A comparison of outcomes including bile duct injury of subtotal cholecystectomy versus open total cholecystectomy as bailout procedures for severe cholecystitis: A multicenter real-world study.

BACKGROUND: Dense inflammation obscuring the hepatocystic anatomy can hinder the ability to perform a safe standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy in severe cholecystitis, requiring use of a bailout procedure. We compared clinical outcomes of laparoscopic and open subtotal cholecystectomy against the traditional standard of open total cholecystectomy to identify the optimal bailout strategy for the difficult gallbladder. METHODS: A multicenter, multinational retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent bailout procedures for severe cholecystitis. Procedures were compared using one-way analysis of variance/Kruskal-Wallis tests and χ2 tests with multiple pairwise comparisons, maintaining a family-wise error rate at 0.05. Multiple multivariate linear/logistical regression models were created. RESULTS: In 11 centers, 727 bailout procedures were conducted: 317 laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomies, 172 open subtotal cholecystectomies, and 238 open cholecystectomies. Baseline characteristics were similar among subgroups. Bile leak was common in laparoscopic and open fenestrating subtotal cholecystectomies, with increased intraoperative drain placements and postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography(P < .05). In contrast, intraoperative bleeding (odds ratio = 3.71 [1.9, 7.22]), surgical site infection (odds ratio = 2.41 [1.09, 5.3]), intensive care unit admission (odds ratio = 2.65 [1.51, 4.63]), and length of stay (Δ = 2 days, P < .001) were higher in open procedures. Reoperation rates were higher for open reconstituting subtotal cholecystectomies (odds ratio = 3.43 [1.03, 11.44]) than other subtypes. The overall rate of bile duct injury was 1.1% and was not statistically different between groups. Laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomy had a bile duct injury rate of 0.63%. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomy is a feasible surgical bailout procedure in cases of severe cholecystitis where standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy may carry undue risk of bile duct injury. Open cholecystectomy remains a reasonable option.

Screening Performance of S100 Calcium-Binding Protein B, Glial Fibrillary Acidic Protein, and Ubiquitin C-Terminal Hydrolase L1 for Intracranial Injury Within Six Hours of Injury and Beyond.

The Scandinavian NeuroTrauma Committee (SNC) guidelines recommend S100 calcium-binding protein B (S100B) as a screening tool for early detection of Traumatic brain injury (TBI) in patients presenting with an initial Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) of 14-15. The objective of the current study was to compare S100B's diagnostic performance within the recommended 6-h window after injury, compared with glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) and UCH-L1. The secondary outcome of interest was the ability of these biomarkers in detecting traumatic intracranial pathology beyond the 6-h mark. The Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) core database (2014-2017) was queried for data pertaining to all TBI patients with an initial GCS of 14-15 who had a blood sample taken within 6 h of injury in which the levels of S100B, GFAP, and UCH-L1 were measured. As a subgroup analysis, data involving patients with blood samples taken within 6-9 h and 9-12 h were analyzed separately for diagnostic ability. The diagnostic ability of these biomarkers for detecting any intracranial injury was evaluated based on the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Each biomarker's sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were also reported at the cutoff that maximized Youden's index. A total of 531 TBI patients with GCS 14-15 on admission had a blood sample taken within 6 h, of whom 24.9% (n = 132) had radiologically confirmed intracranial injury. The AUCs of GFAP (0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.82-0.90) and UCH-L1 (0.81, 95% CI: 0.76-0.85) were statistically significantly higher than that of S100B (0.74, 95% CI: 0.69-0.79) during this time. There was no statistically significant difference in the predictive ability of S100B when sampled within 6 h, 6-9 h, and 9-12 h of injury, as the p values were >0.05 when comparing the AUCs. Overlapping AUC 95% CI suggests no benefit of a combined GFAP and UCH-L1 screening tool over GFAP during the time periods studied [0.87 (0.83-0.90) vs. 0.86 (0.82-0.90) when sampled within 6 h of injury, 0.83 (0.78-0.88) vs. 0.83 (0.78-0.89) within 6 to 9 h and 0.81 (0.73-0.88) vs. 0.79 (0.72-0.87) within 9-12 h]. Targeted analysis of the CENTER-TBI core database, with focus on the patient category for which biomarker testing is recommended by the SNC guidelines, revealed that GFAP and UCH-L1 perform superior to S100B in predicting CT-positive intracranial lesions within 6 h of injury. GFAP continued to exhibit superior predictive ability to S100B during the time periods studied. S100B displayed relatively unaltered screening performance beyond the diagnostic timeline provided by SNC guidelines. These findings suggest the need for a reevaluation of the current SNC TBI guidelines.

Mode of anesthesia is not associated with outcomes following emergency hip fracture surgery: a population-level cohort study.

Background: Hip fractures often occur in frail patients with several comorbidities. In those undergoing emergency surgery, determining the optimal anesthesia modality may be challenging, with equipoise concerning outcomes following either spinal or general anesthesia. In this study, we investigated the association between mode of anesthesia and postoperative morbidity and mortality with subgroup analyses. Methods: This is a retrospective study using all consecutive adult patients who underwent emergency hip fracture surgery in Orebro County, Sweden, between 2013 and 2017. Patients were extracted from the Swedish National Hip Fracture Registry, and their electronic medical records were reviewed. The association between the type of anesthesia and 30-day and 90-day postoperative mortality, as well as in-hospital severe complications (Clavien-Dindo classification ≥3a), was analyzed using Poisson regression models with robust SEs, while the association with 1-year mortality was analyzed using Cox proportional hazards models. All analyses were adjusted for potential confounders. Results: A total of 2437 hip fracture cases were included in the study, of whom 60% received spinal anesthesia. There was no statistically significant difference in the risk of 30-day postoperative mortality (adjusted incident rate ratio (IRR) (95% CI): 0.99 (0.72 to 1.36), p=0.952), 90-day postoperative mortality (adjusted IRR (95% CI): 0.88 (0.70 to 1.11), p=0.281), 1-year postoperative mortality (adjusted HR (95% CI): 0.98 (0.83 to 1.15), p=0.773), or in-hospital severe complications (adjusted IRR (95% CI): 1.24 (0.85 to 1.82), p=0.273), when comparing general and spinal anesthesia. Conclusions: Mode of anesthesia during emergency hip fracture surgery was not associated with an increased risk of postoperative mortality or in-hospital severe complications in the study population or any of the investigated subgroups.Level of evidence: Therapeutic/Care Management, level III.

Developing and validating a scoring system for measuring frailty in patients with hip fracture: a novel model for predicting short-term postoperative mortality.

Objectives: Frailty is common among patients with hip fracture and may, in part, contribute to the increased risk of mortality and morbidity after hip fracture surgery. This study aimed to develop a novel frailty score for patients with traumatic hip fracture that could be used to predict postoperative mortality as well as facilitate further research into the role of frailty in patients with hip fracture. Methods: The Orthopedic Hip Frailty Score (OFS) was developed using a national dataset, retrieved from the Swedish National Quality Registry for Hip Fractures, that contained all adult patients who underwent surgery for a traumatic hip fracture in Sweden between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2017. Candidate variables were selected from the Nottingham Hip Fracture Score, Sernbo Score, Charlson Comorbidity Index, 5-factor modified Frailty Index, as well as the Revised Cardiac Risk Index and ranked based on their permutation importance, with the top 5 variables being selected for the score. The OFS was then validated on a local dataset that only included patients from Orebro County, Sweden. Results: The national dataset consisted of 126,065 patients. 2365 patients were present in the local dataset. The most important variables for predicting 30-day mortality were congestive heart failure, institutionalization, non-independent functional status, an age ≥85, and a history of malignancy. In the local dataset, the OFS achieved an area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (95% CI) of 0.77 (0.74 to 0.80) and 0.76 (0.74 to 0.78) when predicting 30-day and 90-day postoperative mortality, respectively. Conclusions: The OFS is a significant predictor of short-term postoperative mortality in patients with hip fracture that outperforms, or performs on par with, all other investigated indices. Level of evidence: Level III, Prognostic and Epidemiological.

The significance of direct transportation to a trauma center on survival for severe traumatic brain injury.

INTRODUCTION: While timely specialized care can contribute to improved outcomes following traumatic brain injury (TBI), this condition remains the most common cause of post-injury death worldwide. The purpose of this study was to investigate the difference in mortality between regional trauma centers in Sweden (which provide neurosurgical services round the clock) and non-trauma centers, hypothesizing that 1-day and 30-day mortality will be lower at regional trauma centers. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used data extracted from the Swedish national trauma registry and included adults admitted with severe TBI between January 2014 and December 2018. The cohort was divided into two subgroups based on whether they were treated at a trauma center or non-trauma center. Severe TBI was defined as a head injury with an AIS score of 3 or higher. Poisson regression analyses with both univariate and multivariate models were performed to determine the difference in mortality risk [Incidence Rate Ratio (IRR)] between the subgroups. As a sensitivity analysis, the inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) method was used to adjust for the effects of confounding. RESULTS: A total of 3039 patients were included. Patients admitted to a trauma center had a lower crude 30-day mortality rate (21.7 vs. 26.4% days, p = 0.006). After adjusting for confounding variables, patients treated at regional trauma center had a 28% [adj. IRR (95% CI): 0.72 (0.55-0.94), p = 0.015] decreased risk of 1-day mortality and an 18% [adj. IRR (95% CI): 0.82 (0.69-0.98)] reduction in 30-day mortality, compared to patients treated at a non-trauma center. After adjusting for covariates in the Poisson regression analysis performed after IPTW, admission and treatment at a trauma center were associated with a 27% and 17% reduction in 1-day and 30-day mortality, respectively. CONCLUSION: For patients suffering a severe TBI, treatment at a regional trauma center confers a statistically significant 1-day and 30-day survival advantage over treatment at a non-trauma center.