No abstract

No abstract

Objectives Spinal cord ischemia following thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is a devastating complication. This study seeks to demonstrate how a standardized protocol to prevent spinal cord ischemia affects incidence in patients undergoing TEVAR. Methods Using CPT codes 33880 and 33881, all TEVAR procedures performed at a single tertiary care center from January 2017 to December 2018 were examined. Patients who had concomitant ascending aortic repairs or a TEVAR for traumatic indications were excluded from analysis, leaving 130 TEVAR procedures. Comorbid conditions, procedural characteristics, extent of coverage, peri-procedural management strategies, and post-operative outcomes were collected and analyzed retrospectively. Results One hundred thirty patients undergoing TEVAR were examined for four perioperative variables: postoperative hemoglobin greater than 10 g/dL, subclavian revascularization, preoperative spinal drain placement, and somatosensory evoked potential monitoring (SSEP). All conditions were met in 46.2% (60/130) of procedures; 37.8% (28/74) in emergent/urgent cases and 61.5% (32/52) in elective cases. Of patients who required subclavian coverage, 87.1% (54/62) underwent subclavian revascularization; 70.8% (92/130) of patients received spinal drains preoperatively; 68.5% (89/130) of patients had SSEP monitoring; 73.8% (93/130) of patients obtained a postoperative hemoglobin of >10 g/dL. Out of all patients, two (1.5%) developed spinal cord ischemia. Conclusion Incidence of spinal cord ischemia in our cohort was low at 1.5% (2/130). Individual and bundled interventions for the prevention of spinal cord ischemia were unable to demonstrate a statistically significant effect given the low rate. Nonetheless, we advocate for a proactive approach for the prevention of spinal cord ischemia given our experience in this complex population.

Background: Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is an aggressive malignancy with a short median survival time. Because of the rapid growth rate there may be an advantage to emergently beginning chemotherapy as soon as SCLC diagnosis is made. Methods:All SCLC patients evaluated at Cooper University Hospital from January 2011 to September 2014 were reviewed. Multiple clinical factors were analyzed including timing between diagnosis and start of chemotherapy.Results: A total of 75 patients were analyzed. On univariate analysis there was a survival detriment to early initiation of chemotherapy. With multivariate analysis the difference in survival disappeared. With logistic regression, the only variable that was related to overall survival was stage (extensive versus limited). We did not find any subset that benefited from early initiation of chemotherapy.Conclusions: Mortality and cumulative survival time were not improved by early initiation of chemotherapy for any patient subset. Only stage at diagnosis was predictive for mortality and cumulative survival. Our data appears to show that urgency in starting chemotherapy has little bearing on survival in patients diagnosed with SCLC. The data suggest that there is no detriment to a non-urgent start time for chemotherapy. status (including potentially compromising the integrity of informed consent), strain hospital systems with the costs of inpatient chemotherapy and delayed discharge, and interfere with proper disease staging.