No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Therapeutic study, level III.

Prognostic study, level III.

Esophageal cancer has traditionally been a disease with poor long term outcomes in terms of both survival and quality of life. In combination with surgical and pharmacologic therapy, nutrition support has been demonstrated to improve patient tolerance of treatment, quality of life, and longterm outcomes. An aggressive multi-disciplinary approach is warranted with nutrition support remaining a cornerstone in management. Historically, nutrition support has focused on adequate caloric provision to prevent weight loss and allow for tolerance of treatment regimens. Alterations in metabolism occur in these patients making their use of available calories inefficient and the future of nutritional support may lie in the ability to alter this deranged metabolism. The purpose of this article is to review the current literature surrounding the etiology, treatment, and role of nutrition support in improving outcomes in esophageal cancer.

Background There is an increasing trend toward regionalization of emergency general surgery, which burdens patients. The absence of a standardized, emergency general surgery transfer algorithm creates the potential for unnecessary transfers. The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical reasoning prompting emergency general surgery transfers and to initiate a discussion for optimal emergency general surgery use. Methods Consecutive emergency general surgery transfers (December 2018 to May 2019) to 2 tertiary centers were prospectively enrolled in an institutional review board–approved protocol. Clinical reasoning prompting transfer was obtained prospectively from the accepting/consulting surgeon. Patient outcomes were used to create an algorithm for emergency general surgery transfer. Results Two hundred emergency general surgery transfers (49% admissions, 51% consults) occurred with a median age of 59 (18 to 100) and body mass index of 30 (15 to 75). Insurance status was 25% private, 45% Medicare, 21% Medicaid, and 9% uninsured. Weekend transfers (Friday to Sunday) occurred in 45%, and 57% occurred overnight (6:00 pm to 6:00 am). Surgeon-to-surgeon communication occurred with 22% of admissions. Pretransfer notification occurred with 10% of consults. Common transfer reasons included no surgical coverage (20%), surgeon discomfort (24%), or hospital limitations (36%). A minority (36%) underwent surgery within 24 hours; 54% did not require surgery during the admission. Median length of stay was 6 (1 to 44) days. Conclusion Conditions prompting emergency general surgery transfers are heterogeneous in this rural state review. There remains an unmet need to standardize emergency general surgery transfer criteria, incorporating patient and hospital factors and surgeon availability. Well-defined requirements for communication with the accepting surgeon may prevent unnecessary transfers and maximize resource allocation.

The incidence of obesity has been increasing in the United States, and the medical care of obese patients after injury is complex. Obesity has been linked to increased morbidity after blunt trauma. Whether increased girth protects abdominal organs from penetrating injury or complicates management from obesity-associated medical comorbidities after penetrating injury has not been well defined. All patients admitted with penetrating injury between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2013, at a university-affiliated Level I center trauma center were reviewed. Primary endpoints for analysis were the presence of significant injuries requiring operative intervention and outcomes, including inpatient complications. Logistic regression, chi-squared tests, and the Kruskal-Wallis test were used to compare groups. Five hundred patients were included in the study; 225 with stabs and 275 with gunshot wounds (GSWs). In each group, there was no major difference between obese and nonobese patients in regard to injury location, operative approach, or postoperative outcomes. Unadjusted odds ratios comparing both overweight and obese individuals to normal BMI patients did not suggest a decreased rate of therapeutic operations for either population after stabs or GSWs. In obese or overweight patients, there is no difference in the rate of operative intervention for significant injuries after penetrating axial trauma compared with a normal BMI population. On the other hand, obesity was not associated with prolonged length of stay, increased complications, or death after penetrating injuries.