Search

Current guidelines recommend that patients with choledocholithiasis undergo same-admission cholecystectomy. The compliance with this guideline is poor in elderly patients. We hypothesized that elderly patients treated with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) alone would have higher complication and readmission rates than the patients treated with cholecystectomy.The Nationwide Readmissions Database was queried for all patients aged ≥65 years with admission for choledocholithiasis January to June 2016. The patients were divided based on index treatment received: (1) no intervention; (2) ERCP alone; or (3) cholecystectomy. Multivariate analyses identified predictors of cholecystectomy during index admission and of readmissions.A total of 16,121 patients with choledocholithiasis were admitted; 38.4% underwent cholecystectomy, 37.6% endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography alone, and 24.0% no intervention. The patients not receiving a cholecystectomy were more likely to be older, female, have a higher Elixhauser score, do-not-resuscitate status, and at a teaching hospital (all P.001). Emergency readmissions for recurrent biliary disease were lowest in patients undoing a cholecystectomy (2.2% vs 9.2% endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and 12.4% no intervention, P.001), as were readmissions for complications (3.6% vs 5.5% and 7.8%, P.001). Cholecystectomy reduced rates of readmissions for recurrent disease (odds ratio 0.168, P.001), for complications (odds ratio 0.540, P.001), and death during readmission (odds ratio 0.503, P = .007); endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography alone reduced only rates of readmissions. Age was not a predictor of readmission or death.Index admission cholecystectomy is associated with a lower risk of readmission for biliary disease or complications, as well as death during readmission, in elderly patients. Age alone is not predictive of outcomes; surgical intervention should be guided by clinical condition, comorbidities, and patient preference.

Background Patients on antithrombotic medications presenting with blunt trauma are at risk for delayed intracranial hemorrhage. We hypothesized that clinically significant delayed intracranial hemorrhage is rare in patients presenting on antithrombotic medications and therefore routine, repeat head computed tomography imaging is not a cost-effective practice to monitor for delayed intracranial hemorrhage. Methods Patients presenting to our institution on antithrombotic (anticoagulant and antiplatelet) medications during a 5-y period from January 2014 through March 2019 who underwent a head computed tomography for blunt trauma were identified in our trauma registry. Patients with an initial negative head computed tomography underwent repeat imaging 6 h after their initial head computed tomography. Patient demographics, antithrombotic medication, international normalized ratio, Glasgow Coma Score, clinical change in neurologic status, and need for neurosurgical intervention were collected. Results Our institution evaluated 1,676 patients on antithrombotic therapy with blunt trauma. The initial head computed tomography was negative in 1,377 patients (82.0%). Of those with an initial negative head computed tomography, 12 patients (0.9%) developed an intracranial hemorrhage that was identified on the second head computed tomography. Delayed intracranial hemorrhage included 6 patients with intraventricular hemorrhage, 3 with subdural hematoma, 2 with subarachnoid hemorrhage, and 1 with an intraparenchymal hemorrhage. None of the patients with delayed intracranial hemorrhage developed a change in neurologic status, required an intracranial pressure monitor, or underwent neurosurgical intervention. The estimated total direct cost of the negative head computed tomography scans was $926,247. Conclusion Clinically significant delayed intracranial hemorrhage is rare in trauma patients on antithrombotic therapy, with an initial negative head computed tomography. Routine repeat head computed tomography imaging in patients with a negative scan on admission is not cost-effective.