Quality improvement program decreases mortality after cardiac surgery

ObjectiveThis study investigated the effects of a quality improvement program and goal-oriented, multidisciplinary protocols on mortality after cardiac surgery.MethodsPatients were divided into two groups: those undergoing surgery (coronary artery bypass grafting, isolated valve surgery, or coronary artery bypass grafting and valve surgery) after establishment of the multidisciplinary quality improvement program (January 2005–December 2006, n = 922) and those undergoing surgery before institution of the program (January 2002–December 2003, n = 1289). Logistic regression and propensity score analysis were used to adjust for imbalances in patients' preoperative characteristics.ResultsOperative mortality was lower in the quality improvement group (2.6% vs 5.0%, P < .01). Unadjusted odds ratio was 0.5 (95% confidence interval 0.3–0.8, P < .01); propensity score–adjusted odds ratio was 0.6 (95% confidence interval 0.4–0.99, P = .04). In multivariable analysis, diabetes (P < .01), chronic renal insufficiency (P = .05), previous cardiovascular operation (P = .04), congestive heart failure (P < .01), unstable angina (P < .01), age older than 75 years (P < .01), prolonged pump time (P < .01), and prolonged operation (P = .05) emerged as independent predictors of higher mortality after cardiac surgery, whereas quality improvement program (P < .01) and male sex (P = .03) were associated with lower mortality. Mortality decline was less pronounced in patients with than without diabetes (P = .04).ConclusionApplication of goal-directed, multidisciplinary protocols and a quality improvement program were associated with lower mortality after cardiac surgery. This decline was less prominent in patients with diabetes, and focused quality improvement protocols may be required for this subset of patients

Goodbye Hartmann trial: a prospective, international, multicenter, observational study on the current use of a surgical procedure developed a century ago

Background: Literature suggests colonic resection and primary anastomosis (RPA) instead of Hartmann's procedure (HP) for the treatment of left-sided colonic emergencies. We aim to evaluate the surgical options globally used to treat patients with acute left-sided colonic emergencies and the factors that leading to the choice of treatment, comparing HP and RPA. Methods: This is a prospective, international, multicenter, observational study registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. A total 1215 patients with left-sided colonic emergencies who required surgery were included from 204 centers during the period of March 1, 2020, to May 31, 2020. with a 1-year follow-up. Results: 564 patients (43.1%) were females. The mean age was 65.9 ± 15.6&nbsp;years. HP was performed in 697 (57.3%) patients and RPA in 384 (31.6%) cases. Complicated acute diverticulitis was the most common cause of left-sided colonic emergencies (40.2%), followed by colorectal malignancy (36.6%). Severe complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3b) were higher in the HP group (P &lt; 0.001). 30-day mortality was higher in HP patients (13.7%), especially in case of bowel perforation and diffused peritonitis. 1-year follow-up showed no differences on ostomy reversal rate between HP and RPA. (P = 0.127). A backward likelihood logistic regression model showed that RPA was preferred in younger patients, having low ASA score (≤ 3), in case of large bowel obstruction, absence of colonic ischemia, longer time from admission to surgery, operating early at the day working hours, by a surgeon who performed more than 50 colorectal resections. Conclusions: After 100&nbsp;years since the first Hartmann's procedure, HP remains the most common treatment for left-sided colorectal emergencies. Treatment's choice depends on patient characteristics, the time of surgery and the experience of the surgeon. RPA should be considered as the gold standard for surgery, with HP being an exception

Piperacillin-Tazobactam Compared With Cefoxitin as Antimicrobial Prophylaxis for Pancreatoduodenectomy: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Despite improvements in perioperative mortality, the incidence of postoperative surgical site infection (SSI) remains high after pancreatoduodenectomy. The effect of broad-spectrum antimicrobial surgical prophylaxis in reducing SSI is poorly understood. OBJECTIVE: To define the effect of broad-spectrum perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis on postoperative SSI incidence compared with standard care antibiotics. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Pragmatic, open-label, multicenter, randomized phase 3 clinical trial at 26 hospitals across the US and Canada. Participants were enrolled between November 2017 and August 2021, with follow-up through December 2021. Adults undergoing open pancreatoduodenectomy for any indication were eligible. Individuals were excluded if they had allergies to study medications, active infections, chronic steroid use, significant kidney dysfunction, or were pregnant or breastfeeding. Participants were block randomized in a 1:1 ratio and stratified by the presence of a preoperative biliary stent. Participants, investigators, and statisticians analyzing trial data were unblinded to treatment assignment. INTERVENTION: The intervention group received piperacillin-tazobactam (3.375 or 4 g intravenously) as perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis, while the control group received cefoxitin (2 g intravenously; standard care). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was development of postoperative SSI within 30 days. Secondary end points included 30-day mortality, development of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula, and sepsis. All data were collected as part of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. RESULTS: The trial was terminated at an interim analysis on the basis of a predefined stopping rule. Of 778 participants (378 in the piperacillin-tazobactam group [median age, 66.8 y; 233 {61.6%} men] and 400 in the cefoxitin group [median age, 68.0 y; 223 {55.8%} men]), the percentage with SSI at 30 days was lower in the perioperative piperacillin-tazobactam vs cefoxitin group (19.8% vs 32.8%; absolute difference, -13.0% [95% CI, -19.1% to -6.9%]; P \u3c .001). Participants treated with piperacillin-tazobactam, vs cefoxitin, had lower rates of postoperative sepsis (4.2% vs 7.5%; difference, -3.3% [95% CI, -6.6% to 0.0%]; P = .02) and clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (12.7% vs 19.0%; difference, -6.3% [95% CI, -11.4% to -1.2%]; P = .03). Mortality rates at 30 days were 1.3% (5/378) among participants treated with piperacillin-tazobactam and 2.5% (10/400) among those receiving cefoxitin (difference, -1.2% [95% CI, -3.1% to 0.7%]; P = .32). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In participants undergoing open pancreatoduodenectomy, use of piperacillin-tazobactam as perioperative prophylaxis reduced postoperative SSI, pancreatic fistula, and multiple downstream sequelae of SSI. The findings support the use of piperacillin-tazobactam as standard care for open pancreatoduodenectomy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03269994

Goodbye Hartmann trial: a prospective, international, multicenter, observational study on the current use of a surgical procedure developed a century ago /

Background: Literature suggests colonic resection and primary anastomosis (RPA) instead of Hartmann’s procedure (HP) for the treatment of left-sided colonic emergencies. We aim to evaluate the surgical options globally used to treat patients with acute left-sided colonic emergencies and the factors that leading to the choice of treatment, comparing HP and RPA. Methods: This is a prospective, international, multicenter, observational study registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. A total 1215 patients with left-sided colonic emergencies who required surgery were included from 204 centers during the period of March 1, 2020, to May 31, 2020. with a 1-year follow-up. Results: 564 patients (43.1%) were females. The mean age was 65.9 ± 15.6 years. HP was performed in 697 (57.3%) patients and RPA in 384 (31.6%) cases. Complicated acute diverticulitis was the most common cause of left-sided colonic emergencies (40.2%), followed by colorectal malignancy (36.6%). Severe complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3b) were higher in the HP group (P < 0.001). 30-day mortality was higher in HP patients (13.7%), especially in case of bowel perforation and diffused peritonitis. 1-year follow-up showed no differences on ostomy reversal rate between HP and RPA. (P = 0.127). A backward likelihood logistic regression model showed that RPA was preferred in younger patients, having low ASA score (≤ 3), in case of large bowel obstruction, absence of colonic ischemia, longer time from admission to surgery, operating early at the day working hours, by a surgeon who performed more than 50 colorectal resections. Conclusions: After 100 years since the first Hartmann’s procedure, HP remains the most common treatment for left-sided colorectal emergencies. Treatment’s choice depends on patient characteristics, the time of surgery and the experience of the surgeon. RPA should be considered as the gold standard for surgery, with HP being an exception