SELF-EXPANDING FOAM VS PRE-PERITONEAL PACKING FOR EXSANGUINATING PELVIC HEMORRHAGE.

BACKGROUND: Mortality for pelvic fracture patients presenting with hemorrhagic shock ranges from 21-57%. The objective of this study was to develop a lethal and clinically-relevant pelvic hemorrhage animal model with and without bony fracture for evaluating therapeutic interventions. ResQFoam is a self-expanding foam that has previously been described to significantly decrease mortality in large-animal models of abdominal exsanguination. We hypothesized that administration of ResQFoam into the pre-peritoneal space could decrease mortality in exsanguinating pelvic hemorrhage. METHODS: Two pelvic hemorrhage models were developed using non-coagulopathic swine. Pelvic hemorrhage model #1: bilateral, closed-cavity, major vascular retro-peritoneal hemorrhage without bony pelvic fracture. After injury, animals received no treatment (control, n = 10), underwent pre-peritoneal packing using laparotomy pads (n = 11), or received ResQFoam (n = 10) injected into the pre-peritoneal space. Pelvic hemorrhage model #2: unilateral, closed-cavity, retro-peritoneal hemorrhage injury (with intra-peritoneal communication) combined with complex pelvic fracture. After injury, animals received resuscitation (control, n = 12), resuscitation with pre-peritoneal packing (n = 10) or with ResQFoam injection (n = 10) into the pre-peritoneal space. RESULTS: For model #1, only ResQFoam provided a significant survival benefit. The median survival times were 50 and 67 minutes for pre-peritoneal packing and ResQFoam, compared to 6 minutes with controls (p = 0.002 and 0.057, respectively). Foam treatment facilitated hemodynamic stabilization and resulted in significantly less hemorrhage (21.5 ± 5.3 g/kg) relative to controls (31.6 ± 5.0 g/kg, p < 0.001) and pre-peritoneal packing (32.7 ± 5.4 g/kg, p < 0.001). For model #2, both ResQFoam and pre-peritoneal packing resulted in significant survival benefit compared to controls. The median survival times were 119 and 124 minutes for the pre-peritoneal packing and ResQFoam groups, compared to 4 minutes with controls (p = 0.004 and 0.013, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Percutaneous injection of ResQFoam into the pre-peritoneal space improved survival relative to controls, and similar survival benefit was achieved compared to standard pre-peritoneal pelvic packing. The technology has potential to augment the armamentarium of tools to treat pelvic hemorrhage.Study Type: This is a Basic Science paper and, therefore, does not require level of evidence.

The effect of anticoagulation on outcomes after liver and spleen injuries: A research consortium of New England centers for trauma (ReCONECT) study.

BACKGROUND: Liver and spleen injuries are the most commonly injured solid organs, the effects of anticoagulation on these injuries has not yet been well characterized. STUDY DESIGN: Multicenter retrospective study. RESULT: During the 4-year study period, 1254 patients, 64 (5%) on anticoagulation (AC), were admitted with liver and/or splenic injury. 58% of patients had a splenic injury, 53% had a liver injury and 11% had both. Patients on AC were older than non-AC patients (mean age 60.9 vs. 38.6 years, p < 0.001). The most common AC drug was warfarin (70%) with atrial fibrillation (47%) the most common indication for AC. There was no significant difference in AAST injury grade between AC and non-AC patients (median grade 2), but AC patients required a blood product transfusion more commonly (58 vs 40%, p = 0.007) particularly FFP (4 vs 19%, p < 0.01). Among those transfused, non-AC patients required slightly more PRBC (5.7 vs 3.8 units, p = 0.018) but similar amount of FFP (3.2 vs 3.1 units, p = 0.92). The two groups had no significant difference in the rates of initial non-operative management (50% (AC) vs 56% (non-AC), p = 0.3)) or failure of non-operative management (7 vs 4%, p = 0.16). AC patients were more likely to be managed initially with angiography (36 vs 20%, p = 0.001) while non-AC patients with surgery (24% vs 13%, p = 0.04). There was no significant difference in LOS and mortality. CONCLUSION: The use of anticoagulation did not result in a difference in outcomes among patients with spleen and/or liver injuries.

Improved Mortality in Necrotizing Pancreatitis with a Multidisciplinary Minimally Invasive Step-Up Approach: Comparison with a Modern Open Necrosectomy Cohort.

BACKGROUND: A minimally invasive step-up (MIS) approach has been associated with reduced morbidity compared with open surgical necrosectomy (OSN) for treatment of necrotizing pancreatitis. We sought to determine whether transitioning from an OSN to an MIS-based approach would result in reduced mortality. MIS interventions included percutaneous drainage, endoscopic transgastric necrosectomy, video-assisted retroperitoneal debridement, sinus tract endoscopic necrosectomy, or a combination of techniques, with selective use of OSN. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted an observational cohort study with retrospective comparison at a single tertiary referral center (2006 through 2019). Eighty-eight patients were treated with OSN and 91 were treated with an MIS-based approach. Baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes were compared between groups. The primary end point was 90-day mortality. RESULTS: There was no difference in baseline characteristics. Ninety-day mortality was 2% with MIS compared with 10% with OSN (p = 0.03). One-year mortality was 3% with MIS compared with 15% with OSN (p = 0.012). The rate of organ failure was lower with MIS (30% vs 45%; p = 0.029), but there was a higher bleeding rate (19% vs 9%; p = 0.064). In the MIS group, 9% were treated with percutaneous drainage, 32% with endoscopic transgastric necrosectomy, 8% with video-assisted retroperitoneal debridement, 15% with sinus tract endoscopic necrosectomy, and 27% with a combination of techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Adoption of a multidisciplinary MIS-based approach to necrotizing pancreatitis resulted in a 5-fold decrease in mortality compared with OSN.

Description and Impact of a Comprehensive Multispecialty Multidisciplinary Intervention to Decrease Opioid Prescribing in Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Diversion of excess prescription opioids contributes to the opioid epidemic. We sought to describe and study the impact of a comprehensive departmental initiative to decrease opioid prescribing in surgery. METHODS: A multispecialty multidisciplinary initiative was designed to change the culture of postoperative opioid prescribing, including: consensus-built opioid guidelines for 42 procedures from 11 specialties, provider-focused posters displayed in all surgical units, patient opioid/pain brochures setting expectations, and educational seminars to residents, advanced practice providers, residents and nurses. Pre- (April 2016-March 2017) versu post-initiative (April 2017-May 2018) analyses of opioid prescribing at discharge [median oral morphine equivalent (OME)] were performed at the specialty, prescriber, patient, and procedure levels. Refill prescriptions within 3 months were also studied. RESULTS: A total of 23,298 patients were included (11,983 pre-; 11,315 post-initiative). Post-initiative, the median OME significantly decreased for 10 specialties (all P values < 0.001), the percentage of patients discharged without opioids increased from 35.7% to 52.5% (P < 0.001), and there was no change in opioids refills (0.07% vs 0.08%, P = 0.9). Similar significant decreases in OME were observed when the analyses were performed at the provider and individual procedure levels. Patient-level analyses showed that the preinitiative race/sex disparities in opioid-prescribing disappeared post-initiative. CONCLUSION: We describe a comprehensive multi-specialty intervention that successfully reduced prescribed opioids without increase in refills and decreased sex/race prescription disparities.