Faculty Bibliography

This cohort study compares the outcomes of open colectomy with ureteral stenting with the outcomes of open colectomy without ureteral stenting.

IMPORTANCE:Anticipating postsurgical complications is a vital physician skill, particularly when counseling surgically complex patients on their risks of intervention. Although internists and surgeons both counsel patients on surgical risks, it is uncertain who is better equipped to accurately anticipate surgical complications. OBJECTIVE:To examine how internal medicine and general surgery trainees compare in their assessment of risk of surgically complex patients. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:General surgery and internal medicine residents (urban, tertiary, and academic medical center) answered an anonymous, online assessment of 7 real-life, complex clinical scenarios. Participants estimated the chance of any morbidity, mortality, surgical site infection, pneumonia, and cardiac complications. Scenarios represented a diverse general surgery practice, including colectomy, duodenal ulcer repair, inguinal hernia repair, perforated viscus exploration, small-bowel resection, cholecystectomy, and mastectomy in surgically complex patients likely to be comanaged by surgical and internal medicine services. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES:Responses were compared with risk-adjusted outcomes reported by the American College of Surgeons’ National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (NSQIP) online calculator. RESULTS: < .001). For 91% of clinical estimates, both groups similarly overestimated every type of risk; in 9% of estimates, internal medicine residents had higher overestimates. Estimates varied significantly, with wide 95% CIs; however, only 11% of the NSQIP estimates fell within the 95% CIs. Overall, the mean percentages of the estimates ranged from 26% to 33% over NSQIP estimates for all complications. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:General surgery and internal medicine residents demonstrated similar estimates of postoperative complications and death. Both groups overestimated risks in surgically complex patient scenarios compared with NSQIP risk calculator estimates. This near-universal overestimation of risk underscores the importance of developing risk-estimation resources for internists and surgeons.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Patients sustaining multisystem trauma are at risk for oral and maxillofacial fractures. Although the University of Wisconsin established criteria to help guide the clinician in obtaining additional cross-sectional imaging to evaluate possible facial fractures, it has not been externally validated. Our aim was to evaluate whether the University of Wisconsin's Criteria is generalizable to external institutions through validation and to report modern practice patterns at a level 1 trauma center. METHODS:A retrospective case study was performed of all patients who had computed tomography of the facial bones (CT face) at a tertiary, academic, Level 1 trauma center over the 6-month period ending on June 30, 2015. The electronic medical record was reviewed for the 5 University of Wisconsin criteria (bony step off or instability, periorbital ecchymosis, malocclusion, tooth absence, and glasgow coma scale). Final interpretation of CT face findings by board-certified radiologists (facial fractures, intracranial hemorrhage, and cervical spine injury) were also captured. Our modeling was similar to that described by the reference study, the internal validation study. Sensitivity, specificity, negative, and positive predictive values with 95% confidence intervals were evaluated. A P < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS:The presence of any ≥1 of the 5 criteria identified on physical examination resulted in 81% sensitivity for any facial fracture, which is lower than the sensitivity initially described (98%) and subsequently internally validated (97%). The absence of all 5 physical examination criteria had a negative predictive value of 60%, again lower than that initially described (87%) and then internally validated (81%). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:We were unable to validate the University of Wisconsin criteria for predicting facial fractures. These criteria may be institutionally specific and not generalizable to other trauma centers. Further research to refine the criteria for CT of the face is needed to improve resource allocation.

BACKGROUND:The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) established anatomic grading to facilitate risk stratification and risk-adjusted outcomes in emergency general surgery. Cholecystitis severity was graded based on clinical, imaging, operative, and pathologic criteria. We aimed to validate the AAST anatomic grading system for acute cholecystitis. METHODS:This is a retrospective cohort study including consecutive patients admitted with acute cholecystitis at an urban, tertiary medical center between 2013 and 2016. Grade 1 is acute cholecystitis, Grade 2 is gangrenous or emphysematous cholecystitis, Grade 3 is localized perforation, and Grades 4 and 5 have regional and systemic peritonitis, respectively. Concordance between the AAST grade and outcome including mortality, length of stay (LOS), ICU use, readmission, and complications were assessed using logistic regression. RESULTS:A total of 315 patients were included. There was very good inter-rater (two independent raters) reliability for anatomic grading, κ = 1.00, p < 0.005. The majority of patients were Grade 1 or Grade 2 (94%). Incidence of complications, LOS, ICU use, and any adverse event increased with increasing anatomic grade. When compared to Grade 1 disease, patients with Grade 2 were more likely to undergo cholecystectomy (OR 4.07 [1.93-8.56]). Grade 3 patients were at higher risk of adverse events (OR 3.83 [1.34-10.94]), longer LOS (OR 1.73 [1.03-2.92]), and ICU use (OR 8.07 [2.43-26.80]). CONCLUSIONS:AAST severity scores were independently associated with clinical outcomes in patients with acute cholecystitis. Despite low-grade disease, complications were common, and therefore a refinement of the scoring system may be necessary for more granular prediction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Epidemiologic/prognostic, level III.

Small-bowel obstruction (SBO) is a common disorder and constitutes a significant healthcare burden. Laparoscopic lysis of adhesions (LLOA) for SBO is predicted to decrease complications, shorten hospital stay, and cut healthcare costs compared with the open lysis of adhesions (OLOA); however, large comparison studies are lacking. We evaluated the nationwide adoption of LLOA and compared outcomes with OLOA. We retrospectively analyzed data from 9920 OLOA and 3269 LLOA cases from 2005 to 2013 using the American College of Surgeons prospective National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data set. Annual trends were evaluated using linear regression. Surgery outcomes were compared using two-sample t tests or Mann-Whitney tests. Post-surgical complications were compared using multivariable logistic regression adjusting for comorbidities. The proportion of SBO cases treated by LLOA increased nationwide by 1.6 percent per year (R ² 0.87), from 17.2 % in 2006 to 28.7 % in 2013. Patients undergoing OLOA had longer operations (66 vs 60 min, P < 0.001), longer hospital stay (8.9 vs 4.2 days, P < 0.001), and higher post-surgical complication rates (adjusted odds ratio 2.73 95 % CI 2.36-3.15, P < 0.001) when compared to LLOA. Despite the lack of prospective randomized trials comparing LLOA to OLOA, we found progressive nationwide adoption of LLOA for SBO treatment. Our large retrospective analysis demonstrated clinical benefit and reduced resource utilization for LLOA.

BACKGROUND:Procedural teaching and the ability to detect and correct errors are important components of surgical education. This study evaluates whether review of an instructional video will improve residents' ability to detect errors. We hypothesized that clinical experience and confidence do not correlate with ability to detect errors. METHODS:Participants were randomized to 2 groups: the study group viewed an instructional video demonstrating correct technique, whereas the control group did not view the instructional video. Forty general surgery residents described errors in technique during an ultrasound-guided right internal jugular vein catheterization pre and post randomization. RESULTS:Participants who viewed the video improved their error identification rate by 72.6% (P < .001). No correlation between postgraduate year or confidence in error detection and the actual ability to detect errors was noted (r = .17 and r = .14 respectively). CONCLUSIONS:Experience and seniority may not be sufficient to detect procedural errors during central line insertion. Instructional videos improve error recognition.

BACKGROUND:Volume-to-outcome data have been studied in several complex surgical procedures, demonstrating improved outcomes at higher volume centers. Laparoscopic lysis of adhesions (LLOA) for small bowel obstruction (SBO) may result in better outcomes, but there is no information on the learning curve for this potentially complex case. This study evaluates the effect of institutional procedural volume on length of stay (LOS), outcomes, and costs in LLOA for SBOs. MATERIALS AND METHODS:The Nationwide Inpatient Sample data set between 2000 and 2013 was queried for discharges for a diagnosis of SBO involving LLOA in adult patients. Patients with intra-abdominal malignancy and evidence of any other major surgical procedure during hospitalization were excluded. The procedural volume per hospital was calculated over the period, and high-volume hospitals were designated as those performing greater than five LLOA per year. Patient characteristics were described by hospital volume status using stratified cluster sampling tabulation and linear regression methods. LOS, total charges, and costs were reported as means with standard deviation and median values. P < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS:A total of 9111 discharges were selected, which was representative of 43,567 weighted discharges nationally between 2000 and 2013. Over the study period, there has been a 450% increase in the number of LLOA performed. High-volume hospitals had significantly shorter LOS (mean: 4.92 ± standard error (SE) 0.13 d; median: 3.6) compared to low-volume hospitals (mean: 5.68 ± 0.06 d; median: 4.5). In multivariate analysis, high-volume status was associated with a decreased LOS of 0.72 d (P < 0.0001) as compared to low-volume status. Other significant predictors for decreased LOS included decreased age, decreased comorbidity, and the absence of small bowel resection. There was no significant association between volume status and total charges in multivariate or univariate models, but high-volume hospitals were associated with lower costs in multivariate models by approximately $984 (P = 0.017). CONCLUSIONS:This study demonstrates that high hospital volume was associated with decreased LOS for LLOA in SBO. Although volume was not associated with differences in total charges, there was a small decrease in hospital costs.

Organ shortage remains a major barrier to transplantation. While many efforts have focused on educating the general population regarding donation, few studies have examined knowledge regarding donation and donor registration rates among waitlisted candidates. We aimed to determine waitlisted patients' willingness to donate, elucidate attitudes surrounding organ allocation, and identify barriers to donation. A cross-sectional survey was distributed to assess demographics, knowledge regarding organ donation, and attitudes regarding the allocation process. Responses from 225 of 579 (39%) waitlisted patients were collected. Seventy-one respondents (32%) were registered donors, while 64 patients (28%) noted no interest in participating in donation. A total of 19% of respondents felt their medical treatment would change by being a donor, while 86 patients (38%) felt their condition precluded them from donation. Forty patients (18%) felt they should be prioritized on the waitlist if they agreed to donate. A minority of patients (28%) reported discussion of organ donation with their physician. Waitlisted candidates constitute a population of willing, although often unregistered, organ donors. Moreover, many endorse misconceptions regarding the allocation process and their donation eligibility. In a population for which transplantation is not always possible, education is needed regarding organ donation among waitlisted patients, as this may enhance donation rates.