Background Previous research demonstrates that twice-daily enoxaparin is inadequate for venous thromboembolic (VTE) prophylaxis in critically ill trauma patients prompting dose adjustment based on anti-Xa levels. Most studies evaluate peak anti-Xa levels; however, data suggest that trough levels are associated with decreased VTE. We evaluated trough anti-Xa levels in noncritically ill trauma patients receiving fixed or weight-based enoxaparin. Methods Peak and trough anti-Xa levels were prospectively collected from patients receiving at least 3 consecutive doses of enoxaparin (PRE). A performance improvement project prompted a change to weight-based dosing. Peak and trough levels were subsequently prospectively collected from the weight-based group (POST). Adequate peak was defined as ≥0.2 IU/mL and adequate trough as ≥0.1 IU/mL. PRE and POST groups were compared. Results 200 patients were evaluated (100 PRE, 100 POST). In the PRE group, only 34% of trough and 61% of peak anti-Xa levels were adequate compared with 82% and 97%, respectively, in the POST group ( P < .01). Median trough improved from 0.07 IU/mL to 0.2 IU/mL ( P < .01). Median peak improved from 0.22 IU/mL to 0.47 IU/mL ( P < .01). More patients achieved adequate peak and trough levels in the POST group (79% vs 31%, P < .01). 95% of patients with adequate troughs also had adequate peaks, whereas 75% with adequate peaks had adequate troughs. Discussion Traditional enoxaparin dosing in noncritically ill trauma patients results in suboptimal anti-Xa levels. Weight-based enoxaparin improves both trough and peak anti-Xa levels obviating dose adjustment. Furthermore, troughs better predict adequate anti-Xa levels.
Background Frailty is associated with adverse surgical outcomes including post-operative complications, needs for post-acute care, and mortality. While multiple frailty screening tools exist, most are time and resource intensive. Here we examine the association of an automated electronic frailty index (eFI), derived from routine data in the Electronic Health Record (EHR), with outcomes in vascular surgery patients undergoing open, lower extremity revascularization. Methods A retrospective analysis at a single academic medical center from 2015 to 2019 was completed. Information extracted from the EHR included demographics, eFI, comorbidity, and procedure type. Frailty status was defined as fit (eFI≤0.10), pre-frail (0.10<eFI≤0.21), and frail (eFI>0.21). Outcomes included length of stay (LOS), 30-day readmission, and non-home discharge. Results We included 295 patients (mean age 65.9 years; 31% female), with the majority classified as pre-frail (57%) or frail (32%). Frail patients exhibited a higher degree of comorbidity and were more likely to be classified as American Society of Anesthesiologist class IV (frail: 46%, pre-frail: 27%, and fit: 18%, P = 0.0012). There were no statistically significant differences in procedure type, LOS, or 30-day readmissions based on eFI. Frail patients were more likely to expire in the hospital or be discharged to an acute care facility (31%) compared to pre-frail (14%) and fit patients (15%, P = 0.002). Adjusting for comorbidity, risk of non-home discharge was higher comparing frail to pre-frail patients (OR 3.01, 95% CI 1.40-6.48). Discussion Frail patients, based on eFI, undergoing elective, open, lower extremity revascularization were twice as likely to not be discharged home.
A 25-year-old man presented with right lower quadrant abdominal wall erythema, a punctum of purulence, and localized pain at the site of a previous appendicostomy. Cross-sectional imaging revealed appendicitis at his previous appendicostomy with a fecalith near the skin. He was managed with appendectomy. The surgical approach mimicked a loop ileostomy reversal by circumferentially dissecting the tissue around the appendicostomy to the level of the fascia and then dividing the appendix at the base of the cecum through a small two-centimeter incision. Appendicitis in a previous appendicostomy is uncommon and has only been described in three previous case reports (two adults and one child) and was surgically approached through a low-midline laparotomy. Our case is unique as it is an uncommon presentation of a common disease managed with a minimally invasive approach not previously described.
Background Deranged physiology in trauma complicates the clinical identification of sepsis, resulting in overscreening for bacteremia. No clinical signs or biomarkers accurately diagnose sepsis in this population. Our objective was to evaluate the accuracy of the current criteria used to prompt screening for bacteremia in trauma patients and determine independent predictors of bacteremia. Materials and Methods Adult trauma patients admitted to our level I academic trauma center who had blood cultures (BCs) drawn were identified. Those with positive BCs were compared to those with negative or false positive BCs. False positive was defined as a BC deemed contaminated and not treated at the discretion of the attending physician. Results Over a 2-year period, 366 trauma patients had BCs drawn. After excluding surveillance cultures (those drawn to demonstrate bacteremia clearance), 492 unique BC sets were evaluated; 104 (21.1%) BC sets were positive; 30 (28.8%) of these were falsely positive, resulting in a true-positive rate of 15% in the screened population. Univariate analysis suggested temperature and heart rate were associated with positive BC, while multivariable analysis found only the presence of a central line and lactic acid to be predictive. Procalcitonin (PCT) was poorly predictive, with a positive predictive value of 18% and a negative predictive value of 91%. Conclusion Current tools for identifying bacteremia in trauma patients result in overscreening. PCT may have a limited role as a negative predictor for bacteremia. Given that false-positive BCs have negative patient and economic consequences, future study should focus on development of alternative screening modalities.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.