Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:In patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) who need intestinal resection, prior data suggest that earlier surgical intervention may be associated with improved outcomes. However, surgery is often deferred for additional trials of advanced therapies, which potentially shifts patients from a fit to a frail preoperative state. OBJECTIVES/UNASSIGNED:This study aimed to evaluate clinical changes that occur in the year prior to intestinal resection in patients with IBD. DESIGN/UNASSIGNED:Retrospective cohort study. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:This was a multi-hospital retrospective study of patients ⩾18 years old who underwent initial IBD-related intestinal resection between January 1, 2018 and May 31, 2023. Clinical characteristics and radiographical skeletal muscle mass were compared using the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test for continuous variables and McNemar's test for categorical variables. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED: = 0.06). CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:In the 6-12 months prior to an IBD-related intestinal resection, as compared to the month prior, individuals were less likely to be malnourished, have an infection, or need hospitalization for IBD. This suggests that minimizing delays to surgery may lead to improved outcomes.

BACKGROUND:Ileal pouch anal anastomosis is the preferred method for restoration of intestinal continuity after proctocolectomy. Successful ileal pouch anal anastomosis requires adequate reach of the ileal mesentery to the pelvis. Reach issues are a common cause for intraoperative pouch abandonment; however, data regarding contemporary abandonment rates are rare and nonexistent in the revisional setting. METHODS:A retrospective review was conducted of consecutive ileal pouch anal anastomosis surgery at a single referral center. Both initial or "primary" pouches and revisional pouch surgery were included. RESULTS:In total, 447 attempts at pouch anal anastomosis were made, with an 1.6% overall rate of intraoperative abandonment. Pouch abandonment was attributed to inadequate mesenteric reach during 3 surgeries, desmoid tumors in 2 surgeries, and insufficient remaining small bowel in 2 surgeries. Twelve patients required lengthening maneuvers including 6 S pouches (1%) and 6 H pouches (1%). One half (49%) of operations were revisional ileal pouch anal anastomosis surgery. Overall, reach issues led to intraoperative abandonment in only 0.4% of attempted primary pouches and 1.0% of revisional surgeries. A preoperative diagnosis of familial adenomatous polyposis was associated with pouch abandonment (P < .001). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Extremely low pouch abandonment rates as a result of mesenteric reach can be achieved even in the revisional setting at a high-volume center with institutional expertise. In the revisional setting, intra-abdominal desmoids or the potential for short gut affects pouch abandonment rates as much as reach issues.

Since the first appearance of the severe acute respiratory syndrome corona virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) earlier this year, clinicians and researchers alike have been faced with dynamic, daily challenges of recognizing, understanding, and treating the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) due to SARS-CoV-2. Those who are moderately to severely ill with COVID-19 are likely to develop acute hypoxemic respiratory failure and require administration of supplemental oxygen. Assessing the need to initiate or titrate oxygen therapy is largely dependent on evaluating the patient's existing blood oxygenation status, either by direct arterial blood sampling or by transcutaneous arterial oxygen saturation monitoring, also referred to as pulse oximetry. While the sampling of arterial blood for measurement of dissolved gases provides a direct measurement, it is technically challenging to obtain, is painful to the patient, and can be time and resource intensive. Pulse oximetry allows for non-invasive, real-time, continuous monitoring of the percent of hemoglobin molecules that are saturated with oxygen, and usually closely predicts the arterial oxygen content. As such, it was particularly concerning when patients with severe COVID-19 requiring endotracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation within one of our intensive care units were observed to have significant discordance between their predicted arterial oxygen content via pulse oximetry and their actual measured oxygen content. We offer these preliminary observations along with our speculative causes as a timely, urgent clinical need. In the setting of a COVID-19 intensive care unit, entering a patient room to obtain a fresh arterial blood gas sample not only takes exponentially longer to do given the time required for donning and doffing of personal protective equipment (PPE), it involves the consumption of already sparce PPE, and it increases the risk of viral exposure to the nurse, physician, or respiratory therapist entering the room to obtain the sample. As such, technology similar to pulse oximetry which can be applied to a patients finger, and then continuously monitored from outside the room is essential in preventing a particularly dangerous situation of unrealized hypoxia in this critically-ill patient population. Additionally, it would appear that conventional two-wavelength pulse oximetry may not accurately predict the arterial oxygen content of blood in these patients. This discordance of oxygenation measurements poses a critical concern in the evaluation and management of the acute hypoxemic respiratory failure seen in patients with COVID-19.