Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Diabetes mellitus is a complex heterogenous metabolic disease that significantly affects the world population. Although many treatments exist, including medications such as metformin, sulfonylureas, and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP) receptor agonist, there is growing interest in finding alternative methods to noninvasively treat this disease. It has been previously shown that low-intensity ultrasound stimulation of pancreatic β-cells in mice can elicit insulin secretion as a potential treatment for this disease. This is desirable as therapeutic ultrasound has the ability to induce bioeffects while selectively focusing deep within tissues, allowing for modulation of hormone secretion in the pancreas to mitigate insufficient levels of insulin. METHODS:was administered 5 minutes continuously, that is, 100% duty cycle, to donor pancreatic human islets, followed by 1 hour incubation and RT-qPCR to assess the effect of ultrasound stimulation on gene expression. The genes were insulin (INS), glucagon (Glu), amylin (Amy), and binding immunoglobulin protein (BiP). Nine donor pancreatic human islets were used to assess insulin and glucagon secretion, while eight samples were used for amylin and BiP. Fold change (FC) was calculated to analyze the effect of ultrasound stimulation on the gene expression of the donor islet cells. High-glucose and thapsigargin-treated islets were utilized as positive controls. Cell viability testing was done using a Trypan Blue Exclusion Test. RESULTS:Ultrasound stimulation did not cause a statistically significant upregulation in any of the tested genes (INS FC = 1.15, P-value = .5692; Glu FC = 1.60, P-value = .2231; Amy FC, P-value = .2863; BiP FC = 2.68, P-value = .3907). CONCLUSIONS:The results of this study show that the proposed ultrasound treatment parameters do not appear to significantly affect gene expression of any gene tested.

BACKGROUND:The orthopaedic surgery residency match is becoming increasingly more competitive with a disproportionate number of applicants to positions. As the residency application process has become more competitive, applicants have resorted to applying broadly to improve their chance of a successful match. Preference signaling was implemented for orthopaedic surgery for the 2022-2023 match cycle which allowed applicants to "signal" 30 programs of their choosing. METHODS:The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of preference signaling on orthopaedic surgery applicant experiences and outcomes in the 2023 residency application cycle and match. An anonymous electronically based survey study developed using Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) was send to 895 applicants to a single orthopedic residency program. 148 applicants filled out some portion of the survey for a 16.5% response rate. RESULTS:51% of applicants applied to 61-100 programs. Applicants received more interview offers from programs they signaled compared to programs they did not signal. 50% of applicants responded that the number of allotted signals was "just right", with more applicants responding that the number of signals allotted was "too many" rather than "too few". 62% of applicants agreed that signaling increased his/her chances of receiving an interview offer at a signaled program, 66% were satisfied with the results of the match, and 50% thought signaling had a positive impact on the application process. CONCLUSION:.

BACKGROUND:Amantadine is used in the post-acute care setting to improve cognitive function after a traumatic brain injury. Its utility in the acute postinjury period is unknown. In this pilot study, we sought to examine the effect of amantadine on short-term cognitive disability among patients with a severe traumatic brain injury and hypothesized that patients receiving amantadine would have a greater improvement in disability throughout their acute hospitalization. METHODS:We performed a prospective, observational study of patients ≥18 years with severe traumatic brain injury (Glasgow Coma Scale ≤8) at a level I trauma center between 2020 and 2022. Patients with penetrating trauma, death within 48 hours of admission, and no radiographic evidence of intracranial pathology were excluded. Patients were grouped according to whether they received amantadine. Our primary outcome was the change in cognitive disability, measured by the Disability Rating Scale (DRS), over the index hospitalization. RESULTS:There were 55 patients in the cohort: 41.8% (n = 23) received amantadine and 58.2% (n = 32) did not. There were higher rates of motor vehicle collisions (65.2% vs 46.9%, P = .02), diffuse axonal injury (47.8% vs 18.8%, P = .02), intracranial pressure monitor use (73.9% vs 21.9%, P = .0001), and propranolol use (73.9% vs 21.9%, P = .0001) in the amantadine. There was a larger improvement in DRS scores among patients receiving amantadine (7.8 vs 3.6, P = .001), and amantadine independently predicted improvement in DRS scores (β, 1.61; 95% confidence interval, 0.20-3.02, P = .03). Rates of discharge to traumatic brain injury rehabilitation were significantly higher in the amantadine group (73.9% vs 21.9%, P = .0002). CONCLUSION:Among patients with severe traumatic brain injury, amantadine use in the acute postinjury period may be associated with an improvement in cognitive disability and discharge to traumatic brain injury rehabilitation.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:We sought to determine if there was a relationship between skin management and surgical site infections (SSIs) among patients undergoing a laparotomy for emergency general surgery (EGS). We hypothesize that skin closure technique is not associated with SSI. METHODS:We performed a retrospective review of adult patients (>18 y) who underwent an exploratory laparotomy for EGS conditions within 6 h of surgical consultation from 2015 to 2019. Patients whose fascia was not closed during the index operation were excluded. Patients were divided into groups: open skin (OS) and closed skin (CS). OS included negative pressure wound therapy or wet-to-dry gauze; CS included closure with staples or sutures. Our primary outcome was the rate of SSI. RESULTS:The cohort comprised 388 patients: 42.3% OS (n = 164) and 57.7% CS (n = 224). The OS group had greater rates of systemic inflammatory response syndrome [SIRS] (54.9% versus 27.7%, P < 0.0001), hollow viscus perforation [HVP] (71.3% versus 20.5%, P < 0.0001), and peritoneal drains (51.2% versus 17.9%, P < 0.0001). Rates of OS management increased as wound class severity increased (0% [I] versus 12.2% [II] versus 15.9% [III] versus 72% [IV], P < 0.0001). The SSI rate for the cohort was 3.6% (n = 14); there was no difference in SSI rates (2.7% versus 4.9%, P = 0.3) between the CS or OS groups. Median length of stay was longer for the OS group (10 d versus 6.5 d, P < 0.0001). Independent predictors of OS management were SIRS (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-2.93, P = 0.04), HVP (aOR 2.03, 95% CI 1.09-3.8, P = 0.03), and class III/IV wounds (aOR 8.65, 95% CI 4.43-16.89, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS:OS management occurs more often in patients with SIRS, HVP, and dirty wounds after EGS laparotomies. However, we found no difference in SSI between groups, suggesting that skin closure can be considered in contaminated or dirty wounds.

BACKGROUND:Traumatic pneumothorax (PTX) is a common occurrence in thoracic trauma patients, with a majority requiring tube thoracostomy (TT) for management. Recently, the "35-mm" rule has advocated for observation of patients with PTX less than 35 mm on chest computed tomography (CT) scan. This rule has not been examined in chest x-ray (CXR). We hypothesize that a similar size cutoff can be determined in CXR predictive of need for tube thoracostomy. METHODS:We performed a single-institution retrospective review of patients with traumatic PTX from 2018 to 2022, excluding those who underwent TT prior to CXR. Primary outcomes were size of pneumothorax on CXR and need for TT; secondary outcome was failed observation, defined as TT more than 4 hours after presentation. To determine the size cutoff on CXR to predict TT need, area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) analyses were performed and Youden's index calculated (significance at p < 0.05). Predictors of failure were calculated using logistic regression. RESULTS:There were 341 pneumothoraces in 304 patients (94.4% blunt trauma, median injury severity score 14). Of these, 82 (24.0%) had a TT placed within the first 4 hours. Fifty-five of observed patients (21.2%) failed, and these patients had a larger PTX on CXR (8.6 mm [5.0-18.0 mm] vs. 0.0 mm [0.0-2.3 mm] ( p < 0.001)). Chest x-ray PTX size correlated moderately with CT size (r = 0.31, p < 0.001) and was highly predictive of need for TT insertion (AUC 0.75, p < 0.0001), with an optimal size cutoff predicting TT need of 38 mm. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Chest x-ray imaging size was predictive of need for TT, with an optimal size cutoff on CXR of 38 mm, approaching the "35-mm rule." In addition to size, failed observation was predicted by presenting lactic acidosis and need for supplemental oxygen. This demonstrates this cutoff should be considered for prospective study in CXR. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.

BACKGROUND:The Surgical Apgar Score (SAS) is a 10-point validated score comprised of three intraoperative variables (blood loss, lowest heart rate, and lowest mean arterial pressure). Lower scores are worse and predict major postoperative complications. The SAS has not been applied in emergency general surgery (EGS) but may help guide postoperative disposition. We hypothesize that SAS can predict complications in EGS patients undergoing a laparotomy. METHODS:We performed a retrospective review of adult patients at a single, quaternary care center who underwent an exploratory laparotomy for EGS conditions within 6 hours of surgical consultation from 2015 to 2019. Patients were grouped by whether they experienced a postoperative complication (systemic, surgical, and/or death). Multivariable regression was performed to predict complications, accounting for SAS and other statistically significant variables between groups. Using this model, predicted probabilities of a complication were generated for each SAS. RESULTS:The cohort comprised 482 patients: 32.8% (n = 158) experienced a complication, while 67.2% (n = 324) did not. Patients with complications were older, frailer, more often male, had worse SAS (6 vs. 7, p < 0.0001) and American Society of Anesthesiologists scores, and higher rates of perforated hollow viscus ( p = 0.0003) and open abdomens ( p < 0.0001). On multivariable regression, an increasing SAS independently predicted less complications (adjusted odds ratio, 0.85; 95% confidence interval, 0.75-0.96; p = 0.009). An SAS ≤4 was associated with a 49.2% predicted chance of complications, greater rates of septic shock (9.7% vs. 3%, p = 0.01), respiratory failure (20.5% vs. 10.8%, p = 0.02), and death (24.1% vs. 7.5%, p < 0.0001). An SAS ≤ 4 did not correlate with surgical complications ( p = 0.1). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The SAS accurately predicts postoperative complications in EGS patients undergoing urgent laparotomy, with an SAS ≤ 4 identifying patients at risk for septic shock, respiratory failure, and mortality. This tool can aid in rapidly determining postoperative disposition and resource allocation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.

BACKGROUND:Uptake of lung cancer screening (LCS) has been slow with less than 20% of eligible people who currently or formerly smoked reported to have undergone a screening CT. OBJECTIVE:To determine individual-, health system-, and neighborhood-level factors associated with LCS uptake after a provider order for screening. DESIGN AND SUBJECTS/METHODS:We conducted an observational cohort study of screening-eligible patients within the Population-based Research to Optimize the Screening Process (PROSPR)-Lung Consortium who received a radiology referral/order for a baseline low-dose screening CT (LDCT) from a healthcare provider between January 1, 2015, and June 30, 2019. MAIN MEASURES/METHODS:The primary outcome is screening uptake, defined as LCS-LDCT completion within 90 days of the screening order date. KEY RESULTS/RESULTS:During the study period, 18,294 patients received their first order for LCS-LDCT. Orders more than doubled from the beginning to the end of the study period. Overall, 60% of patients completed screening after receiving their first LCS-LDCT order. Across health systems, uptake varied from 41 to 87%. In both univariate and multivariable analyses, older age, male sex, former smoking status, COPD, and receiving care in a centralized LCS program were positively associated with completing LCS-LDCT. Unknown insurance status, other or unknown race, and lower neighborhood socioeconomic status, as measured by the Yost Index, were negatively associated with screening uptake. CONCLUSIONS:Overall, 40% of patients referred for LCS did not complete a LDCT within 90 days, highlighting a substantial gap in the lung screening care pathway, particularly in decentralized screening programs.