Outcome analysis of the surgical team in open repair of intact abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery.

OBJECTIVES: To analyze how the experience of the surgical team went to impact the outcomes after open repair (OR) of intact abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA). METHODS: This is a single-center, observational cohort study with retrospective analysis of all open repair for intact abdominal aortic aneurysm performed between January 1st, 2010 and December 31st, 2022. The primary outcome was survival at 30 days and in follow-up, and a composite outcome of mortality and major complication. The secondary outcome was freedom from aorta-related reintervention. All outcomes were stratified according to the experience of the operating team (surgeons and anesthesiology). RESULTS: We analyzed 103 (7.2%) patients: 97 (94.2%) males and 6 (5.8%) females. The mean age was 76 ± 8 years (range, 55-93). The best possible team composition was present in 52 (50.5%) interventions. The follow-up index was 0.82 ± 0.18 (range, 0.6-1.0). Mean follow-up duration was 59 ± 43 months (range, 0-158). We observed no differences between teams in major complications (best, 17.3% vs mixed, 21.6%; OR: 0.4, P = 0.622), 30 days mortality (best, 0% vs mixed, 5.9%; OR: 7.6, P = 0.118) and composite outcome (best, 11.5% vs mixed, 17.6%; OR: 0.8, P = 0.416). Cox regression analysis identified the best possible team as a protective factor against the need for reintervention (HR: 0.2; 95% CI: 0.06-0.88, P = 0.032). CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, OR of AAA yielded satisfactory results in terms of safety and efficacy independently of the team's experience. A more experienced team may protect against aorta-related reintervention.

Tracheostomy Timing and Outcome in Severe COVID-19: The WeanTrach Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: Tracheostomy can be performed safely in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, little is known about the optimal timing, effects on outcome, and complications. METHODS: A multicenter, retrospective, observational study. This study included 153 tracheostomized COVID-19 patients from 11 intensive care units (ICUs). The primary endpoint was the median time to tracheostomy in critically ill COVID-19 patients. Secondary endpoints were survival rate, length of ICU stay, and post-tracheostomy complications, stratified by tracheostomy timing (early versus late) and technique (surgical versus percutaneous). RESULTS: The median time to tracheostomy was 15 (1-64) days. There was no significant difference in survival between critically ill COVID-19 patients who received tracheostomy before versus after day 15, nor between surgical and percutaneous techniques. ICU length of stay was shorter with early compared to late tracheostomy (p < 0.001) and percutaneous compared to surgical tracheostomy (p = 0.050). The rate of lower respiratory tract infections was higher with surgical versus percutaneous technique (p = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Among critically ill patients with COVID-19, neither early nor percutaneous tracheostomy improved outcomes, but did shorten ICU stay. Infectious complications were less frequent with percutaneous than surgical tracheostomy.