were withdrawn because of additional surgical repair being performed, emergence delirium requiring unblinding, or loss to follow-up. The remaining 36 boys and 37 girls (aged 15 ± 2 years) included 23 patients randomized to group D, 23 patients randomized to group M, and 27 patients randomized to group R. The median number of pain medication doses within 48 hours of discharge was 2, 3, and 2 in groups D, M, and R, respectively. There were no significant differences in this outcome between groups D and M (difference in medians, 1; 95% confidence interval [CI] of difference in medians, −1 to 2; P = 0.475), groups D and R (difference in medians, 0; 95% CI of difference, −2 to 1; P = 0.821), or groups M and R (difference in medians, −1; 95% CI of difference, −2 to 1; P = 0.594). Other secondary outcomes, including time to first analgesic consumption after discharge, visual analog scale pain score, and subjective intensity of motor block, did not evince statistically significant differences among the study groups. Conclusions In the pediatric population, perineural or intramuscular dexamethasone did not improve analgesia after femoral nerve blockade for knee arthroscopy. Whether the observed lack of benefit reflects a true adult-pediatric difference or a limitation of the study could not be determined. Future pediatric studies are needed to evaluate dexamethasone for other block types and other types of surgery. Clinical Trial Registration This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT01971645.

The perioperative surgical home (PSH) is a patient-centered model designed to improve health, streamline the delivery of health care, and reduce the cost of care. Following the national introduction of PSH in 2014 by the ASA, adult hospitals have reported success with this model, with studies validating the benefits of PSH including reducing length of stay, lowering costs, and improving patient satisfaction.Eligible patients, ranging in age from 16-35 months of age, were identified by the pre-admission testing (PAT) registered nurses (RNs) and faculty anesthesiologists upon review of the patient history. Participation in Pediatric PSH (PPSH) was introduced to the families by the pediatric otolaryngologists. Either the patient's family or physician team could elect to decline participation in the PPSH model. On the day of surgery, the PPSH protocol included a paper checklist to ensure that all patients met eligibility standards. A standardized order-set was implemented in the electronic medical record (EMR) for pre-operative and post-operative nursing instructions and eligible medications. Patients received at least 3 hours of postoperative monitoring prior to discharge home to address postoperative issues. Prior to discharge, caregivers watched a standard teaching video, available on YouTube, which was developed in conjunction with the hospital educational and technical support staff. An attending anesthesiologist made a postoperative followup phone call on the evening of surgery to ensure no untoward events were experienced by the patient as well as elicit caregiver feedback concerning the discharge process. The protocol was discontinued if at any time family members, physicians, or nurses were uncomfortable with completing the protocol or felt that the patient did not meet discharge criteria.One hundred sixty-six patients were evaluated for PPSH inclusion. Forty patients were excluded (23 did not meet inclusion criteria, 5 had viral upper respiratory infections, and 10 for other non specified reasons such as tonsillectomy added, sibling with surgery, and incorrect documentation). Therefore, a total of 126 were eligible for PPSH (male/female = 69/57; age 22 ± 4 months). The comparison group included 1,029 children (male/female = 645/384; age 22 ± 7 months of age) undergoing adenoidectomy who were not evaluated for PPSH inclusion. Of the 126 PPSH participants included in the analysis, 27 were excluded at some point during the pathway. Nine cases experienced oxygen desaturation, laryngospasm, or required supplemental oxygen. Noncompliance with the protocol was noted in 5 cases, parental concerns were noted in 17 cases, and there were concerns from the pediatric anesthesiologist or otolaryngologist in 5 cases. In the comparison group, hospital length of stay was significantly longer than in the PSH group (p0.001), with 524 (51%) patients discharged on the day of service compared to 99 (79%) in the PSH group. No major morbidity or mortality occurred. There was no difference between the two groups in return to the emergency department (ED) visits within 30 days (PSH: 7/126, 6%; control: 59/1,029, 6%; p=0.935). Within 14 days of the procedure, 4 PPSH patients visited urgent care or a primary care physician; 4 visited the ED; and 1 was readmitted to the hospital. Twenty families contacted the otorhinolaryngology triage phone line primarily related to pain and fever.We present our experience and success in developing a PPSH for patients, ranging in age from 16 to 35 months of age, undergoing adenoidectomy either alone or with tympanostomy tube insertion by protocolizing care, collaborating among care providers, and educating families. With this process in place, a significant percentage of these patients who were previously admitted were discharged home the same day of surgery.