Protocol driven management of suspected common duct stones: A Southwestern Surgical Congress multi-centered trial.

BACKGROUND: Several options exist for the diagnosis and management of suspected common duct stones. We hypothesized that a protocol-directed approach would shorten length of stay in this patient population. METHODS: Patients from four participating institutions with a peak bilirubin <4 mg/dL underwent surgery as the initial procedure, whereas patients with a bilirubin ≥4 mg/dL underwent endoscopy. The primary endpoint was length of stay. Analysis involved chi square and Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test with significance at p < 0.05. RESULTS: 214 patients were managed under the protocol during six-month study period. 111 patients (52%) required endoscopy and surgery. Length of stay and the number of MRCPs performed pre-operatively significantly decreased following protocol implementation (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: "Surgery first" approach in patients with bilirubin <4 ml/dL resulted in low morbidity and mortality, reduced MRCP, and length of stay.

Computed tomography to operating room in less than 3 hours minimizes complications from appendicitis.

BACKGROUND: The aim of our study is to select patients with nonperforated appendicitis verified by computed tomography (CT) scan and to determine if there is a temporal component to perforation. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of patients with CT scan evidence of nonperforated appendicitis from 2007 to 2012. RESULTS: 411 patients, aged 39.7 ± 16.25 years (47.5% male) were included in the study. 330 patients (80.3%) were nonperforated at surgery. Analysis of 3-hour intervals from CT scan to operating room (OR) revealed an absolute reduction in the rate of perforation from 27% at the 6- to 9-hour interval, to 17% and 10% at the 3- to 6-hour and 0- to 3-hour intervals, respectively, (P < .04). All organ space infections occurred in patients who were delayed to the OR greater than 3 hours. Mean length of hospitalization was .93 days and 2.81 days, respectively, in nonperforated and perforated appendicitis patients (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Delays to the OR were associated with increased risk of perforation. Patients with uncomplicated appendicitis had shorter hospitalization and fewer postoperative wound infections.

Patient Satisfaction After Outpatient Appendectomy.

BACKGROUND: Outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy has been shown to be safe, with low morbidity and readmission rates, but whether outpatient appendectomy produces poorer patient satisfaction has been questioned. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Preoperatively, patients with uncomplicated appendicitis were counselled regarding outpatient management and instructed on postoperative care, follow-up appointments, and contact information. Telephone surveys of patients who underwent an outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated appendicitis from January through October 2013 were performed. A Likert scale from very dissatisfied (1) to very satisfied (5) was employed. Patients were also queried that if, given the opportunity, they would have chosen to stay in the hospital. RESULTS: Qualified patients included 41 men and 31 women with an average age of 36 years (range 19-79 years). Fifty-four (75%) were reached for satisfaction surveys. Patients were dismissed from the recovery room following a previously published protocol for outpatient management from 6 a.m. to noon (24%), noon to 6 p.m. (17%), 6 p.m. to midnight (22%), and midnight to 6 a.m. (37%). The average satisfaction score for outpatient management was 4.6 (range 2-5). Six patients (11%) stated that they would have preferred hospitalization, if given the opportunity. The reasons included inadequate pain control (2 patients); lack of home assistance (2 patients); nausea and vomiting (1 patient); and prolonged drowsiness (1 patient). Four of these patients violated the outpatient management guidelines (pain controlled on oral analgesics and adequate home assistance). CONCLUSION: Outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy can be performed with high patient satisfaction, but adherence to protocol guidelines for outpatient management is important to properly select patients for outpatient management and to maximize patient satisfaction.

Outpatient Laparoscopic Appendectomy: Is It Time to End the Discussion?

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic appendectomy is typically associated with inpatient hospitalization averaging between 1 and 2 days. In July 2010, a prospective protocol for outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy was adopted at our institution. Patients were dismissed from the post-anesthesia recovery room or day surgery if they met certain predefined criteria. Patients admitted to a hospital room as either full admission or observation status were considered failures of outpatient management. STUDY DESIGN: An IRB-approved, retrospective review of a prospective database was performed on all patients having laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated appendicitis from July 2010 through December 2014. Study exclusions included age younger than 17 years, pregnancy, interval appendectomy, and gangrenous or perforated appendicitis. Patient demographics, success with outpatient management, morbidity, and readmissions were analyzed. RESULTS: Five hundred and sixty-three patients underwent laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated appendicitis during this time frame. There were 281 men and 282 women, with a mean age of 35.5 years. Four hundred and eighty-four patients (86%) were managed as outpatients. Seventy-nine patients were admitted for pre-existing conditions (32 patients), postoperative morbidity (10 patients), physician discretion (6 patients), or lack of transportation or support at home (31 patients). Thirty-eight patients (6.7%) experienced postoperative morbidity. Seven patients (1.2%) were readmitted after outpatient management for transient fever, nausea/vomiting, migraine headache, urinary tract infection, partial small bowel obstruction, and deep venous thrombosis. There were no mortalities or reoperations. Including the readmissions, overall success with outpatient management was 85%. CONCLUSIONS: Outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy can be performed with a high rate of success, low morbidity, and low readmission rate. This protocol has withstood the test of time. Widespread adoption has the potential for substantial health care savings.

Concurrent chart review provides more accurate documentation and increased calculated case mix index, severity of illness, and risk of mortality.

BACKGROUND: Case mix index (CMI) is calculated to determine the relative value assigned to a Diagnosis-Related Group. Accurate documentation of patient complications and comorbidities and major complications and comorbidities changes CMI and can affect hospital reimbursement and future pay for performance metrics. STUDY DESIGN: Starting in 2010, a physician panel concurrently reviewed the documentation of the trauma/acute care surgeons. Clarifications of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services term-specific documentation were made by the panel, and the surgeon could incorporate or decline the clinical queries. A retrospective review of trauma/acute care inpatients was performed. The mean severity of illness, risk of mortality, and CMI from 2009 were compared with the 3 subsequent years. Mean length of stay and mean Injury Severity Score by year were listed as measures of patient acuity. Statistical analysis was performed using ANOVA and t-test, with p < 0.05 for significance. RESULTS: Each year demonstrated an increase in severity of illness, risk of mortality, and CMI compared with baseline values (p < 0.05). Length of stay was not significantly different, reflecting similar patient populations throughout the study. Injury Severity Score decreased in 2011 and 2012 compared with 2009, reflecting a lower level of injury in the trauma population. CONCLUSIONS: A concurrent documentation review significantly increases severity of illness, risk of mortality, and CMI scores in a trauma/acute care service compared with pre-program levels. These changes reflect more accurate key word documentation rather than a change in patient acuity. The increased scores might impact hospital reimbursement and more accurately stratify outcomes measures for care providers.

Should clopidogrel be discontinued before laparoscopic cholecystectomy?

BACKGROUND: The perioperative management of clopidogrel remains an area of controversy. METHODS: An institutional review board-approved retrospective review of patients undergoing a laparoscopic cholecystectomy while on clopidogrel from 2008 to 2012 was performed. These patients were then matched with a nonclopidogrel cohort based on American Society of Anesthesiologists score and emergent or elective surgery. Intraoperative estimated blood loss, operative time, length of stay, and 30-day morbidity were compared. RESULTS: Thirty-six clopidogrel and 36 control patient records were analyzed. There were no significant differences in age, body mass index, sex, or incidence of coronary artery disease, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, and congestive heart failure. Estimated blood loss averaged 50 mL in the clopidogrel group and 47 mL in the control group (P = nonsignificant). There were no significant differences in operative time, 30-day morbidity, or length of stay between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy performed on patients maintained on clopidogrel during the perioperative period did not produce an increase in blood loss, operative time, 30-day morbidity, or length of stay.

Can laparoscopic cholecystectomy be performed with a positive margin at medicaid reimbursement rates?

BACKGROUND: The Affordable Care Act provides health care coverage to an increasing segment of the population at Medicaid reimbursement rates. Health care systems currently offset lower Medicaid reimbursement through higher payers. The ability to "cost shift" will be diminished as the Medicaid population increases. STUDY DESIGN: A financial cost and revenue analysis of outpatient laparoscopic cholecystectomy at our institution was performed. Cost was defined as actual expense to the health care institution. Fixed and variable costs were identified to calculate a break-even point. Time spent from check in to dismissal was based on historic averages. When actual costs could not be pinpointed, estimates from industry experts were used. Reimbursement included surgeon and anesthesia professional fees and facility fees. RESULTS: A total of 501 laparoscopic cholecystectomies were performed at the main operating room facility in 2012. Annual fixed costs were $252,637. Variable costs were $1,860/case. Personnel and single-use equipment made the largest contribution to variable costs. Reimbursement for professional and facility fees totaled $2,444/case. The break-even point occurred at 454 cases. Based on historic volume, the break-even point for the calendar year would occur on November 27. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis demonstrates that laparoscopic cholecystectomy can be performed with a positive margin at Medicaid reimbursement rates with sufficient volume. The minimal margin, however, could substantially limit the ability of lower-volume hospitals to provide these services and negatively impact access to care in this patient population.

Outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy should be the standard of care for uncomplicated appendicitis.

BACKGROUND: In 2012, a protocol for routine outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated appendicitis was published reflecting high success, low morbidity, and significant cost savings. Despite this, national data reflect that the majority of laparoscopic appendectomies are performed with overnight admission. This study updates our experience with outpatient appendectomy since our initial report, confirming the efficacy of this approach. METHODS: In July 2010, a prospective protocol for outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy was adopted at our institution. Patients were dismissed from the postanesthesia recovery room or day surgery if they met predefined criteria for dismissal. Patients admitted to a hospital room as either full admission or observation status were considered failures of outpatient management. An institutional review board-approved retrospective review of patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated appendicitis from July 2010 through December 2012 was performed to analyze success of outpatient management, postoperative morbidity and mortality, as well as readmission rates. RESULTS: Three hundred forty-five patients underwent laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated appendicitis during this time frame. There were 166 men and 179 women, with a mean age of 35 years. Three hundred five patients were managed as outpatients, with a success rate of 88%. Forty patients (12%) were admitted for preexisting comorbidities (15 patients), postoperative morbidity (6 patients), or lack of transportation or home support (19 patients). Twenty-three patients (6.6%) experienced postoperative morbidity. There were no mortalities. Four patients (1%) were readmitted for transient fever, nausea/vomiting, partial small bowel obstruction, and deep venous thrombosis. CONCLUSION: Outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy can be performed with a high rate of success, a low morbidity, and a low readmission rate. This study reaffirms our original pilot study and should serve as the basis for a change in the standard of care for appendicitis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, level V.

Are commercial negative pressure systems worth the cost in open abdomen management?

BACKGROUND: A commercial negative pressure product is compared with the Barker technique (sterile x-ray cassette cover, lap pads, adhesive drape with negative pressure) for temporary abdominal closure in open abdomen management. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a retrospective review of 37 open abdomen patients who had temporary abdominal closure with a commercial negative pressure device (ABThera, KCI) from 2010 to 2011. These patients were compared with the most recent 37 patients having open abdomen management using the Barker technique from 2009 to 2010. Patient demographics, body mass index (BMI), preoperative albumin, indication for open abdomen management, number of operations, use of sequential closure, and success with closure were analyzed. Patients were compared using chi square, t-test, and logistic regression analysis with significance of p < 0.05. RESULTS: Mean age and BMI were significantly higher in the ABThera patients. No statistically significant differences were seen in male:female ratio, indication for open abdomen management, preoperative albumin, number of operations, and use of sequential closure. In 33 patients (89%) ultimate midline fascial closure was achieved with the ABThera vs in 22 patients (59%) using the Barker technique (p < 0.05). Logistic regression analysis was performed on the 3 significant variables identified on bivariate analysis. Only the type of temporary abdominal closure proved significant, with an odds ratio of 7.97 favoring ABThera (95% CI 1.98 to 32.00). CONCLUSIONS: A commercially available negative pressure device for temporary abdominal closure had significantly greater success with ultimate closure after open abdomen management compared with the Barker technique. The added cost of the device is offset by improved patient results and savings from successful closure.

The number of operations negatively influences fascia closure in open abdomen management.

BACKGROUND: Open abdomen management applies to a variety of traumatic and inflammatory abdominal conditions. One complication of this technique is inability to achieve primary closure of the abdominal wall. The aim of this study was to determine if the number of abdominal reexplorations influences the success of abdominal closure. METHODS: A review of patients undergoing open abdomen management from January 2007 to 2010 was performed. The indication for surgery, number of operations, and success at primary fascia closure were tabulated. A synthetic or biologic mesh bridge was considered failure to achieve closure. RESULTS: One hundred four patients underwent open abdomen management for trauma, postoperative hemorrhage, infected pancreatic necrosis, and perforated viscus or anastomotic leak. Reoperations ranged from 2 to 25, with a mean of 4.5 reoperations. Primary fascia closure was achieved in 82 patients (79%). Fascia closure was successful in 93% of patients with ≤4 reoperations, whereas closure occurred in 32% of patients having ≥5 reoperations (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Greater than 4 reoperations is significantly associated with failure of the primary fascia closure. Efforts to obtain closure should be undertaken within 4 reoperations.

The Fort Hood Massacre: Lessons learned from a high profile mass casualty.

BACKGROUND: On November 5, 2009, an army psychiatrist at Fort Hood in Killeen, TX, allegedly opened fire at the largest US military base in the world, killing 13 and wounding 32. METHODS: Data from debriefing sessions, news media, and area hospitals were reviewed. RESULTS: Ten patients were initially transferred to the regional Level I trauma center. The remainder of the shooting victims were triaged to two other local regional hospitals. National news networks broadcasted the Level I trauma center's referral phone line which resulted in more than 1,300 calls. The resulting difficulties in communication led to the transfer of two victims (one critical) to a regional hospital without a trauma designation. CONCLUSIONS: Triage at the scene was compromised by a lack of a secure environment, leading to undertriage of several patients. Overload of routine communication pathways compounded the problem, suggesting redundancy is crucial. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic study, level V.

A prospective treatment protocol for outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis.

BACKGROUND: Many laparoscopic procedures are currently performed on an outpatient basis. Laparoscopic appendectomy, however, continues to require postoperative hospitalization at most institutions. A treatment protocol for outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy was developed to determine if this could be successfully performed without increasing postoperative complications. We hypothesized that adopting an outpatient protocol for laparoscopic appendectomy will significantly increase the rate of outpatient management for uncomplicated appendicitis, without an increase in morbidity or mortality. STUDY DESIGN: We initiated a prospective outpatient protocol for laparoscopic appendectomy in July 2010 at our institution. All patients having laparoscopic appendectomy from July 2010 to March 2011 were included as protocol patients and were retrospectively reviewed. A separate group of patients having laparoscopic appendectomy from January to September 2009 were analyzed as historical controls. These 2 groups were compared for demographics, preoperative comorbidities, outpatient management, and postoperative morbidity by chi-square analysis, with a 0.95 confidence level for statistical significance. RESULTS: A total of 116 protocol patients were compared with 119 historical control patients. There were no significant differences in patient demographics, preoperative comorbidities, and pathologic findings between protocol patients and historical controls. Ninety-nine protocol patients (85.3%) had procedures as outpatients compared with 42 historical control patients (35.3%; p < 0.05). Postoperative morbidity occurred in 6 protocol patients (5.2%) and 10 historical controls (8.4%; p = NS). There were no readmissions or mortalities in the protocol group. CONCLUSIONS: An outpatient protocol for laparoscopic appendectomy significantly increased the rate of outpatient management with no increase in morbidity or mortality. This practice has now become standard of care at our institution.

Outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis.

Laparoscopic appendectomy is the widely accepted treatment for acute appendicitis. This approach offers the potential of less pain, shorter hospital stay, and quicker return to activities. Traditionally, patients are hospitalized for 24 hours after laparoscopic appendectomy. This practice can be questioned due to the good results of other outpatient laparoscopic surgery. A retrospective review of 119 patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated acute appendicitis was undertaken from January through September 2009; outpatient and inpatient laparoscopic appendectomies were compared. Patients were selected for outpatient management based upon physician discretion and their clinical course in operation and recovery rooms. Forty-two patients were dismissed on the day of surgery and 77 were admitted for 1 to 5 days postoperatively. No significant differences in age, gender, and preoperative comorbidities between outpatient and inpatient groups were found. Postoperative complications occurred in 2.4 per cent of outpatients and 11.7 per cent of inpatients (P = 0.16). Complications included superficial wound infections, urinary retention, urinary tract infection, intra-abdominal bleeding, pneumonia, and infected hematoma. Based upon this study, outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy can be performed safely in selected patients. This study provides the background for the present prospective protocol for routine outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy at our institution.