Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 affects multiple organs. Studies have reported mild elevations of lipase levels of unclear significance. Our study aims to determine the outcomes in patients with COVID-19 and hyperlipasemia, and whether correlation with D-dimer levels explains the effect on outcomes. METHODS:Case-control study from two large tertiary care health systems, of patients with COVID-19 disease admitted between March 1 and May 1, 2020 who had lipase levels recorded. Data analyzed to study primary outcomes of mortality, length of stay (LOS) and intensive care utilization in hyperlipasemia patients, and correlation with D-dimer and outcomes. RESULTS:992 out of 5597 COVID-19 patients had lipase levels, of which 429 (43%) had hyperlipasemia. 152 (15%) patients had a lipase > 3x ULN, with clinical pancreatitis in 2 patients. Hyperlipasemia had a higher mortality than normal lipase patients (32% vs. 23%, OR = 1.6,95%CI = 1.2-2.1, P = 0.002). In subgroup analysis, hyperlipasemia patients had significantly worse LOS (11vs.15 days, P = 0.01), ICU admission rates (44% vs. 66%,OR = 2.5,95%CI = 1.3-5.0,P = 0.008), ICU LOS (12vs.19 days,P = 0.01), mechanical ventilation rates (34% vs. 55%,OR = 2.4,95%CI = 1.3-4.8,P = 0.01), and durations of mechanical ventilation (14 vs. 21 days, P = 0.008). Hyperlipasemia patients were more likely to have a D-dimer value in the highest two quartiles, and had increased mortality (59% vs. 15%,OR = 7.2,95%CI = 4.5-11,P < 0.001) and LOS (10vs.7 days,P < 0.001) compared to those with normal lipase and lower D-dimer levels. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:There is high prevalence of hyperlipasemia without clinical pancreatitis in COVID-19 disease. Hyperlipasemia was associated with higher mortality and ICU utilization, possibly explained by elevated D-dimer.

BACKGROUND:Outcomes in neonates receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for meconium aspiration syndrome (MAS) and/or persistent pulmonary hypertension (PPHN) are favorable. Infants with preserved perfusion are often offered venovenous (VV) support to spare morbidities of venoarterial (VA) ECMO. Worsening perfusion or circuit complications can prompt conversion from VV-to-VA support. We examined whether outcomes in infants requiring VA ECMO for MAS/PPHN differed if they underwent VA support initially versus converting to VA after a VV trial, and what factors predicted conversion. METHODS:We reviewed the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization registry from 2007 to 2017 for neonates with primary diagnoses of MAS/PPHN. Propensity score analysis matched VA single-runs (controls) 4:1 against VV-to-VA conversions based on age, pre-ECMO pH, and precannulation arrests. Primary outcomes were complications and survival. Data were analyzed using Mann-Whitney U and Fisher's exact testing. Multivariate regression identified independent predictors of conversion for VV patients. RESULTS:3831 neonates underwent ECMO for MAS/PPHN, including 2129 (55%) initially requiring VA support. Of 1702 patients placed on VV ECMO, 98 (5.8%) required VV-to-VA conversion. Compared with 364 propensity-matched isolated VA controls, conversion runs were longer (190 vs. 127 h, P < 0.001), were associated with more complications, and decreased survival to discharge (70% vs. 83%, P = 0.01). On multivariate regression, conversion was more likely if neonates on VV ECMO did not receive surfactant (OR = 1.7;95%CI = 1.1-2.7;P = 0.03) or required high-frequency ventilation (OR = 1.9;95%CI = 1.2-3.3;P = 0.01) before ECMO. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Conversion from VV-to-VA ECMO in infants with MAS/PPHN conveys increased morbidity and mortality compared to similar patients placed initially onto VA ECMO. VV patients not receiving surfactant or requiring high-frequency ventilation before cannulation may have increased risk of conversion. While conversions remain rare, decisions to offer VV ECMO for MAS/PPHN must be informed by inferior outcomes observed should conversion be required. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Level of evidence 3 Retrospective comparative study.

OBJECTIVE:The aim of the study was to determine whether perforated appendicitis rates in children were influenced by the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) surge. BACKGROUND:Disruption of care pathways during a public health crisis may prevent children from obtaining prompt assessment for surgical conditions. Progression of appendicitis to perforation is influenced by timeliness of presentation. In the context of state-mandated controls and public wariness of hospitals, we investigated the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on perforated appendicitis in children. STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:We conducted an analysis of all children presenting to 3 hospital sites with acute appendicitis between March 1 and May 7, 2020, corresponding with the peak COVID-19 outbreak in the New York City region. Control variables were collected from the same institutions for the preceding 5 years. The primary outcome measure was appendiceal perforation. RESULTS:Fifty-five children presented with acute appendicitis over 10 weeks. Compared to a 5-year control cohort of 1291 patients, we observed a higher perforation rate (45% vs 27%, odds ratio 2.23, 95% confidence interval 1.29-3.85, P = 0.005) and longer mean duration of symptoms in children with perforations (71 ± 39 vs 47 ± 27 h, P = 0.001) during the COVID-19 period. There were no differences in perforation rates (55% vs 59%, P = 0.99) or median length of stay (1.0 vs 3.0 days, P = 0.58) among children screening positive or negative for SARS-CoV-2. CONCLUSIONS:Children in the epicenter of the COVID-19 outbreak demonstrated higher rates of perforated appendicitis compared to historical controls. Preoperative detection of SARS-CoV-2 was not associated with inferior outcomes. Although children likely avoid much of the morbidity directly linked to COVID-19, disruption to local healthcare delivery systems may negatively impact other aspects of pediatric surgical disease.

Fascial closure at 8-mm robotic port sites continues to be controversial. As the use of the robotic platform increases across multiple abdominal specialties, there are more case reports describing reoperation and small bowel resection for acute port-site hernias. A retrospective review of all robotic abdominal surgeries performed from 2012 to 2019 at NYU Langone Medical Center was conducted. Patients who had a reoperation in our facility within 30 days were identified, and medical records reviewed for indications for reoperation and findings. The study included 11,566 patients, of which 82 patients (0.71%) underwent a reoperation related to the index robotic surgery within 30 days. Fifteen of 11,566 patients (0.13%) had acute port-site hernias, and 3 of these 15 patients required small bowel resection. Eleven of 15 acute port-site hernias (73%) were at 8-mm robotic port site, 2 of which required a small bowel resection. More than a third of the patients had a hernia at an 8-mm port site where a surgical drain had been placed. Considering that each robotic case, regardless of specialty, has three ports at a minimum, the true incidence of acute postoperative robotic port-site hernia is 0.032% (11/34,698), with the incidence of concomitant small bowel resection being 0.006% (2/34,698). The incidence of acute port-site hernias from 8-mm robotic ports is exceedingly low across specialties. Our results do not support routine fascial closure at 8-mm robotic port sites due to an extremely low incidence. However, drain sites require special consideration.

BACKGROUND:There is little consensus regarding the use of postoperative antibiotics in the management of perforated appendicitis in children. Patients are commonly discharged with oral antibiotics after a course of intravenous antibiotics; however, recent literature suggests that patients can be safely discharged without any oral antibiotics. To further evaluate this protocol, we conducted a multicenter retrospective preimplementation/postimplementation study comparing rates of abscess formation and rehospitalization between patients discharged with and without oral antibiotics. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:We reviewed the records of all pediatric patients who underwent appendectomies for perforated appendicitis at NYU Tisch Hospital, Bellevue Hospital, and Hackensack University Medical Center from January 2014 to June 2019. Data pertaining to patient demographics, hospital course, intraoperative appearance of the appendix, antibiotic treatment, abscess formation, and rehospitalization were collected. RESULTS:A total of 253 patients were included: 162 received oral antibiotics and 91 did not. The median length of antibiotic treatment (oral and intravenous) was 11 (10-14) d for patients on oral antibiotics and 5 (3-6) d for patients without oral antibiotics (P < 0.01). The median leukocyte count at discharge was 9.5 (7.4-10.9) and 8.1 (6.8-10.4) for these groups, respectively (P = 0.02). Postoperative abscesses occurred in 22% of patients receiving oral antibiotics and 15% of patients on no antibiotics (P = 0.25). Rates of rehospitalization for these groups were 10% and 11%, respectively (P = 0.99). CONCLUSIONS:Children who have undergone appendectomy for perforated appendicitis can be safely discharged without oral antibiotics on meeting clinical discharge criteria and white blood cell count normalization.

BACKGROUND:Congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH) occurs in 1 out of 2500-3000 live births. Right-sided CDHs (R-CDHs) comprise 25% of all CDH cases, and data are conflicting on outcomes of these patients. The aim of our study was to compare outcomes in patients with right versus left CDH (L-CDH). METHODS:We analyzed a multicenter prospectively enrolled database to compare baseline characteristics and outcomes of neonates enrolled from January 2005 to January 2019 with R-CDH vs. L-CDH. RESULTS:A total of 588, 495 L-CDH, and 93 R-CDH patients with CDH were analyzed. L-CDHs were more frequently diagnosed prenatally (p=0.011). Lung-to-head ratio was similar in both cohorts. R-CDHs had a lower frequency of primary repair (p=0.022) and a higher frequency of need for oxygen at discharge (p=0.013). However, in a multivariate analysis, need for oxygen at discharge was no longer significantly different. There were no differences in long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes assessed at two year follow up. There was no difference in mortality, need for ECMO, pulmonary hypertension, or hernia recurrence. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:In this large series comparing R to L-CDH patients, we found no significant difference in mortality, use of ECMO, or pulmonary complications. Our study supports prior studies that R-CDHs are relatively larger and more often require a patch or muscle flap for repair. TYPE OF STUDY/METHODS:Prognosis study LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II.

Since March 2015, our Pediatric ECMO team has cared for 31 patients. Of these, 16 patients are still living today (53%). Patient & family support are necessary during ECMO, as well as post-ECMO and hospital discharge. Recent studies show that not only patients who required ECMO fulfill post-traumatic stress disorder diagnostic criteria, but also their close relatives are at risk to develop PTSD. Minimal peer to peer resources exist in the community for these patients and families. We found this to be a gap in ECMO care and an area of opportunity for us to provide additional support to this patient population. Our team explored options for engaging and decided to host our first Pediatric ECMO Reunion. The reunion included both patients & families and multidisciplinary staff members who cared for our prior ECMO patients. This venue provided an opportunity for sharing patient stories, for ECMO providers to reconnect with survivors and staff to experience the positive outcomes from their work. This allowed for a first step for families to understand their experience and help decrease burnout in providers and staff. We provided families the option to stay in touch with the ECMO Program through different family work groups. We also interviewed families and distributed surveys for direct feedback on their experience working with our team while their child was on ECMO. Next steps include creating an ECMO Family Work Group by partnering with families to develop new ways to support future ECMO families and improve the ECMO family experience

The majority of neonatal and pediatric patients require emergent cannulations at the bedside in the intensive care unit (ICU). To accomplish a bedside cannulation, multidisciplinary teams need to work together and perform tasks that may be different from the usual practices in the ICU. The complexity of the many tasks that need to be completed can lead to significant delay if not well choreographed. Our project goal was to streamline the pre-cannulation process to decrease the time from ECMO mobilization to procedure start. The initiative was implemented in September 2016. Interventions included formalization of ECMO Program policies & procedures and multidisciplinary education, as well as implementation of formal patient case reviews & quality assurance meetings. Our team collaborated with ancillary departments to ensure timeliness and efficiency with orders & processes related to ECMO initiation. We also created a detailed precannulation checklist which defines each team members' role and their responsibilities in the pre-cannulation process. The checklist is reviewed prior to the procedure time out as a final check to ensure all required tasks are completed. Upon retrospective chart review, the pre- & post-initiative data revealed a 54% decrease in time from ECMO mobilization to cannulation procedure start. The post-initiative average time of 65 minutes showed successful improvement from the pre-initiative average time of 136 minutes. We concluded that a structured process for pre-cannulation preparedness, role definition, multidisciplinary education, and team debriefs maximize efficiency in team readiness for a bedside ECMO cannulation procedure

Infants with meconium aspiration syndrome (MAS) and/or persistent pulmonary hypertension of newborn (PPHN) have the most favorable outcomes among infants requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Early term (ET) infants have been shown to have higher morbidities when compared with term infants. It is not known if ET infants requiring ECMO for MAS and/or PPHN have higher morbidities and mortality than term infants. Objective of our study was to compare morbidity and mortality in ET infants with MAS and/or PPHN requiring ECMO in comparison to their term counterparts. A total of 3831 neonatal ECMO runs for MAS and/or PPHN were reviewed from the de-identified ELSO registry patient dataset from 2007- 2017. Neonates born at ET (37+0/7 - 38+6/7 weeks) and term (39+0/7 - 40+6/7 weeks) were further classified as two study groups. Both groups were compared using chi-square test. Of 2529 infants who were included in the study, there were 799 ET and 1730 term infants. ET infants when compared with term infants had higher mortality (9.6% vs 6%, P=0.002), lower survival to discharge (80.4% vs 87.7%, P<0.001), higher neurologic complications (14.8% vs 11.5%, P=0.024), and increased need for hemofiltration (32.9% vs 28.7%, P=0.033). There were no statistically significant differences between both groups in hemorrhagic, infectious, metabolic and cardiovascular complications. ET infants with MAS and/or PPHN have higher morbidities and mortality than term infants on ECMO. Caregivers should be informed of higher risks associated with use of ECMO in ET infants when compared to full term newborns