Outcomes in patients with gunshot wounds to the brain.

Introduction:Gunshot wounds to the brain (GSWB) confer high lethality and uncertain recovery. It is unclear which patients benefit from aggressive resuscitation, and furthermore whether patients with GSWB undergoing cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) have potential for survival or organ donation. Therefore, we sought to determine the rates of survival and organ donation, as well as identify factors associated with both outcomes in patients with GSWB undergoing CPR. Methods:We performed a retrospective, multicenter study at 25 US trauma centers including dates between June 1, 2011 and December 31, 2017. Patients were included if they suffered isolated GSWB and required CPR at a referring hospital, in the field, or in the trauma resuscitation room. Patients were excluded for significant torso or extremity injuries, or if pregnant. Binomial regression models were used to determine predictors of survival/organ donation. Results:825 patients met study criteria; the majority were male (87.6%) with a mean age of 36.5 years. Most (67%) underwent CPR in the field and 2.1% (n=17) survived to discharge. Of the non-survivors, 17.5% (n=141) were considered eligible donors, with a donation rate of 58.9% (n=83) in this group. Regression models found several predictors of survival. Hormone replacement was predictive of both survival and organ donation. Conclusion:We found that GSWB requiring CPR during trauma resuscitation was associated with a 2.1% survival rate and overall organ donation rate of 10.3%. Several factors appear to be favorably associated with survival, although predictions are uncertain due to the low number of survivors in this patient population. Hormone replacement was predictive of both survival and organ donation. These results are a starting point for determining appropriate treatment algorithms for this devastating clinical condition. Level of evidence:Level II

Global wealth disparities drive adherence to COVID-safe pathways in head and neck cancer surgery

Peer reviewe

The impact of surgical delay on resectability of colorectal cancer: An international prospective cohort study

AIM: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has provided a unique opportunity to explore the impact of surgical delays on cancer resectability. This study aimed to compare resectability for colorectal cancer patients undergoing delayed versus non-delayed surgery. METHODS: This was an international prospective cohort study of consecutive colorectal cancer patients with a decision for curative surgery (January-April 2020). Surgical delay was defined as an operation taking place more than 4 weeks after treatment decision, in a patient who did not receive neoadjuvant therapy. A subgroup analysis explored the effects of delay in elective patients only. The impact of longer delays was explored in a sensitivity analysis. The primary outcome was complete resection, defined as curative resection with an R0 margin. RESULTS: Overall, 5453 patients from 304 hospitals in 47 countries were included, of whom 6.6% (358/5453) did not receive their planned operation. Of the 4304 operated patients without neoadjuvant therapy, 40.5% (1744/4304) were delayed beyond 4 weeks. Delayed patients were more likely to be older, men, more comorbid, have higher body mass index and have rectal cancer and early stage disease. Delayed patients had higher unadjusted rates of complete resection (93.7% vs. 91.9%, P = 0.032) and lower rates of emergency surgery (4.5% vs. 22.5%, P < 0.001). After adjustment, delay was not associated with a lower rate of complete resection (OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.90-1.55, P = 0.224), which was consistent in elective patients only (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.69-1.27, P = 0.672). Longer delays were not associated with poorer outcomes. CONCLUSION: One in 15 colorectal cancer patients did not receive their planned operation during the first wave of COVID-19. Surgical delay did not appear to compromise resectability, raising the hypothesis that any reduction in long-term survival attributable to delays is likely to be due to micro-metastatic disease

Elective surgery cancellations due to the COVID-19 pandemic: global predictive modelling to inform surgical recovery plans.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted routine hospital services globally. This study estimated the total number of adult elective operations that would be cancelled worldwide during the 12 weeks of peak disruption due to COVID-19. METHODS: A global expert response study was conducted to elicit projections for the proportion of elective surgery that would be cancelled or postponed during the 12 weeks of peak disruption. A Bayesian β-regression model was used to estimate 12-week cancellation rates for 190 countries. Elective surgical case-mix data, stratified by specialty and indication (surgery for cancer versus benign disease), were determined. This case mix was applied to country-level surgical volumes. The 12-week cancellation rates were then applied to these figures to calculate the total number of cancelled operations. RESULTS: The best estimate was that 28 404 603 operations would be cancelled or postponed during the peak 12 weeks of disruption due to COVID-19 (2 367 050 operations per week). Most would be operations for benign disease (90·2 per cent, 25 638 922 of 28 404 603). The overall 12-week cancellation rate would be 72·3 per cent. Globally, 81·7 per cent of operations for benign conditions (25 638 922 of 31 378 062), 37·7 per cent of cancer operations (2 324 070 of 6 162 311) and 25·4 per cent of elective caesarean sections (441 611 of 1 735 483) would be cancelled or postponed. If countries increased their normal surgical volume by 20 per cent after the pandemic, it would take a median of 45 weeks to clear the backlog of operations resulting from COVID-19 disruption. CONCLUSION: A very large number of operations will be cancelled or postponed owing to disruption caused by COVID-19. Governments should mitigate against this major burden on patients by developing recovery plans and implementing strategies to restore surgical activity safely

Mortality and pulmonary complications in patients undergoing surgery with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection: an international cohort study

Background: The impact of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) on postoperative recovery needs to be understood to inform clinical decision making during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. This study reports 30-day mortality and pulmonary complication rates in patients with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods: This international, multicentre, cohort study at 235 hospitals in 24 countries included all patients undergoing surgery who had SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed within 7 days before or 30 days after surgery. The primary outcome measure was 30-day postoperative mortality and was assessed in all enrolled patients. The main secondary outcome measure was pulmonary complications, defined as pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, or unexpected postoperative ventilation. Findings: This analysis includes 1128 patients who had surgery between Jan 1 and March 31, 2020, of whom 835 (74·0%) had emergency surgery and 280 (24·8%) had elective surgery. SARS-CoV-2 infection was confirmed preoperatively in 294 (26·1%) patients. 30-day mortality was 23·8% (268 of 1128). Pulmonary complications occurred in 577 (51·2%) of 1128 patients; 30-day mortality in these patients was 38·0% (219 of 577), accounting for 81·7% (219 of 268) of all deaths. In adjusted analyses, 30-day mortality was associated with male sex (odds ratio 1·75 [95% CI 1·28–2·40], p\textless0·0001), age 70 years or older versus younger than 70 years (2·30 [1·65–3·22], p\textless0·0001), American Society of Anesthesiologists grades 3–5 versus grades 1–2 (2·35 [1·57–3·53], p\textless0·0001), malignant versus benign or obstetric diagnosis (1·55 [1·01–2·39], p=0·046), emergency versus elective surgery (1·67 [1·06–2·63], p=0·026), and major versus minor surgery (1·52 [1·01–2·31], p=0·047). Interpretation: Postoperative pulmonary complications occur in half of patients with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection and are associated with high mortality. Thresholds for surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic should be higher than during normal practice, particularly in men aged 70 years and older. Consideration should be given for postponing non-urgent procedures and promoting non-operative treatment to delay or avoid the need for surgery. Funding: National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, NIHR Academy, Sarcoma UK, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research

Timing of surgery following SARS-CoV-2 infection: an international prospective cohort study.

Peri-operative SARS-CoV-2 infection increases postoperative mortality. The aim of this study was to determine the optimal duration of planned delay before surgery in patients who have had SARS-CoV-2 infection. This international, multicentre, prospective cohort study included patients undergoing elective or emergency surgery during October 2020. Surgical patients with pre-operative SARS-CoV-2 infection were compared with those without previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. The primary outcome measure was 30-day postoperative mortality. Logistic regression models were used to calculate adjusted 30-day mortality rates stratified by time from diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection to surgery. Among 140,231 patients (116 countries), 3127 patients (2.2%) had a pre-operative SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. Adjusted 30-day mortality in patients without SARS-CoV-2 infection was 1.5% (95%CI 1.4-1.5). In patients with a pre-operative SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, mortality was increased in patients having surgery within 0-2 weeks, 3-4 weeks and 5-6 weeks of the diagnosis (odds ratio (95%CI) 4.1 (3.3-4.8), 3.9 (2.6-5.1) and 3.6 (2.0-5.2), respectively). Surgery performed ≥ 7 weeks after SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis was associated with a similar mortality risk to baseline (odds ratio (95%CI) 1.5 (0.9-2.1)). After a ≥ 7 week delay in undertaking surgery following SARS-CoV-2 infection, patients with ongoing symptoms had a higher mortality than patients whose symptoms had resolved or who had been asymptomatic (6.0% (95%CI 3.2-8.7) vs. 2.4% (95%CI 1.4-3.4) vs. 1.3% (95%CI 0.6-2.0), respectively). Where possible, surgery should be delayed for at least 7 weeks following SARS-CoV-2 infection. Patients with ongoing symptoms ≥ 7 weeks from diagnosis may benefit from further delay

Long-term social dysfunction after trauma: What is the prevalence, risk factors, and associated outcomes?

Background: Social functioning-the ability to participate in organized or informal family, friend, or peer groups and communal activities-is intertwined with physical and emotional health. Although trauma can have a lasting effect on both the physical and emotional well-being of patients, little is known about the long-term impact of injury on social functioning. We sought to determine the prevalence of, risk factors for, and outcomes associated with long-term social dysfunction after trauma. Methods: Adults with moderate-to-severe injuries managed at three Level I trauma centers were contacted at 6 to 12 months after injury to inquire about social dysfunction. Demographics, socioeconomic parameters, and injury-related and hospital course information were also obtained. A stepwise backward logistic regression model was fitted to determine independent risk factors of social dysfunction, and multiple logistic regression models were used to determine associations between social dysfunction and post-traumatic stress disorder, functional limitations, and return to work. Results: Of the 805 screened patients, 45.2% reported social dysfunction. Patients with social dysfunction were more likely to be African American, be Medicaid beneficiaries, be of lower education, require mechanical ventilation, be discharged less often to home, have a lower mean age and had longer hospital stays. In multivariable analysis, low education, longer hospital stay, past psychiatric illness, and African-American race independently increased the risk for social dysfunction. Furthermore, patients with social dysfunction were more likely to screen positive for post-traumatic stress disorder (odds ratio: 16.25 [95% confidence interval: 9.49-27.85]), be experiencing functional limitations (odds ratio: 2.80 [95% confidence interval: 1.76-4.44]), and to not have returned to work (odds ratio: 5.65 [95% confidence interval: 3.92-8.14]). Conclusion: Lower educational attainment, long hospital stay, past pyschiatric illness, and African-American race appear to predispose to social dysfunction after trauma, which in turn is associated with a positive post-traumatic stress disorder screen, functional limitations, and delayed return to wor

Factors associated with long-term outcomes after injury: Results of the functional outcomes and recovery after trauma emergencies (FORTE) multicenter cohort study

Objective: The aim of this study was to determine factors associated with patient-reported outcomes, 6 to 12 months after moderate to severe injury. Summary of background data: Due to limitations of trauma registries, we have an incomplete understanding of factors that impact long-term patient-reported outcomes after injury. As 96% of patients survive their injuries, several entities including the National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine have called for a mechanism to routinely follow trauma patients and determine factors associated with survival, patient-reported outcomes, and reintegration into society after trauma. Methods: Over 30 months, major trauma patients [Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≥9] admitted to 3 Level-I trauma centers in Boston were assessed via telephone between 6 and 12 months after injury. Outcome measures evaluated long-term functional, physical, and mental-health outcomes. Multiple regression models were utilized to identify patient and injury factors associated with outcomes. Results: We successfully followed 1736 patients (65% of patients contacted). More than half (62%) reported current physical limitations, 37% needed help for at least 1 activity of daily living, 20% screened positive for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), all SF-12 physical health subdomain scores were significantly below US norms, and 41% of patients who were working previously were unable to return to work. Age, sex, and education were associated with long-term outcomes, while almost none of the traditional measures of injury severity were. Conclusion: The long-term sequelae of trauma are more significant than previously expected. Collection of postdischarge outcomes identified patient factors, such as female sex and low education, associated with worse recovery. This suggests that social support systems are potentially at the core of recovery rather than traditional measures of injury severit

Sex differences in long-term outcomes after traumatic injury: A mediation analysis

Background: We sought to examine the association and potential mediators between sex and long-term trauma outcomes.Methods: Moderately-to-severely injured patients admitted to 3 level-1 trauma centers were contacted between 6 and 12-months post-injury to assess for functional limitations, use of pain medications, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Multivariable adjusted regression analyses were used to compare long-term outcomes by sex. Potential mediators of the relationship between sex and outcomes was explored using mediation analysis.Results: 2607 patients were followed, of which 45% were female. Compared to male, female patients were more likely to have functional limitations (OR: 1.45; 95% CI: 1.31-1.60), take pain medications (OR: 1.17; 95% CI: 1.02-1.38), and screen positive for PTSD (OR: 1.60; 95% CI: 1.46-1.76) post-injury. Age, extremity injury, previous psychiatric illness, and pre-injury unemployment, partially mediated the effect of female sex on long-term outcomes.Conclusions: There are significant sex differences in long-term trauma outcomes, which are partially driven by patient and injury-related factors

Whole Blood Resuscitation is Safe in Pediatric Trauma Patients: A Multicenter Study.

INTRODUCTION: Whole blood (WB) resuscitation has been associated with a mortality benefit in trauma patients. Several small series report the safe use of WB in the pediatric trauma population. We performed a subgroup analysis of the pediatric patients from a large prospective multicenter trial comparing patients receiving WB or blood component therapy (BCT) during trauma resuscitation. We hypothesized that WB resuscitation would be safe compared to BCT resuscitation in pediatric trauma patients. METHODS: This study included pediatric trauma patients (0-17 y), from ten level-I trauma centers, who received any blood transfusion during initial resuscitation. Patients were included in the WB group if they received at least one unit of WB during their resuscitation, and the BCT group was composed of patients receiving traditional blood product resuscitation. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality with secondary outcomes being complications. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to assess for mortality and complications in those treated with WB vs BCT. RESULTS: Ninety patients, with both penetrating and blunt mechanisms of injury (MOI), were enrolled in the study (WB: 62 (69%), BCT: 28 (21%)). Whole blood patients were more likely to be male. There were no differences in age, MOI, shock index, or injury severity score between groups. On logistic regression, there was no difference in complications. Mortality was not different between the groups ( CONCLUSION: Our data suggest WB resuscitation is safe when compared to BCT resuscitation in the care of critically injured pediatric trauma patients