Search

Background: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols have been shown to benefit recovery after several operations. However, large-scale data on the association between the level of ERAS use and perioperative complications are scarce, particularly in surgeries with increasing ERAS uptake, including total hip (THA) and knee arthroplasty (TKA). Using US national data, we examined the relationship between the number of ERAS components implemented ('level') and perioperative outcomes.Methods: After ethics approval, we included 1 540 462 elective THA/TKA procedures (2006-2016, as recorded in the Premier Healthcare claims database) in this retrospective cohort study. Main outcomes were any complication, cardiopulmonary complications, mortality, blood transfusions, and length of stay. Eight commonly used ERAS components were included. Mixed-effects models measured associations between ERAS level and outcomes, with odds ratios (OR) and confidence intervals (CI) reported.Results: ERAS use increased over time; overall, 21.6% (n=324 437), 62.7% (n=965 953), and 18.0% (n=250 072) of cases were classified as 'High', 'Medium', or 'Low' ERAS. 'High ERAS', 'Medium ERAS', and 'Low ERAS' level of use were defined as such if they received either >6, 5-6, or <5 ERAS components, respectively. After adjustment for relevant covariates, higher levels of ERAS use were associated with incremental reductions in 'any complication': 'Medium' vs 'Low' (OR=0.84; CI, 0.82-0.86) and 'High' vs 'Low' (OR=0.71; CI, 0.68-0.74). Similar patterns were found for the other study outcomes. Individual ERAS components with the strongest effect estimates were early physical therapy, avoidance of a urinary catheter, and tranexamic acid administration.Conclusions: ERAS components were used more frequently over time, and the level of utilisation was independently associated with incrementally improved complication odds and reduced length of stay during the primary admission. Possible indication bias limits the certainty of these findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: While increased surgical-provider volume has been associated with improved outcomes, research regarding volume-outcome relationships within high-volume institutions and the role of anaesthesiologists is limited. Further, the effect of anaesthesia-care-team composition remains understudied. This analysis aimed to identify the impact of anaesthesiologist and surgeon volume on adverse events after total joint arthroplasties.Methods: We retrospectively identified 40 437 patients who underwent total joint arthroplasties at a high-volume institution from 2005 to 2014. The main effects of interest were anaesthesiologist and surgeon volume and experience along with anaesthesia-care-team composition. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to evaluate three outcomes: any complication, cardiopulmonary complication, and length of stay (>5 days). Odds ratios (ORs) and 99.75% confidence intervals (CIs) were reported.Results: Across all three models, anaesthesiologist volume and experience, and anaesthesia-care-team composition were not significant predictors. Surgeon annual case volume >50 was associated with significantly reduced odds of any complication (annual case volume: 50-149; OR: 0.80; CI: 0.66-0.98) and prolonged length of stay (OR: 0.69; CI: 0.60-0.80). Surgeon experience >20 yr was associated with significantly reduced odds of prolonged length of stay (OR: 0.85; CI: 0.75-0.95).Conclusions: Anaesthesiologist volume and experience, and anaesthesia-care-team composition did not impact the odds of an adverse outcome, although a higher surgeon volume was associated with decreased odds of complications and prolonged length of stay. Further study is necessary to determine if these findings can be extrapolated to less specialised, lower volume surgical settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors reflect on the debate over the risks and benefits of same-day bilateral total knee arthroplasty (BTKA). They argue that the subject is of greater interest by physicians because the number of total joint arthroplasties in general has been rising dramatically. They suggest the need for hospitals and physicians to consider using conservative patient selection criteria to mitigate the increased risk for complication associated with same-day BTKA.

Introduction: Although obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a known risk factor for perioperative complications in various patient cohorts data is lacking for patients undergoing hysterectomies, one of the most frequently performed surgeries among women. Using national data we therefore aimed to assess the risk in this patient group.Materials and Methods: We extracted data on patients who underwent a hysterectomy between 2006 and 2014 from a large nationwide database (n = 459,508). OSA patients (identified by ICD-9 CM codes) were compared to non-OSA patients regarding perioperative outcomes: cardiac, central-nervous, gastrointestinal, genitourinary, renal, respiratory, and thromboembolic complications; as well as opioid prescription, need for blood transfusion, cost of hospitalization, length of stay and ICU admission. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) are reported.Results: Overall, 2.67% (n = 11,936) of patients were identified as having OSA. Compared to non-OSA patients, OSA was particularly associated with higher odds for renal (OR 1.98; 95% CI 1.70-2.32) and respiratory complications (OR 3.25; 95% CI 2.97-3.56), and ICU admission (OR 2.28; 95% CI 1.77-2.94). Further, while significant, OSA was associated with modestly increased cost of hospitalization (+6.24%; P < 0.0001) and length of stay (+2.58%; P < 0.0001).Conclusions: In patients undergoing hysterectomies, OSA was associated with substantially increased risk of complications and modestly increased resource utilization. Further research is needed to assess currently used perioperative care strategies for OSA patients undergoing hysterectomies, with the goal to improve outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Objective: The objective was to analyze the impact of a peripheral nerve block in addition to general anesthesia on hospital admission after surgical rotator cuff repair.Design: This was a population-based outcome study. The cost effectiveness of ambulatory rotator cuff repair relies on the discharge of patients on the day of surgery. As the impact of a peripheral nerve block in addition to general anesthesia on this outcome is unknown, we sought to elucidate this subject using population-based data.Patients and Methods: Information on patients undergoing rotator cuff surgery under general anesthesia with or without the addition of a peripheral nerve block (GN vs G) from a retrospective database provided by Premier Perspective, Inc, Charlotte, NC (http://www.premierinc.com), was analyzed. Using multilevel multivariable regressions, we evaluated the independent impact of the type of anesthesia on the outcomes hospital admission, combined major complications, and increased hospital costs.Results: We identified 27,201 patients who underwent surgical rotator cuff repair. Approximately 89% (24,240) of patients were discharged on the day of surgery, whereas 11% (2961) were admitted to the hospital. The admission rates for the GN group were 9.1% and 11.2% for the G group (P=.0001). The multivariable regression models showed that patients with the addition of a peripheral nerve block had 18% less risk of being admitted to the hospital (relative risk [RR]=0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74-0.91; P=.0003) compared with those without this intervention. Differences in risk for combined major complications (RR=1.00; 95% CI, 0.83-1.20; P=.9751) or increased hospital costs (RR=0.97; 95% CI, 0.93-1.02; P=.2538) were nonsignificant.Discussion: For patients undergoing surgical rotator cuff repair under general anesthesia, the addition of a peripheral nerve block may be associated with a reduction in the need for postoperative hospital admission after ambulatory surgery. Although the reason for this finding has to remain speculative, better pain control may play a role. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background context: Despite increasing utilization of surgical spine fusions, a paucity of literature addressing perioperative complications after revision posterior spinal fusion (RPSF) versus primary posterior spine fusion (PPSF) of the thoracic and lumbar spine exists. Purpose: To examine demographics of patients undergoing PPSF and RPSF of the thoracic and lumbar spine, assess the incidence of perioperative morbidity and mortality, and determine independent risk factors for in-hospital death. Study design/setting: Analysis of nationally representative data collected for the National Inpatient Sample (NIS). Patient sample: All discharges included in the NIS with a procedure code for posterior thoracic and lumbar spine fusion from 1998 to 2006. Outcome measures: In-hospital mortality and morbidity. Methods: Data collected for each year between 1998 and 2006 for the NIS were analyzed. Discharges with a procedure code for thoracic and lumbar spine fusion were included in the sample. The prevalence of patient- as well as health care–related demographics was evaluated by procedure type (primary vs. revision). Frequencies of procedure-related complications and in-hospital mortality were analyzed. Independent predictors for in-hospital mortality were determined. Results: We identified 222,549 PPSF and 12,474 RPSF discharges between 1998 and 2006. Patients undergoing PPSF were significantly younger (51.23 years; confidence interval [CI]=51.16, 51.31) and had lower average comorbidity indices (0.40; CI=0.39, 0.41) than those undergoing RPSF (52.69 years; CI=52.43, 52.97) and (0.44; CI=0.43, 0.45), p<.0001. The incidence of procedure-related complications was 16.02% among RPSF compared with 13.44% in PPSF patients (p<.0001). In-hospital mortality rates after PPSF were approximately twice those of RPSF (0.28% vs. 0.15%, p=.006). Adjusted risk factors for increased in-hospital mortality included PPSF compared with RPSF, male gender, and increasing age. A number of comorbidities, complications, and specific surgical indications increased the risk for perioperative death. Conclusion: Despite being performed in generally younger and healthier patients and having lower perioperative morbidity, PPSF procedures are associated with increased mortality compared with RPSF procedures. The findings of this study can be used for risk stratification, accurate patient consultation, and hypothesis formation for future research. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]