Knowledge and practice of tracheal tube cuff pressure monitoring: a multicenter survey of anaesthesia and critical care providers in a developing country

Background Tracheal tubes are routinely used during anaesthesia and in the intensive care unit. Subjective monitoring of cuff pressures have been reported to produce consistently inappropriate cuffs pressures, with attendant morbidity. But this practice of unsafe care remains widespread. With the proliferation of intensive care units in Nigeria and increasing access to surgery, morbidity relating to improper tracheal cuff pressure may assume a greater toll. We aimed to evaluate current knowledge and practice of tracheal cuff pressure monitoring among anaesthesia and critical care providers in Nigeria. Methods This was a multicenter cross-sectional study conducted from March 18 to April 30, 2021. The first part (A) was conducted at 4 tertiary referral hospitals in Nigeria by means of a self-administered questionnaire on the various cadre of anaesthesia and critical care providers. The second part (B) was a nation-wide telephone survey of anaesthesia faculty fellows affiliated to 13 tertiary hospitals in Nigeria, selected by stratified random sampling. Results Only 3.1% (6/196) of the care providers admitted having ever used a tracheal cuff manometer, while 31.1% knew the recommended tracheal cuff pressure. The nationwide telephone survey of anaesthesia faculty fellows revealed that tracheal cuff manometer is neither available, nor has it ever been used in any of the 13 tertiary hospitals surveyed. The ‘Pilot balloon palpation method’ and ‘fixed volume of air from a syringe’ were the most commonly utilized method of cuff pressure estimation by the care providers, at 64.3% and 28.1% respectively in part A survey (84.6% and 15.4% respectively, in the part B survey). Conclusion The use of tracheal cuff manometer is very limited among the care providers surveyed in this study. Knowledge regarding tracheal cuff management among the providers is adjudged to be fair, despite the poor practice and unsafe care.

Safety and efficacy of a novel retrograde route for femoral bone graft harvesting by Reamer-Irrigator-Aspirator: a pilot study on 24 patients

Background The Reamer–Irrigator–Aspirator system was initially developed to reduce fat embolism and thermic necrosis during reamed intramedullary nail fixation of femoral shaft fractures. Currently, this system is used in extended applications including accessing large volume of autologous bone graft, as alternative for iliac crest harvesting. Antegrade femoral bone graft harvesting using the Reamer-Irrigator-Aspirator system is considered the standard technique. The aim of our study is to evaluate the efficacy (bone graft volume) and the complications (blood loss, postoperative pain, and incidence of iatrogenic fractures) of the Reamer–Irrigator–Aspirator system through the retrograde femoral route in a series of patients with post-traumatic bone defects or nonunions. Methods A non-controlled single center retrospective observational cohort study was conducted in a level1 trauma center to evaluate all patients who were treated using the RIA system. Between November 2015 and May 2019, 24 patients (8 women and 16 men; mean age: 41 years [range 27–55 years]) with bone defects or nonunions underwent bone graft harvesting using the Reamer–Irrigator–Aspirator system through retrograde femoral route. Postoperative pain, complications, and bone graft volume were analyzed. Inclusion criteria was patients older than 18 years with a diagnosis of post-traumatic bone defect or associated tibial or femoral nonunion, with minimum 6-months follow, treated using the RIA. We hypothesized that the retrograde route of the RIA system is a safe and efficacious method for bone harvesting. Results The average volume of collected graft was 45 cc (range 30–60 cc). In 83% of the cases, bone grafting was sufficient, while in 17% it was necessary to add iliac crest bone graft to completely fill the bone defect. A mean drop in postoperative hemoglobin of 4.1 g / dL (range 0.5–6.0 g / dL) was evidenced. In 4 cases (33%), a unit of packed red blood cells was required. Regarding postoperative pain, visual analogue scale after 3 months postoperatively was 1.6 in average. After 6 months, the value has decreased to 0.4. There were no perioperative or postoperative complications at 6-month follow-up. Conclusion In this limited case series, large volumes of bone graft were harvested using the retrograde route of the RIA system and there were no intra-/ postoperative complications observed at 6-month follow-up. Therefore this novel technique appears safe and efficacious. However, it’s important to highlight that future prospective controlled studies are necessary to validate the insights from this pilot study.

Operating room efficiency in a low resource setting: a pilot study from a large tertiary referral center in Ethiopia

Background The operating room (OR) is one of the most expensive areas of a hospital, requiring large capital and recurring investments, and necessitating efficient throughput to reduce costs per patient encounter. On top of increasing costs, inefficient utilization of operating rooms results in prolonged waiting lists, high rate of cancellation, frustration of OR personnel as well as increased anxiety that negatively impacts the health of patients. This problem is magnified in developing countries, where there is a high unmet surgical need. However, no system currently exists to assess operating room utilization in Ethiopia. Methodology A prospective study was conducted over a period of 3 months (May 1 to July 31, 2019) in a tertiary hospital. Surgical case start time, end time, room turnover time, cancellations and reason for cancellation were observed to evaluate the efficiency of eight operating rooms. Results A total of 933 elective procedures were observed during the study period. Of these, 246 were cancelled, yielding a cancellation rate of 35.8%. The most common reasons for cancellation were related to lack of OR time and patient preparation (8.7% and 7.7% respectively). Shortage of facilities (instrument, blood, ICU bed) were causes of cancelation in 7.7%. Start time was delayed in 93.4% (mean 8:56 am ± 52 min) of cases. Last case completion time was early in 47.9% and delayed in 20.6% (mean 2:54 pm ± 156 min). Turnover time was prolonged in 34.5% (mean 25 min ± 49 min). Total operating room utilization ranged from 10.5% to 174%. Operating rooms were underutilized in 42.7% while overutilization was found in 14.6%. Conclusion We found a high cancellation rate, most attributable to late start times leading to delays for the remainder of cases, and lack of preoperative patient preparation. In a setting with a high unmet burden of surgical disease, OR efficiency must be maximized with improved patient evaluation workflows, adequate OR staffing and commitment to punctual start times. We recommend future quality improvement projects focusing on these areas to increase OR efficiency.

Variation in practice for preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis: a survey from an academic tertiary referral center in the United States

Background Antibiotic surgical prophylaxis is a core strategy for prevention of surgical site infections (SSI). Despite best practice guidelines and known efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis in decreasing SSI risk, there is often wide variation in its use. This study was designed to determine the individual perspectives of perioperative providers at an academic tertiary referral center regarding their knowledge of preoperative antibiotic choice, dosing, and timing. Methods A prospective survey was conducted amongst surgical and anesthesia team members involved in preoperative antibiotic decision making. The survey addressed ten key principles relating to preoperative antibiotic use, including antibiotic choice, timing and rate of infusion, and dosing. The survey was distributed among orthopaedic surgeons, residents, and anesthesia providers at their respective monthly service line meetings between August 2017 to June 2019. The data was stored and analyzed in a Microsoft Excel worksheet. Results A total of 73 providers completed the survey. Twenty-two (30 %) of the providers agreed and 47 (64 %) disagreed that both vancomycin and cefazolin are equally effective for antibiotic prophylaxis. As for antibiotic choice in patients with penicillin allergies, 37 (51 %) agreed with vancomycin, 21 (29 %) agreed with clindamycin, and 15 (21 %) disagreed with both alternatives. When providers were surveyed regarding the appropriateness of standard versus weight adjusted dosing, 67 (92 %) agreed that vancomycin should be weight adjusted and 63 (86 %) agreed that cefazolin should be weight adjusted. Conclusions There is no clear consensus amongst providers for which antibiotic to administer for antibiotic prophylaxis despite existing guidelines. Discrepancy also exists between orthopaedic surgery and anesthesia providers in regards to appropriate antibiotic choice for patients with reported penicillin allergies. Institutions should implement evidence-based protocols for preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis and continue to prospectively monitor compliance in order to identify any inconsistencies that could result in inappropriate antibiotic prophylaxis for patients.

Fusion versus fixation in complex comminuted C3-type tibial pilon fractures: a systematic review

Background Comminuted intra-articular tibial pilon fractures can be challenging to manage, with high revision rates and poor functional outcomes. This study reviewed [1] treatment, complications, and clinical outcomes in studies of complex comminuted tibial pilon fractures (type AO43-C3); and [2] primary ankle arthrodesis as a management option for these types of complex injuries. Methods A systematic literature search was performed on PubMed from 1990 to 2020 to determine complications and outcomes after staged fracture fixation and primary ankle joint arthrodesis for comminuted C3-type tibial pilon fractures. The search was conducted in compliance with the PRISMA guidelines, using the following MeSH terms: “tibial pilon”/“pilon fracture”/“plafond fracture”/“distal tibial”/“43-C3”/“ankle fracture”/“ankle fusion”/“primary ankle arthrodesis”/“pilon fracture staged”/“pilon external fixation” and “pilon open reduction internal fixation.” Inclusion criteria were restricted to original articles in English language on adult patients ≥18 years of age. Eligibility criteria for retrieved publications were determined using a “PICO” approach (population, intervention/exposure, comparison, outcomes). Weighted analysis was used to compare treatment groups on time to definitive treatment, follow-up time, range of motion, fracture classification, and complications. Results The systematic literature review using the defined MeSH terms yielded 72 original articles. Of these, 13 articles met the eligibility criteria based on the PICO statements, of which 8 publications investigated the outcomes of a staged fixation approach in 308 cumulative patients, and 5 articles focused on primary ankle arthrodesis in 69 cumulative patients. For staged treatment, the mean wound complication rate was 14.6%, and the malunion/nonunion rate was 9.9%. For primary arthrodesis, the mean wound complication rate was 2.9%, and the malunion/nonunion rate was 2.9%. After risk stratification for fracture type and severity, the small cumulative cohort of patients included in the primary arthrodesis publications did not provide sufficient power to determine a clinically relevant difference in complications and long-term patient outcomes compared to the staged surgical fixation group. Conclusions At present, there is insufficient evidence in the published literature to provide guidance towards consideration of ankle arthrodesis for complex comminuted C3-type tibial pilon fractures, compared to the standard treatment by staged surgical fracture fixation.

Are trauma research programs in academic and non-academic centers measured by equal standards? A survey of 137 level I trauma centers in the United States

Background American College of Surgeons level I trauma center verification requires an active research program. This study investigated differences in the research programs of academic and non-academic trauma centers. Methods A 28-question survey was administered to ACS-verified level I trauma centers in 11/12/2020–1/7/2021. The survey included questions on center characteristics (patient volume, staff size), peer-reviewed publications, staff and resources dedicated to research, and funding sources. Results The survey had a 31% response rate: 137 invitations were successfully delivered via email, and 42 centers completed at least part of the survey. Responding level I trauma centers included 36 (86%) self-identified academic and 6 (14%) self-identified non-academic centers. Academic and non-academic centers reported similar annual trauma patient volume (2190 vs. 2450), number of beds (545 vs. 440), and years of ACS verification (20 vs. 14), respectively. Academic centers had more full-time trauma surgeons (median 8 vs 6 for non-academic centers) and general surgery residents (median 30 vs 7) than non-academic centers. Non-academic centers more frequently ranked trauma surgery (100% vs. 36% academic), basic science (50% vs. 6% academic), neurosurgery (50% vs. 14% academic), and nursing (33% vs. 0% academic) in the top three types of studies conducted. Academic centers were more likely to report non-profit status (86% academic, 50% non-academic) and utilized research funding from external governmental or non-profit grants more often (76% vs 17%). Conclusions Survey results suggest that academic centers may have more physician, resident, and financial resources available to dedicate to trauma research, which may make fulfillment of ACS level I research requirements easier. Structural and institutional changes at non-academic centers, such as expansion of general surgery resident programs and increased pursuit of external grant funding, may help ensure that academic and non-academic sites are equally equipped to fulfill ACS research criteria.

Safety of transanal ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis: a retrospective observational cohort study

Background Colectomy with transanal ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (taIPAA) is a surgical technique that can be used to treat benign colorectal disease. Ulcerative colitis is the most frequent inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and although pharmacological therapy has improved, colectomy rates reach up to 15%. The objective of this study was to determine anastomotic leakage rates and treatment after taIPAA as well as short- and long-term pouch function. Methods We conducted a retrospective analysis of a prospective database of all patients undergoing taIPAA at an academic tertiary referral center in Germany, between 01/03/2015 and 31/08/2019. Patients with indications other than ulcerative colitis or with adjuvant chemotherapy following colectomy for colorectal carcinoma were excluded for short- and long-term follow up due to diverging postoperative care yet considered for evaluation of anastomotic leakage. Results A total of 22 patients undergoing taIPAA during the study time-window were included in analysis. Median age at the time of surgery was 32 ± 12.5 (14–54) years. Two patients developed an anastomotic leakage at 11 days (early anastomotic leakage) and 9 months (late anastomotic leakage) after surgery, respectively. In both patients, pouches could be preserved with a multimodal approach. Twenty patients out of 22 met the inclusion criteria for short and long term follow-up. Data on short-term pouch function could be obtained in 14 patients and showed satisfactory pouch function with only four patients reporting intermittent incontinence at a median stool frequency of 9–10 times per day. In the long-term we observed an inflammation or “pouchitis” in 11 patients and a pouch failure in one patient. Conclusion Postoperative complication rates in patients with benign colorectal disease remain an area of concern for surgical patient safety. In this pilot study on 22 selected patients, taIPAA was associated with two patients developing anastomotic leakage. Future large-scale validation studies are required to determine the safety and feasibility of taIPAA in patients with ulcerative colitis.