Objectives/Hypothesis To investigate the concordance in diagnosis and management between initial telemedicine visits and subsequent in‐person visits with laryngoscopy for laryngology‐related complaints during COVID‐19. Study Design Retrospective cohort study. Methods Patients who presented to a tertiary care center with laryngology‐related complaints (voice, swallowing, airway, general throat complaints and others) and completed initial telemedicine visits and subsequent in‐person visits with laryngoscopy between March and October 2020 were included (n = 250). Preliminary diagnoses and managements provided during initial telemedicine visits were compared with the diagnoses and managements during subsequent in‐person visits with laryngoscopy. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to compare concordance rates in diagnosis and management by chief complaint categories after adjusting for relevant demographic and clinical factors. Results Overall concordance rates in diagnosis and management between the initial telemedicine visit and subsequent laryngoscopy exam were 86.1% and 93.7%, respectively. Mean (standard deviation) days until laryngoscopy from the initial visit were 21.2 (23.0). Concordance rates were not associated with patient's age, gender, preferred language, provider, telemedicine visit duration, or days until laryngoscopy. Management concordance rate was relatively lower among patients with general throat complaints in comparison with voice‐related complaints (odds ratio: 0.27; 95% confidence interval: 0.08–0.90). Management changes after laryngoscopy included need for further imaging, procedures, voice therapy, and referral to other specialists. Conclusion Concordance rates in diagnosis and management remained high between the initial telemedicine visit and subsequent in‐person visit with laryngoscopy for new patients presenting with laryngology‐related complaints during the COVID‐19 pandemic. While laryngoscopy is still essential to confirm diagnosis and provide appropriate management, telemedicine may be a feasible alternative to provide suitable empiric therapy until laryngoscopy can be safely performed. Level of Evidence Level IV Laryngoscope , 2021

Background Debate continues in regard to the optimal surgical approach to the mitral valve for degenerative disease. Methods Between February 2004 and July 2015, 363 patients underwent mitral valve repair for degenerative mitral valve disease via either sternotomy (sternotomy, n = 109) or small right anterior thoracotomy (minimally invasive, n = 259). Survival, need for mitral valve reoperation, and progression of mitral regurgitation more than two grades were compared between cohorts using time‐based statistical methods and inverse probability weighting. Results Survival at 1, 5, and 10 years were 99.2, 98.3, and 96.8 for the sternotomy group and 98.1, 94.9, and 94.9 for the minimally invasive group (hazard ratio: 0.39, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.11–1.30, p = .14). The cumulative incidence of need for mitral valve reoperation with death as a competing outcome at 1, 3, and 5 years were 2.7%, 2.7%, and 2.7% in the sternotomy cohort and 1.5%, 3.3%, and 4.1% for the minimally invasive group (subhazard ratio (SHR) 1.17, 95% CI: 0.33–4.20, p = .81). Cumulative incidence of progression of mitral regurgitation more than two grades with death as a competing outcome at 1, 3, and 5 years were 5.5%, 14.4%, and 44.5% for the sternotomy cohort and 4.2%, 9.7%, and 20.5% for the minimally invasive cohort (SHR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.28–1.63, p = .38). Inverse probability weighted time‐based analyses based on preoperative cohort assignment also demonstrated equivalent outcomes between surgical approaches. Conclusions Minimally invasive and sternotomy mitral valve repair in patients with degenerative mitral valve disease is associated with equivalent survival and repair durability.

No abstract

No abstract

Background The goal of this study was to investigate factors associated with 30-day readmission in a multivariate model, including the CDC wound classes “clean,” “clean/contaminated,” “contaminated,” and “dirty/infected.” Methods The 2017–2020 American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database was queried for all patients undergoing total hip replacement, coronary artery bypass grafting, Ivor Lewis esophagectomy, pancreaticoduodenectomy, distal pancreatectomy, pneumonectomy, and colectomies. ACS-defined wound classes were concordant with CDC definitions. Multivariate linear mixed regression was used to determine risk factors for readmission while adjusting for type of surgery as a random intercept. Results 477,964 cases were identified, with 38,734 (8.1%) patients having experienced readmission within 30 days of surgery. There were 181,243 (37.9%) cases classified as wound class “clean”, 215,729 (45.1%) cases classified as “clean/contaminated”, 40,684 cases (8.5%) classified as “contaminated”, and 40,308 (8.4%) cases classified as “dirty/infected”. In the multivariate generalized mixed linear model adjusting for type of surgery, sex, body mass index, race, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, presence of comorbidity, length of stay, urgency of surgery, and discharge destination, “clean/contaminated” (p < .001), “contaminated” (p < .001), and “dirty/infected” (p < .001) wound classes (when compared to “clean”) were significantly associated with 30-day readmission. Organ/space surgical site infection and sepsis were among the most common reasons for readmission in all wound classes. Conclusions Wound classification was strongly prognostic for readmission in multivariable models, suggesting that it may serve as a marker of readmissions. Surgical procedures that are “non-clean” are at significantly greater risk for 30-day readmission. Readmissions may be due to infectious complications; optimizing antibiotic use or source control to prevent readmission are areas of future study.

T here have been unusual patterns in economic activity during the COVID-19 crisis. For example, in contrast to most recessions, household income and personal savings increased during the crisis. 1 Another unusual feature of the COVID-19 crisis is the behavior of business applications.

No abstract