Preoperative Splenic Artery Embolization for Massive Splenomegaly in Children: A Single Center Experience.

Introduction: Massive splenomegaly in children can complicate minimally invasive splenectomy. Splenic artery embolization (SAE) before splenectomy has been shown to decrease splenic volume, reduce intraoperative blood loss, and decrease conversion rates in laparoscopic surgery. Our objective was to review our recent experience with immediate preoperative SAE in massive splenomegaly for pediatric patients using both laparoscopic and robotic techniques. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed preoperative SAE outcomes in pediatric patients with massive splenomegaly undergoing minimally invasive splenectomy between January 2018 and July 2021. Results: Four patients, 3 female, ages 5-18 years, had SAE immediately before minimally invasive splenectomy. Two cases were completed robotically, one laparoscopically, and one laparoscopic case required conversion to open. SAE time ranged from 69 to 92 minutes. Time between embolization and surgical start ranged from 26 to 56 minutes, with operative times from 153 to 317 minutes. Estimated blood loss ranged from <10 to 150 mL. Mean length of stay was 3.5 days (range 2-6). Postoperative complications included one patient with ileus and another with concurrent gastritis and urinary tract infection. Splenic size comparisons were difficult to perform due to morselization of the spleen; however, excised spleen weights, measurements, and surgeon's impression suggested decreased size of the spleen after SAE. There were no transfusions, postembolization complications, or deaths. Conclusion: SAE subjectively appears to decrease splenic distension, which should allow for easier manipulation and possibly better visualization of splenic hilar vessels during minimally invasive surgery. Immediate preoperative SAE is safe and feasible and should be considered in pediatric patients with massive splenomegaly.

Elimination of Postoperative Narcotics in Infant Robotic Pyeloplasty Using Caudal Anesthesia and a Non-Narcotic Pain Pathway.

Introduction: Research suggests that narcotic pain medications are dramatically overprescribed. We hypothesize that narcotics are unnecessary for postoperative pain control in most infants undergoing robotic pyeloplasty. In this series, we report our experience combining caudal blocks with a non-narcotic postoperative pathway as a means of eliminating postoperative narcotics after infant robotic pyeloplasty. Methods: We reviewed 24 consecutive patients who underwent robotic pyeloplasty by a single surgeon treated with an end-procedure caudal block followed by a non-narcotic postoperative pain pathway treated between May 2017 and May 2021. The standardized postoperative pathway consisted of an end-procedure caudal block followed by alternating intravenous acetaminophen and ketorolac. We reviewed demographics, outcomes, and unscheduled health care encounters within 30 postoperative days. Results: Sixty-three percent (15/24) of patients were male and average age was 12.1 months (range 4-34 months). Fifty-eight percent (9/15) underwent surgery on the left, and 16.7% (4/24) of patients received a single postoperative dose of narcotics in the postanesthesia care unit. No patient required narcotic prescriptions at discharge or anytime thereafter. The average length of stay was 1.13 days. There was no pain-related unscheduled visits or phone calls after discharge. Conclusions: This series shows that a non-narcotic standardized pain management strategy is a viable option for infants undergoing robotic pyeloplasty. Postprocedure caudal block is a good addition to a non-narcotic pathway. In the future, we intend to expand these findings to other pediatric urologic procedures in the hope of eliminating unnecessary narcotic use.

Ischemic ST-Segment Depression Maximal in V1-V4 (Versus V5-V6) of Any Amplitude Is Specific for Occlusion Myocardial Infarction (Versus Nonocclusive Ischemia).

Background Occlusion myocardial infarctions (OMIs) of the posterolateral walls are commonly missed by ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) criteria, with >50% of patients with circumflex occlusion not receiving emergent reperfusion and experiencing increased mortality. ST-segment depression maximal in leads V1-V4 (STDmaxV1-4) has been suggested as an indicator of posterior OMI. Methods and Results We retrospectively reviewed a high-risk population with acute coronary syndrome. OMI was defined from prior studies as a culprit lesion with TIMI (Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction) 0 to 2 flow or TIMI 3 flow plus peak troponin T >1.0 ng/mL or troponin I >10 ng/mL. STEMI was defined by the Fourth Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction. ECGs were interpreted blinded to outcomes. Among 808 patients, there were 265 OMIs, 108 (41%) meeting STEMI criteria. A total of 118 (15%) patients had "suspected ischemic" STDmaxV1-4, of whom 106 (90%) had an acute culprit lesion, 99 (84%) had OMI, and 95 (81%) underwent percutaneous coronary intervention. Suspected ischemic STDmaxV1-4 had 97% specificity and 37% sensitivity for OMI. Of the 99 OMIs detected by STDmaxV1-4, 34% had <1 mm ST-segment depression, and only 47 (47%) had accompanying STEMI criteria, of which 17 (36%) were identified a median 1.00 hour earlier by STDmaxV1-4 than STEMI criteria. Despite similar infarct size, TIMI flow, and coronary interventions, patients with STEMI(-) OMI and STDmaxV1-4 were less likely than STEMI(+) patients to undergo catheterization within 90 minutes (46% versus 68%; P=0.028). Conclusions Among patients with high-risk acute coronary syndrome, the specificity of ischemic STDmaxV1-4 was 97% for OMI and 96% for OMI requiring emergent percutaneous coronary intervention. STEMI criteria missed half of OMIs detected by STDmaxV1-4. Ischemic STDmaxV1-V4 in acute coronary syndrome should be considered OMI until proven otherwise.

Accuracy of OMI ECG findings versus STEMI criteria for diagnosis of acute coronary occlusion myocardial infarction.

OBJECTIVE: In the STEMI paradigm of Acute Myocardial Infarction (AMI), many NSTEMI patients have unrecognized acute coronary occlusion MI (OMI), may not receive emergent reperfusion, and have higher mortality than NSTEMI patients without occlusion. We have proposed a new OMI vs. Non-Occlusion MI (NOMI) paradigm shift. We sought to compare the diagnostic accuracy of OMI ECG findings vs. formal STEMI criteria for the diagnosis of OMI. We hypothesized that blinded interpretation for predefined OMI ECG findings would be more accurate than STEMI criteria for the diagnosis of OMI. METHODS: We performed a retrospective case-control study of patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome. The primary definition of OMI was either 1) acute TIMI 0-2 flow culprit or 2) TIMI 3 flow culprit with peak troponin T ≥ 1.0 ng/mL or I ≥ 10.0 ng/mL. RESULTS: 808 patients were included, of whom 49% had AMI (33% OMI; 16% NOMI). Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of STEMI criteria vs Interpreter 1 using OMI ECG findings among 808 patients were 41% vs 86%, 94% vs 91%, and 77% vs 89%, and for Interpreter 2 among 250 patients were 36% vs 80%, 91% vs 92%, and 76% vs 89%. STEMI(-) OMI patients had similar infarct size and mortality as STEMI(+) OMI patients, but greater delays to angiography. CONCLUSIONS: Blinded interpretation using predefined OMI ECG findings was superior to STEMI criteria for the ECG diagnosis of Occlusion MI. These data support further investigation into the OMI vs. NOMI paradigm and suggest that STEMI(-) OMI patients could be identified rapidly and noninvasively for emergent reperfusion using more accurate ECG interpretation.