Search

Introduction Recovery of donated organs at organ procurement organization (OPO)-based recovery facilities has been proposed to improve organ donation outcomes, but few data exist to characterize differences between facilities and acute-care hospitals. Research Question To compare donation outcomes between organ donors that underwent recovery procedures in OPO-based recovery facilities and hospitals. Design Retrospective study of Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network data. From a population-based sample of deceased donors after brain death April 2017 to June 2021, donation outcomes were examined in 10 OPO regions with organ recovery facilities. Primary exposure was organ recovery procedure in an OPO-based organ recovery. Primary outcome was the number of organs transplanted per donor. Multivariable regression models were used to adjust for donor characteristics and managing OPO. Results Among 5010 cohort donors, 2590 (51.7%) underwent recovery procedures in an OPO-based facility. Donors in facilities differed from those in hospitals, including recovery year, mechanisms of death, and some comorbid diseases. Donors in OPO-based facilities had higher total numbers of organs transplanted per donor (mean 3.5 [SD1.8] vs 3.3 [SD1.8]; adjusted mean difference 0.27, 95% confidence interval 0.18-0.36). Organ recovery at an OPO-based facility was also associated with more lungs, livers, and pancreases transplanted. Conclusion Organ recovery procedures at OPO-based facilities were associated with more organs transplanted per donor than in hospitals. Increasing access to OPO-based organ recovery facilities may improve rates of organ transplantation from deceased organ donors, although further data are needed on other important donor management quality metrics.

Risk factors for mortality and in-hospital morbidity among geriatric patients with traumatic rib fractures remain unclear. Such patients are often frail and demonstrate a high comorbidity burden. Moreover, outcomes anticipated by current rubrics may reflect the influence of multisystem injury or surgery, and thus not apply to isolated injuries in geriatric patients. We hypothesized that the Revised Cardiac Risk Index (RCRI) may assist in risk-stratifying geriatric patients following rib fracture.All geriatric patients (age ≥65 years) with a conservatively managed rib fracture owing to an isolated thoracic injury (thorax AIS ≥1), in the 2013-2019 TQIP database were assessed including demographics and outcomes. The association between the RCRI and in-hospital morbidity as well as mortality was analyzed using Poisson regression models while adjusting for potential confounders.96,750 geriatric patients sustained rib fractures. Compared to those with RCRI 0, patients with an RCRI score of 1 had a 16% increased risk of in-hospital mortality [adjusted incidence rate ratio (adj-IRR), 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.16 (1.02-1.32), p=0.020]. An RCRI score of 2 [adj-IRR (95% CI): 1.72 (1.44-2.06), p0.001] or ≥3 [adj-IRR (95% CI): 3.07 (2.31-4.09), p0.001] was associated with an even greater mortality risk. Those with an increased RCRI also exhibited a higher incidence of myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest, stroke, and acute respiratory distress syndrome.Geriatric patients with rib fractures and an RCRI ≥1 represent a vulnerable and high-risk group. This index may inform the decision to admit for inpatient care and can also guide patient and family counseling as well as computer-based decision-support.

Background Multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) frequently contaminate hospital environments. We performed a multicenter, cluster-randomized, crossover trial of 2 methods for monitoring of terminal cleaning effectiveness. Methods Six intensive care units (ICUs) at 3 medical centers received both interventions sequentially, in randomized order. Ten surfaces were surveyed each in 5 rooms weekly, after terminal cleaning, with adenosine triphosphate (ATP) monitoring or an ultraviolet fluorescent marker (UV/F). Results were delivered to environmental services staff in real time with failing surfaces recleaned. We measured monthly rates of MDRO infection or colonization, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, Clostridioides difficile, vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus, and MDR gram-negative bacilli (MDR-GNB) during a 12-month baseline period and sequential 6-month intervention periods, separated by a 2-month washout. Primary analysis compared only the randomized intervention periods, whereas secondary analysis included the baseline. Results The ATP method was associated with a reduction in incidence rate of MDRO infection or colonization compared with the UV/F period (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 0.876; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.807–0.951; P = .002). Including the baseline period, the ATP method was associated with reduced infection with MDROs (IRR 0.924; 95% CI, 0.855–0.998; P = .04), and MDR-GNB infection or colonization (IRR 0.856; 95% CI, 0.825–0.887; P Conclusions Intensive monitoring of ICU terminal room cleaning with an ATP modality is associated with a reduction of MDRO infection and colonization.

In this report, we describe a 41-year-old man who underwent resection of a large chordoma. During his post-operative recovery, he experienced delayed-onset non-compressive pelvic hemorrhage in the surgical resection bed resulting in nerve root compression. Zone 3 REBOA was prepositioned intra-operatively prior to placing the patient in the prone position for hematoma evacuation and exploration for surgical hemostasis. The balloon was completely inflated to facilitate exposure to the site of hemorrhage in this patient with a high risk for neurologic injury during this operative re-exploration.

Purpose Traumatic brain injury (TBI) continues to be a significant cause of mortality and morbidity worldwide. As cardiovascular events are among the most common extracranial causes of death after a severe TBI, the Revised Cardiac Risk Index (RCRI) could potentially aid in the risk stratification of this patient population. This investigation aimed to determine the association between the RCRI and in-hospital deaths among isolated severe TBI patients. Methods All adult patients registered in the TQIP database between 2013 and 2017 who suffered an isolated severe TBI, defined as a head AIS ≥ 3 with an AIS ≤ 1 in all other body regions, were included. Patients were excluded if they had a head AIS of 6. The association between different RCRI scores (0, 1, 2, 3, ≥ 4) and in-hospital mortality was analyzed using a Poisson regression model with robust standard errors while adjusting for potential confounders, with RCRI 0 as the reference. Results 259,399 patients met the study’s inclusion criteria. RCRI 2 was associated with a 6% increase in mortality risk [adjusted IRR (95% CI) 1.06 (1.01–1.12), p = 0.027], RCRI 3 was associated with a 17% increased risk of mortality [adjusted IRR (95% CI) 1.17 (1.05–1.31), p = 0.004], and RCRI ≥ 4 was associated with a 46% increased risk of in-hospital mortality [adjusted IRR(95% CI) 1.46 (1.11–1.90), p = 0.006], compared to RCRI 0. Conclusion An elevated RCRI ≥ 2 is significantly associated with an increased risk of in-hospital mortality among patients with an isolated severe traumatic brain injury. The simplicity and bedside applicability of the index makes it an attractive choice for risk stratification in this patient population.

Background: Despite recommendations to integrate palliative care (PC) into care for critically ill trauma patients, little is known about current PC practices in trauma care to inform opportunities for improvement. Objective: Describe patterns of PC delivery among a large, critically ill trauma cohort. Setting/Subjects: Retrospective cohort study of adult (≥18 years) trauma patients admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) at an urban, level one trauma center in the United States from March 1, 2017 to March 1, 2019. Methods: We linked the electronic medical record with the institutional trauma registry. PC process measures included a PC consult order, advance care planning (ACP) note, and hospice use. Unadjusted results are reported for the total population, decedents, and subgroups at risk for poor outcomes (age ≥55 years, Black race ≥1 pre-existing comorbidity, and severe injury) after trauma. Results: Among 1309 eligible admissions, 902 (68.9%) were male, 640 (48.9%) were Black, and 654 (50.0%) were ≥55 years old. Eighty-one (6.2%) patients received a PC consult order, 66 (5.0%) had an ACP note, and 13 (1.1%) were discharged to hospice. Among decedents (N = 91; 7%), 28 (30.8%) received a PC consult order and 36 (39.6%) had an ACP note. For high-risk subgroups, PC consult orders and ACP note rates ranged from 4.5-12.8% and 4.5-11.8%, respectively. Conclusion: PC delivery was rare among this cohort, including those at high risk for poor outcomes. Urgent efforts are needed to identify barriers to and develop targeted interventions for high quality PC delivery in trauma ICU care.

Background: Management of major life-threatening bleeding with factor Xa (FXa) inhibition poses complex challenges involving novel direct reversal agents competing with non-specific preexisting strategies. The recent availability of andexanet alfa (AA) led to a health-system guideline incorporating its use alongside the most commonly used historic agent, four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC). Objectives: The objective was to characterize the use and efficacy of AA and 4F-PCC for reversal of FXa inhibition after implementation of the health-system guideline. Methods: This multi-hospital, retrospective cohort study included patients aged >18 years administered either AA or 4F-PCC between October 2018 to June 2020 with the indication for urgent reversal of FXa inhibitor-induced coagulopathy. The primary outcome assessed hemostatic efficacy between treatment groups. Secondary outcomes evaluated adjunct blood product administration, incidence of repeat pharmacologic reversal, incidence of thromboembolism, intensive care unit and hospital length of stays, and in-hospital mortality. Results: Eighty-five patients were included; 33 patients received AA and 52 patients received 4F-PCC. Effective hemostasis was achieved at similar rates in both treatment groups (84.8% vs 76.9%; P = .373). Thrombotic events occurring during the observed hospitalization were more frequent among the AA treated group (18% vs 3.8%, P = .027). No differences were observed for other secondary outcomes. Conclusion: Guideline use resulted in similar rates of effective hemostasis with a higher incidence of VTE in patients receiving AA. Further exploration with a larger, prospective study to evaluate these findings is warranted.

The 2016 National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine report included a proposal to establish a National Trauma Research Action Plan. In response, the Department of Defense funded the Coalition for National Trauma Research to generate a comprehensive research agenda spanning the continuum of trauma and burn care from prehospital care to rehabilitation as part of an overall strategy to achieve zero preventable deaths and disability after injury. The Postadmission Critical Care Research panel was 1 of 11 panels constituted to develop this research agenda.We recruited interdisciplinary experts in surgical critical care and recruited them to identify current gaps in clinical critical care research, generate research questions, and establish the priority of these questions using a consensus-driven Delphi survey approach. The first of four survey rounds asked participants to generate key research questions. On subsequent rounds, we asked survey participants to rank the priority of each research question on a 9-point Likert scale, categorized to represent low-, medium-, and high-priority items. Consensus was defined as ≥60% of panelists agreeing on the priority category.Twenty-five subject matter experts generated 595 questions. By Round 3, 249 questions reached ≥60% consensus. Of these, 22 questions were high, 185 were medium, and 42 were low priority. The clinical states of hypovolemic shock and delirium were most represented in the high-priority questions. Traumatic brain injury was the only specific injury pattern with a high-priority question.The National Trauma Research Action Plan critical care research panel identified 22 high-priority research questions, which, if answered, would reduce preventable death and disability after injury.Diagnostic Tests or Criteria; Level IV.

In a large health system in the United States, investigators examined whether mortality, receipt of mechanical ventilation, and patient acuity changed over time among adult patients with COVID-19–related critical illness admitted to intensive care units., Visual Abstract. COVID-19–Related Critical Illness In a large health system in the United States, investigators examined whether mortality, receipt of mechanical ventilation, and patient acuity changed over time among adult patients with COVID-19–related critical illness admitted to intensive care units. Visual Abstract. COVID-19–Related Critical Illness In a large health system in the United States, investigators examined whether mortality, receipt of mechanical ventilation, and patient acuity changed over time among adult patients with COVID-19–related critical illness admitted to intensive care units., Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues to surge in the United States and globally. Objective: To describe the epidemiology of COVID-19–related critical illness, including trends in outcomes and care delivery. Design: Single–health system, multihospital retrospective cohort study. Setting: 5 hospitals within the University of Pennsylvania Health System. Patients: Adults with COVID-19–related critical illness who were admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) with acute respiratory failure or shock during the initial surge of the pandemic. Measurements: The primary exposure for outcomes and care delivery trend analyses was longitudinal time during the pandemic. The primary outcome was all-cause 28-day in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were all-cause death at any time, receipt of mechanical ventilation (MV), and readmissions. Results: Among 468 patients with COVID-19–related critical illness, 319 (68.2%) were treated with MV and 121 (25.9%) with vasopressors. Outcomes were notable for an all-cause 28-day in-hospital mortality rate of 29.9%, a median ICU stay of 8 days (interquartile range [IQR], 3 to 17 days), a median hospital stay of 13 days (IQR, 7 to 25 days), and an all-cause 30-day readmission rate (among nonhospice survivors) of 10.8%. Mortality decreased over time, from 43.5% (95% CI, 31.3% to 53.8%) to 19.2% (CI, 11.6% to 26.7%) between the first and last 15-day periods in the core adjusted model, whereas patient acuity and other factors did not change. Limitation: Single–health system study; use of, or highly dynamic trends in, other clinical interventions were not evaluated, nor were complications. Conclusion: Among patients with COVID-19–related critical illness admitted to ICUs of a learning health system in the United States, mortality seemed to decrease over time despite stable patient characteristics. Further studies are necessary to confirm this result and to investigate causal mechanisms. Primary Funding Source: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Although most studies of trauma patients have not demonstrated a "weekend" or "night" effect on mortality, outcomes of hypotensive (systolic blood pressure90 mm Hg) patients have not been studied. We sought to evaluate whether outcomes of hypotensive patients were associated with admission time and day.We retrospectively analyzed patients from Pennsylvania Level 1 and Level 2 trauma centers with systolic blood pressure of90 mm Hg over 5 y. Patients were stratified into four groups by arrival day and time: Group 1, weekday days; Group 2, weekday nights; Group 3, weekend days; and Group 4, weekend nights. Patient characteristics and outcomes were compared for the four groups. Adjusted mortality risks for Groups 2, 3, and 4 with Group 1 as the reference were determined using a generalized linear mixed effects model.After exclusions, 27 trauma centers with a total of 4937 patients were analyzed. Overall mortality was 44%. Compared with patients arriving during the day (Groups 1 and 3), those arriving at night (Groups 2 and 4) were more likely to be younger, to be male, to have lower Glasgow Coma Scale scores and blood pressures, to have penetrating injuries, and to die in the emergency room. Controlled for admission variables, odds ratios (95% confidence intervals) for Groups 2, 3, and 4 were 0.92 (0.72-1.17), 0.89 (0.65-1.23), and 0.76 (0.56-1.02), respectively, for mortality with Group 1 as reference.Patients arriving in shock to Pennsylvania Level 1 and Level 2 trauma centers at night or weekends had no increased mortality risk compared with weekday daytime arrivals.

Retained bullets are common after firearm injuries, yet their management remains poorly defined. Surgeon members of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma ( N = 427) were surveyed using an anonymous, web-based questionnaire during Spring 2016. Indications for bullet removal and practice patterns surrounding this theme were queried. Also, habits around screening and diagnosing psychological illness in victims of firearm injury were asked. Most respondents were male (76.5%, n = 327) and practiced at urban (84.3%, n = 360), academic (88.3%, n = 377), Level 1 trauma centers (72.8%, n = 311). Only 14.5% ( n = 62) of surgeons had institutional policies for bullet removal and 5.6% ( n = 24) were likely to remove bullets. Half of the surgeons (52.0%, n = 222) preferred to remove bullets after the index hospitalization and pain (88.1%, n = 376) and a palpable bullet (71.2%, n = 304) were the most frequent indications for removal. Having the opportunity to follow-up with patients to discuss bullet removal was significantly predictive of removal (odds ratio (OR) = 2.25, 95% confidence interval (CI) = [1.05, 4.85], p = .04). Furthermore, routinely asking about retained bullets during outpatient follow-up was predictive of new psychological illness screening (OR = 1.94, 95% CI [1.19, 3.16], p = .01) and diagnosis (OR = 1.86, 95% CI = [1.12, 3.09], p = .02) in victims of firearm injury. Thus, surgeons should be encouraged to allot time for patients concerning retained bullet management so that a shared decision can be reached.

Background With rising obesity rates in the United States, knowledge of obesity's impact on trauma outcomes is essential to providing high-quality care. The interaction between body mass and outcomes is unclear, with existing literature demonstrating conflicting results. We hypothesized that in a broad cohort of trauma patients, obesity would be associated with in-hospital mortality. Materials and methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the 2014-2015 Pennsylvania Trauma Outcomes Study (PTOS) registry, a state-wide registry to which all accredited Pennsylvania trauma centers are required to report. We included nonburn adult trauma patients admitted to level I and II centers. Because PTOS lacks height data, weight thresholds of 111.75 kg for men and 95.05 kg for women were used, which correspond to BMI = 30 kg/m2 at the 99th height percentile in the United States. We tested the association of obesity with in-hospital mortality using logistic regression to adjust for confounders. Results We included 46,329 patients in a complete case analysis. In univariate logistic regression analysis, injury mechanism, presence of a complication, age, sex, need for blood transfusion, Revised Trauma Score, and Injury Severity Score were associated with mortality. On multivariate analysis, including these factors, obesity was significantly associated with mortality (odds ratio 1.36, 95% confidence interval 1.10-1.69). Respiratory, thromboembolic, and infectious complications, as defined by PTOS, were more common in obese patients. Conclusions After adjusting for patient and injury characteristics, obesity is associated with increased mortality following trauma. This information may help resolve previous conflicting evidence and guide providers in caring for the obese patient.

BackgroundVenous thromboembolism (VTE) after an inferior vena cava (IVC) injury is a devastating complication. Current practice involves variable use of anticoagulation and antiplatelet (AC/AP) agents. We hypothesized that AC/AP can reduce the incidence of VTE and that delayed institution of AC/AP is associated with increased VTE events.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed IVC injuries cared for at a large urban adult academic level 1 trauma center between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2020, surviving 72 hours. Patient demographics, injury mechanism, surgical repair, type and timing of AC, and type and timing of VTE events were characterized. Postoperative AC status during hospital course before an acute VTE event was delineated by grouping patients into four categories: full, prophylactic, prophylactic with concomitant AP, and none. The primary outcome was the incidence of an acute VTE event. IVC ligation was excluded from analysis.ResultsOf the 76 patients sustaining an IVC injury, 26 were included. The incidence of a new deep vein thrombosis distal to the IVC injury and a new pulmonary embolism was 31% and 15%, respectively. The median onset of VTE was 5 days (IQR 1–11). Four received full AC, 10 received prophylactic AC with concomitant AP, 8 received prophylactic AC, and 4 received no AC/AP. New VTE events occurred in 0.0% of full, in 30.0% of prophylactic with concomitant AP, in 50.0% of prophylactic, and in 50.0% without AC/AP. There was no difference in baseline demographics, injury mechanisms, surgical interventions, and bleeding complications.DiscussionThis is the first study to suggest that delay and degree of antithrombotic initiation in an IVC-injured patient may be associated with an increase in VTE events. Consideration of therapy initiation should be performed on hemostatic stabilization. Future studies are necessary to characterize the optimal dosing and temporal timing of these therapies.Level of evidenceTherapeutic, level 3.

IMPORTANCE: There is a lack of evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of pharmacologic venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis among patients who undergo neurosurgical interventions for traumatic brain injury (TBI). OBJECTIVE: To measure the association between timing of VTE prophylaxis after urgent neurosurgical intervention for TBI and thromboembolic and intracranial complications. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This retrospective cohort study included adult patients (aged ≥16 years) who underwent urgent neurosurgical interventions (craniotomy/craniectomy or intracranial monitor/drain insertion within 24 hours after admission) for TBI at level 1 and 2 trauma centers participating in the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2016. Data were analyzed from January to August 2020. EXPOSURES: Timing of pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis initiation after urgent neurosurgical intervention (prophylaxis delay) measured in days (24-hour periods). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was VTE (deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism). Secondary outcomes were repeated neurosurgery (neurosurgical reintervention after initiation of VTE prophylaxis) and mortality. Hierarchical logistic regression models were used to evaluate the association between prophylaxis delay and each outcome at the patient level and were adjusted for patient baseline and injury characteristics. RESULTS: The study included 4951 patients (3676 [74%] male; median age, 50 years [IQR, 31-64 years]) who underwent urgent neurosurgical intervention for TBI at 304 trauma centers. The median prophylaxis delay was 3 days (IQR, 1-5 days). After adjustment for patient baseline and injury characteristics, prophylaxis delay was associated with increased odds of VTE (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.08 per day; 95% CI, 1.04-1.12). Earlier initiation of prophylaxis was associated with increased risk of repeated neurosurgery. During the first 3 days, each additional day of prophylaxis delay was associated with a 28% decrease in odds of repeated neurosurgery (aOR, 0.72 per day; 95% CI, 0.59-0.88). After 3 days, each additional day of prophylaxis delay was associated with an additional 15% decrease in odds of repeated neurosurgery (aOR, 0.85 per day; 95% CI, 0.80-0.90). Earlier prophylaxis was associated with greater mortality among patients who initially underwent intracranial monitor/drain procedures, such that each additional day of prophylaxis delay was associated with decreased odds of death (aOR, 0.94 per day; 95% CI, 0.89-0.99). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this cohort study of patients who underwent urgent neurosurgical interventions for TBI, early pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis was associated with reduced risk of thromboembolism. However, earlier initiation of prophylaxis was associated with increased risk of repeated neurosurgery. These findings suggest that although timely initiation of prophylaxis should be prioritized, caution should be used particularly during the first 3 days after the index procedure, when this risk appears to be highest.

OBJECTIVE: Risk factors for mortality in patients with subdural hematoma (SDH) include poor Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), pupil non-reactivity, and hemodynamic instability on presentation. Little is published regarding prognosticators of SDH in the elderly. This study aims to examine risk factors for hospital mortality and withdrawal of life-sustaining measures in an octogenarian population presenting with SDH. METHODS: A prospectively collected multi-center database of 3,279 TBI admissions to 45 different U.S. trauma centers between 2017–2019 was queried to identify patients >79 years old presenting with SDH. Factors collected included baseline demographic data, past medical history, antiplatelet/anticoagulant use, and clinical presentation (GCS, pupil reactivity, injury severity scale [ISS]). Primary outcome data included hospital mortality/discharge to hospice care and withdrawal of life-sustaining measures. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to identify factors independently associated with primary outcome variables. RESULTS: A total of 695 patients were isolated for analysis. Of the total cohort, the rate of hospital mortality or discharge to hospice care was 22% (n=150) and the rate of withdrawal of life-sustaining measures was 10% (n=66). A multivariate logistic regression model identified GCS 80 years with SDH. Pre-existing CHF may further predict withdrawal of life-sustaining measures.

Objective Stress-induced hyperglycemia is associated with poor outcomes in nearly all critical illnesses. This acute elevation in glucose after injury or illness is associated with increased morbidity and mortality, including multiple organ failure. Stress-induced hyperglycemia is often attributed to insulin resistance as controlling glucose levels via exogenous insulin improves outcomes, but the mechanisms are unclear. Forkhead box O (FOXO) transcription factors are direct targets of insulin signaling in the liver that regulate glucose homeostasis via direct and indirect pathways. Loss of hepatic FOXO transcription factors reduces hyperglycemia in chronic insulin resistance; however, the role of FOXOs in stress-induced hyperglycemia is unknown. Methods We subjected mice lacking FOXO transcription factors in the liver to a model of injury known to cause stress-induced hyperglycemia. Glucose, insulin, glycerol, fatty acids, cytokines, and adipokines were assessed before and after injury. Liver and adipose tissue were analyzed for changes in glycogen, FOXO target gene expression, and insulin signaling. Results Stress-induced hyperglycemia was associated with reduced hepatic insulin signaling and increased hepatic FOXO target gene expression while loss of FOXO1, 3, and 4 in the liver attenuated hyperglycemia and prevented hyperinsulinemia. Mechanistically, the loss of FOXO transcription factors mitigated the stress-induced hyperglycemia response by directly altering gene expression and glycogenolysis in the liver and indirectly suppressing lipolysis in adipose tissue. Reductions were associated with decreased IL-6, TNF-α, and follistatin and increased FGF21, suggesting that cytokines and FOXO-regulated hepatokines contribute to the stress-induced hyperglycemia response. Conclusions This study implicates FOXO transcription factors as a predominant driver of stress-induced hyperglycemia through means that include cross-talk between the liver and adipose, highlighting a novel mechanism underlying acute hyperglycemia and insulin resistance in stress., Highlights • Liver forkhead box O (FOXO) target gene expression is increased in critical illness. • Loss of FOXO1, 3, and 4 in the liver mitigates stress-induced hyperglycemia (SIH). • Hepatic FOXO drives SIH via direct and indirect means in the liver and adipose.

Background There has been an unprecedented increase in critical care research recently, and there is a need for an organized and systematic approach to surgical critical care research planning. The purpose of this article was to establish a surgical critical care research agenda via a systematic review of the literature and needs assessment. Methods A systematic review of the literature was performed to identify high-impact critical care articles since 1999 on the basis of citation data. Using a standardized data abstraction tool, surgical representation in the literature was analyzed. A needs assessment was performed using a modified Delphi approach in three rounds to obtain consensus among members of the Critical Care Committee of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (n = 30) regarding research priorities in surgical critical care. Results Of 1,019 articles screened, 645 underwent full-text review, and 276 articles were included in the final analysis. Surgical patients were identified in 177 studies (64.1%), whereas trauma patients were identified in 82 (31.7%). Key categories identified during the first round of the Delphi included end of life care, traumatic brain injury (TBI), delirium, post-intensive care syndrome (PICS), hemodynamic monitoring, and volume/fluid balance. During the second and third rounds, 10 topics were classified as high priority. The three highest ranked topics were: addressing goals of care in the acute care setting (4.44 ± 0.70); improving prognostic indicators in patients with severe TBI (4.38 ± 0.85); and interventions to mitigate PICS (4.22 ± 0.65). There was a strong positive correlation in ratings (Rs value = 0.90, p = 0.001) between rounds 2 and 3. Conclusion The results of this study highlight the recent surgical critical care research literature and may serve as a platform for future research endeavors in surgical critical care.

BACKGROUND: Failure to rescue (FTR) refers to death after a major complication. Defining the optimal context in which to reduce FTR after injury requires knowledge of where and when FTR events occur. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective observational study of patients >16 y with a minimum Abbreviated Injury Score ≥2 at all 30 level I and II Pennsylvania trauma centers (2007–2015). Location and timing of the first major complication were collected. Complication, mortality, and FTR rates were calculated by location (prehospital, emergency department, operating room, stepdown unit, interventional radiology, intensive care unit (ICU), radiology, and the surgical ward) and by postadmission day. Kruskal—Wallis and chi-squared tests were used to compare variables. RESULTS: Major complications occurred in 15,388 of 178,602 (8.6%) patients. The median age was 58 y (interquartile range [IQR] 37–77 y), 78% were Caucasian, 68% were male, 89% were bluntly injured, and the median Injury Severity Score was 19 (IQR 10–29). Death occurred in 2512 of 15,388 patients with a major complication, for an FTR rate of 16.3%. Compared with non-FTR, FTR had earlier major complications (median day 2 [IQR 0–5 d] versus day 4 [IQR 2–8 d], P < 0.001). FTR rates were highest in the prehospital setting (42%), the operating room (33%), and the emergency department (32%), but the greatest number (1608 of 2512 total FTR events, 64%) occurred in the ICU. Pulmonary (32%) and cardiac (26%) complications most frequently contributed to FTR deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions designed to reduce FTR after injury should focus on pulmonary and cardiac complications in the ICU.

Medical emergency response teams (MERTs) are widespread throughout inpatient hospital care facilities. Besides the rise of the ubiquitous rapid response team, current MERTs span trauma, stroke, myocardial infarction, and sepsis in many hospitals. Given the multiplicity of teams with widely varying membership, leadership, and functionality, the structure of MERTs is appropriate to review to determine opportunities for improvement. Since nonmedical ERTs predate MERT genesis and are similar across multiple disciplines, nonmedical ERTs provide a standard against which to compare and review MERT design and function.Nonmedical ERTs are crafted to leverage team members who are fully trained and dedicated to that domain, whose skills are regularly updated, with leadership tied to unique skill sets rather than based on hierarchical rank; activity is immediately reviewed at the conclusion of each deployment and teams continue to work together between team deployments. Medical emergency response teams, in sharp contradistinction, often incorporate trainees into teams that do not train together, are not focused on the discipline required to be leveraged, are led based on arrival time or hierarchy, and are usually reviewed at a time remote from team action; teams rapidly disperse after each activity and generally do not continue to work together in between team activations. These differences between ERTs and MERTs may impede MERT success with regard to morbidity and mortality mitigation. Readily deployable approaches to bridge identified gaps include dedicated Advanced Practice Provider (APP) team leadership, reductions in trainee MERT leadership while preserving participation, discipline-dedicated rescue teams, and interteam integration training.Emergency response teams in medical and nonmedical domains share parallels yet lack congruency in structure, function, membership, roles, and performance evaluation. Medical emergency response team structural redesign may be warranted to embrace the beneficial elements of nonmedical ERTs to improve patient outcome and reduce variation in rescue practices and team functionality.

There is growing interest in, and need for, integrating palliative care (PC) into the care of patients undergoing emergency surgery and those with traumatic injury. Thus, PC consults for these populations will likely grow in the coming years. Understanding the nuances and unique characteristics of these two acutely ill populations will improve the care that PC clinicians can provide. Using a modified Delphi technique, this article offers 10 tips that experts in the field, based on their broad clinical experience, believe PC clinicians should know about the care of trauma and emergency surgery patients.

BACKGROUND The COVID-19 pandemic reshaped the health care system in 2020. COVID-19 infection has been associated with poor outcomes after orthopedic surgery and elective, general surgery, but the impact of COVID-19 on outcomes after trauma is unknown. METHODS We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients admitted to Pennsylvania trauma centers from March 21 to July 31, 2020. The exposure of interest was COVID-19 (COV+) and the primary outcome was inpatient mortality. Secondary outcomes were length of stay and complications. We compared demographic and injury characteristics between positive, negative, and not-tested patients. We used multivariable regression with coarsened exact matching to estimate the impact of COV+ on outcomes. RESULTS Of 15,550 included patients, 8,170 (52.5%) were tested for COVID-19 and 219 (2.7%) were positive (COV+). Compared with COVID-19-negative (COV-) patients, COV+ patients were similar in terms of age and sex, but were less often white (53.5% vs. 74.7%, p < 0.0001), and more often uninsured (10.1 vs. 5.6%, p = 0.002). Injury severity was similar, but firearm injuries accounted for 11.9% of COV+ patients versus 5.1% of COV- patients (p < 0.001). Unadjusted mortality for COV+ was double that of COV- patients (9.1% vs. 4.7%, p < 0.0001) and length of stay was longer (median, 5 vs. 4 days; p < 0.001). Using coarsened exact matching, COV+ patients had an increased risk of death (odds ratio [OR], 6.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.29-15.99), any complication (OR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.08-3.16), and pulmonary complications (OR, 5.79; 95% CI, 2.02-16.54) compared with COV- patients. CONCLUSION Patients with concomitant traumatic injury and COVID-19 infection have elevated risks of morbidity and mortality. Trauma centers must incorporate an understanding of these risks into patient and family counseling and resource allocation during this pandemic. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Level II, Prognostic Study.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic and associated policies have had important downstream consequences for individuals, communities, and the healthcare system, and they appear to have been accompanied by rising interpersonal violence. The objective of this study was to evaluate the incidence of injuries owing to interpersonal violence after implementation of a statewide stay-at-home order in Pennsylvania in March 2020. METHODS: Using the Pennsylvania Trauma Outcome Study registry, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients with gunshot wounds, stab wounds, and blunt assault-related injuries attributable to interpersonal violence treated at Pennsylvania trauma centers from March 16 to July 31 of 2018, 2019, and 2020. RESULTS: There were fewer total trauma admissions in 2020 (17,489) vs 2018 (19,290) and 2019 (19,561). Gunshot wounds increased in 2020 to 737 vs 647 for 2019 and 565 for 2018 (P = .028), whereas blunt assault injuries decreased (P = .03). In all time periods, interpersonal violence primarily impacted urban counties. African American men were predominantly affected by gunshot wounds and stab wounds, whereas Caucasian men were predominantly affected by blunt assault injuries. There were more patients with substance abuse disorders and positive drug screens during coronavirus disease than in comparison periods: (stab wound population 52.3% vs 33.9% vs 45.9%, coronavirus disease era vs 2018 vs 2019, respectively P = .0001), (blunt assault injury population 41.4% vs 33.1% vs 33.5%, coronavirus disease era vs 2018 vs 2019, respectively P < .0001). There was no correlation between the incidence of interpersonal violence and coronavirus disease 2019 rates at the county level. CONCLUSION: The implementation of a stay-at-home order was accompanied by rising incidence of gunshot and stab wound injuries in Pennsylvania. Preparedness for future resurgences of coronavirus disease 2019 and other pandemics calls for plans to address injury prevention, recidivism, and access to mental health and substance abuse prevention services.

Pain management in the intensive care unit (ICU) can be challenging for physicians. Opioids are nearly ubiquitous in their use for analgesia given their effectiveness, versatility, physician familiarity, and, oftentimes, the lack of an equally efficacious alternative. They are often also used for sedation. In the ICU, where survivors of critical illness cite pain as being one of the most significant causes of stress, the role of opioids is an especially important one (Fraser and Gagnon , CCSAP 2016 Book 3: Pain and Sedation/Support. ACCP, Kansas, 2016; Martyn et al. New Engl J Med. 380:365–378, 2019). Though a key tool instrument to alleviate suffering, opioids are certainly not without significant consequences and their many receptor targets involve nearly every physiologic system. The adage that every drug is also a poison is never truer; a fact that is made clearest by the 400,000 Americans who have died from opioid use since the turn of the century (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Understanding the Epidemic [Internet]. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2018 [updated 2018, cited 2019 November] Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/drugoverdose/epidemic/index.html).

Objectives Determine variability in intra- and post-operative management of tracheostomies (trachs) at our institution as existing literature suggests that trachs are a frequent trigger for airway-related emergencies. Catalyze the development of an institution-wide protocols for trach care. Methods A 39-question online survey was sent to 55 providers who perform open and percutaneous trachs at three of the hospitals within our large, urban, academic medical center. These providers were identified by surveillance of the operating room schedules for 1 year. Results The survey was completed by 40 of the 53 eligible providers (75.5%). Response rate by question varied. Respondents included members of all departments that perform trachs at our institution (Otorhinolaryngology, Trauma Surgery, Thoracic Surgery, General Surgery, Cardiovascular Surgery and Interventional Pulmonology). While most responses demonstrated uniformity in practice, notable variations included the following: 80% of percutaneous trach providers stated that morbid obesity was not a contraindication to performing a trach outside of the operating room (n = 20) while 58% of open trach providers stated that morbid obesity was a contraindication; only 35% of open trach providers perform a Bjork flap (n = 350). The survey also identified significant variability in practice with regards to timing of trach suture removal. Discussion Lack of uniformity was identified in several practices related to intra- and post-operative tracheostomy care. Results did, however, trend toward consensus in many areas. The results are being used to establish a more consistent approach to tracheostomy management across our institution to ensure standardization of practice amidst the rapidly evolving practices of trach placement. Implications for practice With ongoing evolution in the methods of trach placement and its management, the concepts put forth here will be a resource for health care providers at other institutions to consider intra-institutional analysis and establishment of practice standardization.

This article, on hemodynamic monitoring, fluid responsiveness, volume assessment, and endpoints of resuscitation, is part of a compendium of guidelines provided by the AAST (American Association for the Surgery of Trauma) critical care committee. The intention of these guidelines is to inform practitioners with practical clinical guidance. To do this effectively and contemporarily, expert consensus via the critical care committee was obtained. Strict guideline methodology such a GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) was purposefully NOT used so as not to limit the possible clinical guidance. The critical care committee foresees this methodology as practically valuable to the bedside clinician.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text., Objectives: Examine well-being, measured as burnout and professional fulfillment, across critical care healthcare professionals, ICUs, and hospitals within a health system; examine the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Design: To complement a longitudinal survey administered to medical critical care physicians at the end of an ICU rotation, which began in May 2018, we conducted a cross-sectional survey among critical care professionals across four hospitals in December 2018 to January 2019. We report the results of the cross-sectional survey and, to examine the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, the longitudinal survey results from July 2019 to May 2020. Setting: Academic medical center. Subjects: Four-hundred eighty-one critical care professionals, including 353 critical care nurses, 58 advanced practice providers, 57 physicians, and 13 pharmacists, participated in the cross-sectional survey; 15 medical critical care physicians participated in the longitudinal survey through the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: Burnout was present in 50% of ICU clinicians, ranging from 42% for critical care physicians to 55% for advanced practice providers. Professional fulfillment was less common at 37%, with significant variability across provider (p = 0.04), with a low of 23% among critical care pharmacists and a high of 53% among physicians. Well-being varied significantly at the hospital and ICU level. Workload and job demand were identified as drivers of burnout and meaning in work, culture and values of work community, control and flexibility, and social support and community at work were each identified as drivers of well-being. Between July 2019 and March 2020, burnout and professional fulfillment were present in 35% (15/43) and 58% (25/43) of medical critical care physician responses, respectively. In comparison, during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, burnout and professional fulfillment were present in 57% (12/21) and 38% (8/21), respectively. Conclusions: Burnout was common across roles, yet differed across ICUs and hospitals. Professional fulfillment varied by provider role. We identified potentially modifiable factors related to clinician well-being that can inform organizational strategies at the ICU and hospital level. Longitudinal studies, designed to assess the long-term impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on the well-being of the critical care workforce, are urgently needed.

Background: Disasters or crises impact humans, pets, and service animals alike. Current preparation at the federal, state, and local level focuses on preserving human life. Hospitals, shelters, and other human care facilities generally make few to no provisions for companion care nor service animal care as part of their disaster management plan. Abandoned animals have infectious disease, safety and psychologic impact on owners, rescue workers, and those involved in reclamation efforts. Animals working as first responder partners may be injured or exposed to biohazards and require care. Data sources: English language literature available via PubMed as well as lay press publications on emergency care, veterinary care, disaster management, disasters, biohazards, infection, zoonosis, bond-centered care, preparedness, bioethics, and public health. No year restrictions were set. Conclusions: Human clinician skills share important overlaps with veterinary clinician skills; similar overlaps occur in medical and surgical emergency care. These commonalities offer the potential to craft-specific and disaster or crisis-deployable skills to care for humans, pets (dogs and cats), service animals (dogs and miniature horses) and first-responder partners (dogs) as part of national disaster healthcare preparedness. Such a platform could leverage the skills and resources of the existing US trauma system to underpin such a program.

Objective: To determine the outcomes of patients undergoing tracheostomy for COVID-19 and of healthcare workers performing these procedures. Background: Tracheostomy is often performed for prolonged endotracheal intubation in critically ill patients. However, in the context of COVID-19, tracheostomy placement pathways have been altered due to the poor prognosis of intubated patients and the risk of transmission to providers through this highly aerosolizing procedure. Methods: A prospective single-system multi-center observational cohort study was performed on patients who underwent tracheostomy after acute respiratory failure secondary to COVID-19. Results: Of the 53 patients who underwent tracheostomy, the average time from endotracheal intubation to tracheostomy was 19.7 days ± 6.9 days. The most common indication for tracheostomy was acute respiratory distress syndrome, followed by failure to wean ventilation and post-extracorporeal membrane oxygenation decannulation. Thirty patients (56.6%) were liberated from the ventilator, 16 (30.2%) have been discharged alive, 7 (13.2%) have been decannulated, and 6 (11.3%) died. The average time from tracheostomy to ventilator liberation was 11.8 days ± 6.9 days (range 2–32 days). Both open surgical and percutaneous dilational tracheostomy techniques were performed utilizing methods to mitigate aerosols. No healthcare worker transmissions resulted from performing the procedure. Conclusions: Alterations to tracheostomy practices and processes were successfully instituted. Following these steps, tracheostomy in COVID-19 intubated patients seems safe for both patients and healthcare workers performing the procedure.

Rib fractures are common injuries in blunt thoracic trauma and contribute significantly to post-traumatic morbidity and mortality. Severe complications may arise in patients with multiple rib fractures due to changes in their respiratory mechanics, such as pneumonia, prolonged ventilator time, and need for tracheostomy. Surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) is an emerging practice with increasingly supportive data; however, indications and patient selection vary greatly in the literature and in clinical practice. The current data regarding outcomes of SSRF for patients with non-flail segment pathology is sparse, however suggests the benefit of fewer ventilator days, decreased chronic pain scores, and decreased mortality in older patients. We recommend consideration of SSRF use in patients with multiple severe rib fractures with altered pulmonary mechanics, or in those with high likelihood of chronic pain.

The concept of ‘abbreviated laparotomy’ and the practice of leaving the peritoneal cavity open was first described in trauma patients by Stone in 1983 and became an acceptable surgical strategy after a landmark paper in 1993 (Stone HH et al. Ann Surg. 1983;197(5):532–535; Rotondo MF, et al. J Trauma. 1993;35(3):383). The open abdomen strategy involves carrying out only life-saving procedures at the index operation, leaving the abdominal wall open, and covering the exposed viscera with a temporary abdominal dressing. Abbreviated laparotomy, also known as “staged” or “damage control” laparotomy, allows for immediate management of life-threatening conditions in patients who are too critically ill to otherwise withstand definitive operative repair. Definitive repair is then deferred to a time when physiologic homeostasis had been reestablished. In the last two decades, the indications for damage control laparotomy have expanded to also include emergency general surgery (Nagpal S, et al. J Trauma. 2009;67(5):152; Allardyce DB. Am J Surg. 1987;154(3):295–299; Soop M and Carlson GL. Br J Surg. 2017;104(2):e74; Wertheimer MD and Norris CS. Arch Surg. 1986;121(4):484–487). However, whereas damage control laparotomy is considered standard of care in trauma surgery, its role is more controversial and less well defined in emergency general surgery.