Faculty Bibliography

Introduction/UNASSIGNED:Positioning-related neural injuries are an inherent risk in surgery, particularly in robotic-assisted abdominal wall reconstruction because of unique patient positioning and increased operative times. The implementation of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring should be considered in such cases. Methods/UNASSIGNED:This was a two-armed study with one prospective intervention group and one retrospective control group. All patients underwent robotic abdominal wall reconstruction at an academic center. The prospective arm underwent robotic reconstruction from January through July 2019. The retrospective database reviewed patients who underwent the same procedure from August 2015 through July 2018. Factors assessed included: demographics (age, gender, body mass index, comorbidities), surgical details (American Society of Anesthesiologists class, procedure, operative time, positioning), outcomes (length of stay, 30-d readmission, reoperation), and any new-onset intraoperative or postoperative neuropathy. Patients were seen in the clinic postoperatively at weeks 1 and 6. Results/UNASSIGNED:Ten patients were included in the prospective arm. All received intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring using somatosensory evoked potentials. They were compared with 47 patients in the retrospective arm who underwent surgery without intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring. One position-related neural response from baseline was detected intraoperatively in the prospective arm; however, there were no peripheral neurological symptoms present postoperatively. Two patients in the control group developed transient peripheral neuropathies that resolved within 6 weeks. Demographics, surgical procedures, and length of surgery were similar in both groups. The prospective group had a higher rate of preoperative neuropathy and intraoperative use of vasopressors. Conclusion/UNASSIGNED:Incorporation of neurophysiological monitoring in robotic surgery is feasible and may lead to the prevention and reduction in positioning-related injuries.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:The prevalence of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) has increased with continued evidence of their efficacy and ease of use. However, the rise in their utilization also surfaced a concern regarding their reversal in patients actively bleeding and/or those requiring invasive procedures. Up until 2018, there were several reversal options available including 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4-factor PCC), activated charcoal, desmopressin, and tranexamic acid. Then, in 2018, andexanet alpha, a recombinant factor Xa, was approved for the reversal of apixaban and rivaroxaban in patients with life-threatening or uncontrolled bleeding. Nonetheless, because 4-factor PCC is more easily attainable and cost-effective, it continues to be the more favorable option for many health-care professionals. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:This retrospective chart review was conducted at NYU Winthrop Hospital in patients who received 4-factor PCC for the reversal of DOACs from January 2018 to July 2018. Patient charts were reviewed and relevant data was collected (admitting diagnosis, dose of 4-factor PCC utilized, etc). RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Fifty-three patients were evaluated with 85% experiencing a positive response and complete recovery following the administration of 4-factor PCC; 8 (15%) patients died after receiving 4-factor PCC, none as a result of its administration; 3 patients died secondary to other underlying comorbidities, 4 patients died due to an intracranial hemorrhage, and 1 died due to hematoma of the tongue. CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:Based on the results thus far, the use of 4-factor PCC may be a good treatment option in patients requiring DOAC reversal.

BACKGROUND:Although the American Heart Association promotes telehealth models to improve care access, there is limited literature on its use in underserved populations. This study is the first to compare utilization and quality of life (QoL) for underserved black and Hispanic heart failure (HF) patients assigned to telehealth self-monitoring (TSM) or comprehensive outpatient management (COM) over 90 days. METHODS:This randomized controlled trial enrolled 104 patients. Outcomes included emergency department (ED) visits, hospitalizations, QoL, depression, and anxiety. Binary outcomes for utilization were analyzed using chi-square or Fisher's exact test. Poisson or negative binomial regression, repeated-measures analysis of variance, or generalized estimating equations were also used as appropriate. RESULTS:Of 104 patients, 31% were Hispanic, 69% black, 41% women, and 72% reported incomes of <$10,000/year. Groups did not differ regarding binary ED visits (relative risk [RR] = 1.37, confidence interval [CI] = 0.83-2.27), hospitalization (RR = 0.92, CI = 0.57-1.48), or length of stay in days (TSM = 0.54 vs. COM = 0.91). Number of all-cause hospitalizations was significantly lower for COM (TSM = 0.78 vs. COM = 0.55; p = 0.03). COM patients reported greater anxiety reduction from baseline to 90 days (TSM = 50-28%; COM = 57-13%; p = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS:These findings suggest that TSM is not effective in reducing utilization or improving QoL for underserved patients with HF. Future studies are needed to determine whether TSM can be effective for populations facing health care access issues.

BACKGROUND:Home telemonitoring (HTM) is a promising approach to improve quality of life (QoL) and decrease hospital utilization. METHODS:This randomized-controlled study followed 89 community-dwelling Medicare outpatients with heart failure (HF) after discharge from home care for 6 months. Patients were randomized to HTM or comprehensive outpatient management (COM). HTM received weekly (video) televisits with daily vital sign monitoring. COM was contacted weekly by telephone. Outcomes included emergency department (ED) and inpatient utilization and QoL. RESULTS:Average age at enrollment was 81.4 for HTM and 84.9 for COM. Thirty-eight percent of HTM had ≥1 ED visit versus 60% of COM (p = 0.04), while 48% of HTM had ≥1 hospitalization versus 55% of COM (p = 0.47). Length of stay (LOS) (days) was 4.0 for HTM versus 7.4 for COM (p = 0.39). Costs were $38,990 for HTM versus $50,943 for COM (p = 0.91). QoL improved by -9.66 for HTM and -3.56 for COM (p = 0.02). Although HF-related utilization did not differ between groups, HTM patients who were highly adherent obtained better all-cause outcomes than those with low adherence. CONCLUSIONS:Significantly improved all-cause ED utilization, LOS, and QoL were found for HTM; other differences were not significant. More research is needed to determine how to best utilize this technology to improve patient outcomes.

This study examined the prognostic value of the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) in predicting short-term clinical outcomes in hospitalized older adults. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients, older than 75 years, admitted to the medicine service at a large tertiary hospital (New York). We used the Enhanced International Classification of Disease, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification adaptation to abstract the CCI from electronic medical records. The CCI scores were compared, using the standard Deyo version and the Schneeweiss version. Outcome measures included in-hospital mortality, length of stay (LOS), and 30-day readmissions. When comparing Charlson/Deyo and Charlson/Deyo/Schneeweiss with and without age, we found similar significant association with regard to in-hospital mortality, with a moderate predictive ability (area under the curve [AUC]: 0.5906-0.6433). However, for 30-day readmissions and LOS, the predictive ability was poor (AUC: 0.5598-0.6106 and ρ: 0.11-0.12, respectively). The CCI is, at most, a moderate predictor of in-hospital mortality and a poor predictor of other important healthcare outcomes relevant to administrative healthcare practices.

BACKGROUND:Among medical specialties, orthopaedic surgery persistently has one of the lowest representations of women in residency programs. This study examined whether differences exist in the academic metrics of the orthopaedic residency applicants and enrolled candidates by sex, which may be contributing to the persistent underrepresentation of women. Differences in enrollment rate in orthopaedic residency programs also were analyzed. We hypothesized that academic metrics were similar for female and male applicants and thus do not explain the underrepresentation of women in training programs. METHODS:Academic data of first-time applicants (n = 9,133) and candidates who enrolled in an orthopaedic residency (n = 6,381) in the U.S. from 2005 to 2014 were reviewed. The United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step-1 and Step-2 Clinical Knowledge (CK) scores, Alpha Omega Alpha (AΩA) Honor Medical Society status, number of publications, and volunteer experiences were compared by sex and were analyzed over time. RESULTS:From 2005 to 2014, representation of female applicants increased from 12.6% to 16.0%, corresponding with an increase in the percentage of enrolled female residents (from 12.9% to 16.1%); 70.3% of male and 67.1% of female applicants to orthopaedic residency enrolled as residents (p = 0.082). Mean academic metrics increased significantly over time for applicants and enrolled candidates, irrespective of sex. Comparing by sex, the mean USMLE Step-1 scores of male applicants and enrolled candidates were approximately 2% higher than those of female applicants (p < 0.0001). Volunteer experiences of female applicants and enrolled candidates were 12% higher compared with male applicants (p < 0.0001). There was no significant difference in USMLE Step-2 CK scores, number of publications, or AΩA status by sex. CONCLUSIONS:The enrollment rate of male and female applicants in orthopaedic residencies was similar and did not change during the 10-year study period. The academic metrics of applicants and enrolled candidates have increased significantly. The academic metrics were found to be comparable by sex; the differences in USMLE Step-1 scores and volunteer experiences were small relative to the magnitude of accomplishments that these values represent. The growth rate of the proportion of women in orthopaedic residencies lags other surgical subspecialties but appears to be independent of academic metrics.

BACKGROUND:The decision to utilize portal or systemic venous drainage in pancreas transplantation is surgeon- and center-dependent. Information regarding the superior method is based on single-center reports and animal models. METHODS:UNOS data on adults receiving pancreas and kidney-pancreas transplants from 1987 to 2016 were analyzed (n = 29 078). The groups analyzed were: systemic venous pancreas graft drainage (SVD, n = 24 512) or portal venous pancreas graft drainage (PVD, n = 4566). A Cox proportional hazard model compared patient and allograft survival between groups. RESULTS:No statistically significant differences were observed for patient and allograft survival at 1, 3, 5, 10, or 15 years post-transplant at each time interval and cumulatively (patient - HR:1.041; 95% CI:0.989-1.095; allograft - HR:0.951; 95% CI:0.881-1.027). PVD reduced the risk of death by 22.0% (P = 0.017) compared to SVD for patients undergoing pancreas after kidney transplant (PAK); no statistically significant difference was found for patients undergoing other types of transplants. CONCLUSION:There is no significant clinical difference in patient or allograft survival between PVD and SVD in pancreas transplantation for the majority of patients. For the subgroup of PAK, PVD was associated with decreased mortality. For individual surgeons, center and patient scenarios should dictate which technique is performed.