RESUMO
Background: The burden of firearm injury (FI) extends beyond hospitalization; however, literature focuses mostly on short-term physical outcomes. This study aimed to assess changes in patient-reported outcomes following firearm-related trauma. We hypothesized long-term patient-reported socioeconomic, mental health, and quality-of-life (QoL) outcomes are worse post-FI compared to pre-FI.Methods: This was a retrospective study where a phone survey was conducted with FI survivors admitted between January 2017 and August 2022 at a level 1 trauma center. Survey questions assessed demographics, socioeconomics, and mental and physical health pre-FI vs ≥ 6 months post-FI; the McNemar test was used for comparisons. The PROMIS-29 + 2v2.1 NIH validated instrument was used to assess long-term QoL. Standardized NIH PROMIS T-scores were calculated using the HealthMeasures Scoring Service.Results: Of 204 eligible FI survivors, 71 were successfully contacted and 38 surveyed. Respondents were male (86.8%), Black (76%), and aged 18-29 (55.3%), and 68.4% had high school level education. Post-FI, patients were more likely to be unemployed (55.2% vs 13.2%, P < .001) and report increased mental health needs (84.2% vs 21%, P < .001) compared to pre-FI. Most (73.7%) also reported lasting physical disability. Similarly, the PROMIS instrument demonstrated largely worse health-related QoL scores post-FI, particularly high anxiety/fear (T-score 60.2, SE 3.1, CI 54.6-66.3, Table 2), pain resulting in life interference (T-score 60.0, SE 2.3, CI 55.7-63.9), and worse physical function (T-score 42.5, SE 3.0, CI 38.2-46.9).Conclusions: Firearm injury survivors had more unemployment and worse mental health post-FI compared to pre-FI. Firearm injury survivors also reported significantly worse health-related QoL metrics including pain, anxiety, and physical function 6 months following their trauma. These long-term patient-reported outcomes are a framework to build future outpatient resources.Level of Evidence: IV.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Leak following surgical repair of traumatic duodenal injuries results in prolonged hospitalization and oftentimes nil per os(NPO) treatment. Parenteral nutrition(PN) has known morbidity; however, duodenal leak(DL) patients often have complex injuries and hospital courses resulting in barriers to enteral nutrition(EN). We hypothesized EN alone would be associated with 1)shorter duration until leak closure and 2)less infectious complications and shorter hospital length of stay(HLOS) compared to PN. METHODS: This was a post-hoc analysis of a retrospective, multicenter study from 35 Level-1 trauma centers, including patients >14 years-old who underwent surgery for duodenal injuries(1/2010-12/2020) and endured post-operative DL. The study compared nutrition strategies: EN vs PN vs EN + PN using Chi-Square and Kruskal-Wallis tests; if significance was found pairwise comparison or Dunn's test were performed. RESULTS: There were 113 patients with DL: 43 EN, 22 PN, and 48 EN + PN. Patients were young(median age 28 years-old) males(83.2%) with penetrating injuries(81.4%). There was no difference in injury severity or critical illness among the groups, however there were more pancreatic injuries among PN groups. EN patients had less days NPO compared to both PN groups(12 days[IQR23] vs 40[54] vs 33[32],p = <0.001). Time until leak closure was less in EN patients when comparing the three groups(7 days[IQR14.5] vs 15[20.5] vs 25.5[55.8],p = 0.008). EN patients had less intra-abdominal abscesses, bacteremia, and days with drains than the PN groups(all p < 0.05). HLOS was shorter among EN patients vs both PN groups(27 days[24] vs 44[62] vs 45[31],p = 0.001). When controlling for predictors of leak, regression analysis demonstrated EN was associated with shorter HLOS(ß -24.9, 95%CI -39.0 to -10.7,p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: EN was associated with a shorter duration until leak closure, less infectious complications, and shorter length of stay. Contrary to some conventional thought, PN was not associated with decreased time until leak closure. We therefore suggest EN should be the preferred choice of nutrition in patients with duodenal leaks whenever feasible. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.
RESUMO
Patients with macromastia and/or moderate-severe ptosis who desire mastectomy are typically offered skin sparing mastectomies. Recent technical advances have broadened the inclusion criteria to allow for nipple sparing mastectomy (NSM) in this population; however, they have been limited to patients with unifocal disease. We report on the multidisciplinary approach used to offer a NSM to a patient with multicentric triple-negative breast cancer and symptomatic macromastia with severe ptosis in the setting of positive genetic testing. We discuss the combination of a staged oncoplastic approach with neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy, as well as the foundations of these approaches. We encourage further research and inclusion of patients such as ours in the criteria for NSM.
