Search

Introduction The advent of the Gastrograffin® small bowel follow through (G-SBFT) has resulted in a decreased rate of operative intervention of small bowel obstructions (SBO); however, there is no data to suggest when G-SBFT should be performed. Methods We retrospectively reviewed 548 patients, admitted to 1 of 9 hospitals with a diagnosis of SBO. Patients were divided into two categories with regards to timing of G-SBFT: before (early) or after (late) 48 hours from admission. Primary outcomes were length of stay (LOS) and total cost. Secondary outcomes were operative interventions and mortality. Results Of the reviewed patients, 71% had the G-SBFT ordered early. Comparing early versus late, there were no differences in patient characteristics with regards to age, sex, or BMI. There was a significant difference between LOS (4 vs 8 days, P < 0.05) and total cost ($17,056.19 vs $33,292.00, P < 0.05). There was no difference in mortality (1.3% vs 2.6%, P = 0.239) or 30-day readmission rates (15.6% vs 15.9%, P = 0.509). Patients in the early group underwent fewer operations (20.7% vs 31.9%, P = 0.05). Discussion Patients that had a G-SBFT ordered early had a decreased LOS, total cost, and operative intervention. This suggests there is a benefit to ordering G-SBFT earlier in the hospital stay to reduce the overall disease burden, and that it is safe to do so with regards to mortality and readmissions. We therefore recommend ordering a G-SBFT within 48 hours to reduce LOS, cost, and need for an operation

Background Mechanical cardiac support (MCS) is a lifesaving therapy option in patients with heart failure and other medical disorders. However, there is an associated risk of gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB). The goal of this study was to determine GIB incidence and associated risk factors. Methods All patients at one institution from 2009 to 2018 under durable and nondurable support were retrospectively reviewed for GIB during their MCS period. Clinical records were evaluated for patient demographics, GIB characteristics, and interventions. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to compare patient groups. Results A total of 427 patients were reviewed, with 111 (25.9%) patients representing 218 episodes of GIB during our study period. The incidence rate from support initiation to GIB was 44.9% by 6 months and 60.6% in 12 months, occurring at a mean of 216.7 days. Higher rates of bleeding were found in patients with hypertension (82% vs 71.5%; P = .03) and diabetes mellitus (62.2% vs 38.3%; P < .0001), as well as pulmonary (48.7% vs 35.4%; P = .014), hepatic (21.6% vs 10.4%; P = .003), and renal disease (48.7% vs 37.3%; P = .037). Endoscopy revealed an upper GI source in 56% (n = 123) of bleeds. The most common etiology of bleeding included angiodysplasia/vascular malformation (35.7%). Therapeutic intervention was performed in 109 (50%) cases, with only 1 surgical intervention. Discussion Overall, GIB can be a significant adverse event in patients under mechanical cardiac support, so proper management of anticoagulation and early endoscopy evaluation remains of great importance.

Objectives The highest rates of surgical site infections (SSIs) are associated with colorectal operations (up to 30%). A sentinel paper showed that the use of intravenous (IV) cefazolin and metronidazole was associated with decreased rates of SSI compared with cefoxitin (6% vs 13%). We reviewed the association of SSI with prophylactic antibiotic choice. We specifically investigated the regimens of ceftriaxone and metronidazole IV, cefoxitin IV, or ertapenem. Methods We conducted a retrospective review of 532 colon surgeries between 2016 and 2018. Inclusion criteria were patients 18-89 years of age undergoing elective colon surgery who received ceftriaxone/metronidazole, cefoxitin, or ertapenem for prophylaxis. All emergent cases were excluded. This resulted in 241 elective colon cases for review. The primary endpoint was to determine if the use of ceftriaxone/metronidazole decreased the rate of SSI. Results In total, there were 241 elective colon cases with 21 SSI. We compared SSI rates in the ceftriaxone/metronidazole group to those patients receiving either cefoxitin or ertapenem (4.5% vs 12.2%; P = .035). We then compared SSI in ceftriaxone/metronidazole to SSI in cefoxitin (4.5% vs 10%; P = .13). Finally, we compared SSI in the ceftriaxone/metronidazole group to SSI in the ertapenem group (4.5% vs 14%; P = .03). Comorbidities and underlying factors were similar across all antibiotic groups. Conclusion In our experience, the use of ceftriaxone/metronidazole is associated with a decreased SSI rate. Furthermore, ceftriaxone/metronidazole use is superior to the use of ertapenem, with a trend toward superiority over cefoxitin. Based on this study, we recommend ceftriaxone/metronidazole as antibiotic prophylaxis for elective colon surgery.