Impact of Liposomal Bupivacaine on Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol for Lung Resection.

BACKGROUND: There is limited data showing the benefit of liposomal bupivacaine as part of an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol in reducing opioid use in minimally invasive lobectomies. METHODS: A retrospective observational study compared three cohorts of patients undergoing lobectomies between January 2015 and December 2021. The control group neither received liposomal bupivacaine intraoperatively nor underwent an ERAS protocol. The liposomal bupivacaine cohort only received a nerve block, whereas the ERAS cohort received a nerve block intraoperatively and underwent an ERAS protocol. Primary outcome was post-operative opioid consumption. RESULTS: There were 433 patients in this study (n=87 for controls, n=138 for liposomal bupivacaine alone, and n=208 for ERAS/liposomal bupivacaine). There was a statistically significant difference in the amount of opioids used between the control (43 OME) and liposomal bupivacaine alone cohort (30.5 OME) (p<.001); between control vs. ERAS/liposomal bupivacaine cohort (17 OME) (p<.001); and between liposomal bupivacaine alone and ERAS/liposomal bupivacaine cohorts (p<.001). Hospital stay was not statistically different between the two groups of interest (3 days); however, hospital stay differed from the control (4 days). 30-day readmission was not significantly different between the 3 groups (p=.43). CONCLUSIONS: Liposomal bupivacaine alone as part of a larger ERAS protocol significantly reduced opioid use and hospitalization duration; however, the reduction in opioid use was much greater with incorporation of liposomal bupivacaine into an ERAS protocol rather than in isolation. Prospective studies are needed to determine reproducibility and applicability of liposomal bupivacaine for opioid use reduction in other US hospital systems.

Pancreaticoduodenal Artery Aneurysm Complicated by Median Arcuate Ligament Syndrome.

PURPOSE: To highlight median arcuate ligament syndrome as a potential cause for celiac artery stenosis and pancreaticoduodenal artery aneurysm, and describe treatment options in this setting. CASE REPORT: A 63-year-old male presented with a pancreaticoduodenal artery aneurysm and concomitant celiac artery stenosis that was treated with celiac artery stenting and aneurysm coiling. He subsequently developed stent fracture and celiac artery occlusion secondary to previously unrecognized median arcuate ligament syndrome causing reperfusion of the aneurysm. This was treated with open median arcuate ligament release and aorta to common hepatic artery bypass with good clinical result and stable 20-month surveillance imaging. CONCLUSION: It is critical to recognize median arcuate ligament syndrome as a cause of celiac artery stenosis in the setting of pancreaticoduodenal artery aneurysm given the high risk of failure of endovascular stenting. Open aorto-hepatic artery bypass and endovascular aneurysm coiling should be the preferred approach in these patients.

Impact of a High Observation Trauma Protocol on Patients with Isolated Traumatic Brain Injury.

BACKGROUND: Nationally, the volume of geriatric falls with intracranial hemorrhage is increasing. Our institution began observing patients with intracranial hemorrhage, Glasgow Coma Scale of 14 or greater, and no midline shift or intraventricular hemorrhage with hourly neurologic examinations outside of the ICU in a high observation trauma (HOT) protocol. We first excluded patients on anticoagulants or antiplatelets (HOT I), then included antiplatelets and warfarin (HOT II), and finally, included direct oral anticoagulants (HOT III). Our hypothesis is that HOT protocol safely reduces ICU use and creates cost savings in this patient population. STUDY DESIGN: Our institutional trauma registry was retrospectively queried for all patients on HOT protocol. Patients were stratified based on date of admission (HOT I [2008-2014], HOT II [2015-2018], and HOT III [2019-2021]), and were compared for demographics, anticoagulant use, injury characteristics, lengths of stay, incidence of neurointervention, and mortality. RESULTS: During the study period, 2,343 patients were admitted: 939 stratified to HOT I, 794 to HOT II, and 610 to HOT III. Of these patients, 331 (35%), 554 (70%), and 495 (81%) were admitted to the floor under HOT protocol, respectively. HOT protocol patients required neurointervention in 3.0%, 0.5%, and 0.4% of cases in HOT I, II, and III, respectively. Mortality among HOT protocol patients was found to be 0.6% in HOT I, 0.9% in HOT II, and 0.2% in the HOT III cohort (p = 0.33). CONCLUSIONS: Throughout the study period ICU use decreased without an increase in neurosurgical intervention or mortality, indicating the efficacy of the HOT selection criteria in identifying appropriate candidates for stepdown admission and HOT protocol.

Endovascular therapy for Stanford B aortic dissection for patients with Marfan Syndrome: systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The role of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in patients with Marfan Syndrome with Stanford type B aortic dissection (TBAD) remains under debate. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched through December 2021 to identify studies that investigated outcomes in MFS patients with TBAD who underwent TEVAR. Data regarding patient characteristics, perioperative and late outcomes were extracted. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Twelve studies were identified including 120 patients. The mean age was 40.2 years (95% confidence interval [CI], 36.8-43.6). 40.4% (95% CI: 10.8-70.0) of cases were performed emergently. 76.2% (95% CI: 64.6-87.8) of patients had a history of previous aortic surgery. In-hospital mortality was 3.7% (95% CI: 0.6-6.8). Primary endoleak occurred in 15.2% (95% CI: 8.6-21.8), which was comprised of type 1 (9.3% [95% CI: 3.9-14.6]) and type 2 (7.1% [95% CI: 2.3-12.0]) endoleaks. During mean follow-up period of 37.4 months (95% CI: 24.1-50.7), secondary endoleak was reported in 14.1% (95% CI: 7.1-21.1), which was comprised of type 1 (7.4% [95% CI: 2.4-12.5]) and type 2 (4.0% [95% CI: 0.3-7.7]) endoleak. Repeat TEVAR was performed in 15.5% (95% CI: 9.3-21.8) and open aortic surgery in 18.6% (95% CI: 9.6-27.5). Long-term mortality was 11.9% (95% CI: 6.5-17.3). CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis showed that TEVAR for TBAD in patients with MFS has low perioperative morbidity and mortality but was associated with a high rate of late reintervention. This treatment option should be limited to emergent cases and to patients deemed unsuitable for open repair. Lifelong follow-up with imaging is mandatory in this population.

Utilization of the Revised American College of Rheumatology (rACR) Scoring to Avoid Unnecessary Temporal Artery Biopsies-A Case Series.

Introduction: The American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria, and more recently the revised ACR criteria (rACR), are a scoring system developed to aid in the diagnosis of giant cell arteritis (GCA). Our aim was to investigate the value of the non-biopsy criteria of the original ACR criteria and rACR criteria to predict GCA, and investigate the utilization of such scores to avoid biopsy when a very high or very low likelihood of a positive temporal artery biopsy TAB was predicted. Method: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 59 patients undergoing TAB from 2013 to 2017 in Beaumont Hospital, a tertiary referral centre in Dublin, Ireland. Demographic data, biochemical results, presenting features, and histology results were collected and collated. Results: Data were analysed from 53 patients and ACR scores were compiled. Seventeen scored < 3 and thirty-six scored 3−5. All 11 positive biopsies were in the 3−5 score range. Forty-five patients were analysed with rACR scores. Eight were excluded due to not meeting the inclusion criteria. Of the 11 positive biopsies, 2 were in the 3−4 score range, and 9 were in the ≥5 score range. In the ACR method, 36% of all biopsies scored as low-risk pre-biopsy. In the rACR method, 84.4% of all biopsies scored in the low- and intermediate-risk group pre-biopsy and 15.6% of all biopsies scored in the high-risk group pre-biopsy. Conclusions: This study illustrates the potential value of the rACR scoring system as a useful tool to categorize patients according to risk with a view to avoiding unnecessary TAB. The data suggest that a TAB has a helpful role in low- and intermediate-risk groups but is of minimal benefit in the high-risk group.