Is Esophagectomy for Benign Conditions Benign?

BACKGROUND: Outcomes data on esophagectomy performed for benign conditions is scarce. Using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database, we sought to analyze outcomes of esophagectomy performed for benign conditions. METHODS: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was queried for all esophagectomies performed from 2005 to 2015. Outcomes for benign conditions were analyzed and compared with outcomes for malignant conditions. RESULTS: Esophagectomy was performed in 7,477 patients during the study period. Of those, 6,762 underwent esophagectomy for malignant conditions and 715 for benign conditions. For patients with benign conditions, reconstruction was performed using gastric conduit in 631 and colon/intestine in 84. The anastomosis was intrathoracic in 420 and cervical in 295. Benign esophagectomies were more likely to be emergent (10.1% vs 0.4%, p \u3c 0.001). In addition, these patients had a longer hospital length of stay (17.2 days vs 14.5 days, p \u3c 0.001) and higher occurrence of Clavien-Dindo grade IV complications (25% vs 20%, p = 0.003). Mortality was similar at 4%. In patients with benign conditions, reconstruction with colon/intestine had higher occurrence of Clavien-Dindo Grade IV complications (37% vs 23%, p = 0.006), surgical wound infections (33% vs 16%, p \u3c 0.001), and death (10% vs 4%, p = 0.017) compared with gastric reconstruction. Site of anastomosis did not affect outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Benign esophagectomies are associated with significant morbidity. Although the site of the anastomosis does not alter outcomes, use of colon/intestine conduit should be pursued with caution

Predictors of one-year follow-up patient survey completion after bariatric surgery

Background: The impact of bariatric surgery on comorbidity remission and quality of life requires long term evaluation of outcomes. Most MBSAQIP centers struggle to achieve lifelong, in-person, follow-up for bariatric surgery patients. An alternative strategy utilizes patient completed surveys. Identification of patient and site specific factors associated with survey completion may provide valuable information for practices seeking to maximize follow-up rates This study aims to identify factors that are associated with patients\u27 completion rates of previously validated one-year follow-up surveys after bariatric surgery. Methods: Using clinical registry data from the Michigan Bariatric Surgery Collaborative, we included all patients who underwent bariatric surgery at 38 unique hospitals from January 2012 thru October 2015. Procedure type, demographic data, co-morbidities, and 30-day postoperative complications were evaluated for significant predictors of follow-up. Hospital specific rates of survey completion were compared. Results: A total of 24,781 patients underwent bariatric surgery during the study period and 11,125 (44.9%) completed one-year follow-up surveys. Compared to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, the follow-up rate was lower after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (OR= 0.49; CI = 0.41-0.58) but higher after sleeve gastrectomy (OR= 1.22; CI= 0.82-1.80). Better follow-up was noted with annual household incomes 4 $10,000 (OR= 1.54; CI= 1.39-1.70), college graduates (OR= 1.38; CI= 1.28-1.49), older age (OR= 1.02; CI= 1.02-1.03) and those who were married or living with a significant other (OR = 1.3; CI= 1.23-1.37). Serious postoperative complications, private insurance, Black race, and tobacco use were associated with lower follow-up rates (all p\u3c 0.0001). During the study period, average follow-up rates increased from 28% in 2012 to 52% in 2015 (Figure 1). Follow-up rates at the hospital level ranged from 0% to 81% per year. Six hospitals (16%) had persistently high follow-up rates (≥ 42% per year) while rates increased 20% to 40% in 10 hospitals (26%) and 4 40% in 9 hospitals (24%). Conclusion: Procedure type, socioeconomic factors and serious complications have significant associations with completion of one-year follow-up surveys after bariatric surgery. Certain hospitals had improved rates of follow-up indicating that hospitals pecific protocols may play an important role in obtaining followup data. Elucidation of these systematic follow-up protocols may allow optimization of long term data acquisition

Cryopreserved allograft in the management of native and prosthetic aortic infections 3.

INTRODUCTION: Management of patients with mycotic aortic aneurysms and prosthetic aortic graft infections is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. We describe a single-center experience with the use of cryopreserved human allografts for in situ reconstruction of infected aortas and aortic grafts. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent implantation of cryopreserved aortic allograft at our tertiary care center from June 2010 to December 2016. Demographic data, preoperative work-up, procedural details, and outcomes were collected. RESULTS: Fifteen patients underwent cryopreserved allograft aortic reconstruction. Nine patients had aortic infection associated with a prosthetic graft, and 6 had primary aortic infections. Of these patients, 1 had involvement of the descending thoracic aorta, 6 of the paravisceral aorta, and 8 of the infrarenal abdominal aorta. Mean follow-up was 18.3 months. One (6.7 %) patient died within 30 days (multisystem organ failure). Postoperative complications included graft thrombosis in 1 (6.7%), reoperation for bleeding in 1 (6.7%), MI in 1 (6.7%), acute kidney injury requiring hemo-dialysis in 3 (20%), paraplegia in 1 (6.7 %), and stroke in 1 (6.7%). During follow-up, 2 patients developed graft stenosis requiring angioplasty, and 1 patient had graft rupture requiring stent placement. At 1 month, 6 months, 1 year, 3 years, and 6 years, estimated survivals were 93%, 78%, 67%, 67%, and 67%, respectively. No patient suffered limb loss. CONCLUSIONS: The management of mycotic aneurysms and infected aortic grafts continues to be challenging. Cryopreserved graft with in situ reconstruction provides a viable alternative for ex-tra-anatomic bypass in the setting of infection

Clinical utility of carotid duplex ultrasound prior to cardiac surgery

OBJECTIVE: Clinical utility and cost-effectiveness of carotid duplex examination prior to cardiac surgery have been questioned by the multidisciplinary committee creating the 2012 Appropriate Use Criteria for Peripheral Vascular Laboratory Testing. We report the clinical outcomes and postoperative neurologic symptoms in patients who underwent carotid duplex ultrasound prior to open heart surgery at a tertiary institution. METHODS: Using the combined databases from our clinical vascular laboratory and the Society of Thoracic Surgery, a retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent carotid duplex ultrasound within 13 months prior to open heart surgery from March 2005 to March 2013 was performed. The outcomes between those who underwent carotid duplex scanning (group A) and those who did not (group B) were compared. RESULTS: Among 3233 patients in the cohort who underwent cardiac surgery, 515 (15.9%) patients underwent a carotid duplex ultrasound preoperatively, and 2718 patients did not (84.1%). Among the patients who underwent carotid screening vs no screening, there was no statistically significant difference in the risk factors of cerebrovascular disease (10.9% vs 12.7%; P = .26), prior stroke (8.2% vs 7.2%; P = .41), and prior transient ischemic attack (2.9% vs 3.3%; P = .24). For those undergoing isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), 306 (17.8%) of 1723 patients underwent preoperative carotid duplex ultrasound. Among patients who had carotid screening prior to CABG, the incidence of carotid disease was low: 249 (81.4%) had minimal or mild stenosis ( CONCLUSIONS: In this study, the correlation between preoperative duplex-documented high-grade carotid stenosis and postoperative stroke was low. Prudent use of preoperative carotid duplex ultrasound should be based on the presence of cerebrovascular symptoms and the type of open heart surgery

Cryopreserved Allograft in the Management of Native and Prosthetic Aortic Infections

BACKGROUND: The management of patients with aortic native and prosthetic infections is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. We describe a single-center experience with the use of cryopreserved allografts for the treatment of aortic infections, and compare outcomes with rifampin-soaked grafts and extra-anatomic bypass. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent an operative intervention for aortic infection at our tertiary care center from August 2007 to August 2017. Demographic data, preoperative work-up, procedural details, and outcomes were collected for each treatment modality. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients had aortic revascularization for aortic infection. Seventeen patients had cryopreserved allografts, 10 had rifampin-soaked grafts, and 5 had extra-anatomic bypass. Sixteen patients (50%) had native aortic infection and 16 patients (50%) had prosthetic aortic infection. Eighteen had involvement of the infrarenal abdominal aorta, 12 of the paravisceral aorta, and 2 of the descending thoracic aorta. Early mortality was 5.9% (1/17) for the cryopreserved group, 10% (1/10) for the rifampin-soaked group, and 40% (2/5) for the extra-anatomic bypass group. Early graft-related complications occurred in 1 patient (cryopreserved group). Mean follow-up was 34.8 months. Late death occurred in 4 patients with cryopreserved allografts, 2 with rifampin-soaked grafts and none with extra-anatomic bypass. Late graft-related complications occurred in 4 patients (cryopreserved group). Only 1 patient had recurrence of aortic infection (cryopreserved group) and 2 patients had limb loss (1 from the cryopreserved group and 1 from the rifampin-soaked group). At 1 month, 6 months, 1 year, and 3 years, estimated survival for patients with cryopreserved allografts was 94%, 82%, 75%, and 64%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The management of aortic infections is challenging. In patients who do not need immediate intervention, in situ aortic reconstruction with cryopreserved allografts is a viable treatment modality with relatively low morbidity and mortality