Polveroni, Thomas M.

Abstract Background Although uncommon, nontuberculous mycobacterial infections (NTMI) of the upper extremity cause significant morbidity based on their natural history, delay in diagnosis, prolonged duration of antimicrobial therapy often combined with surgical debridement, and functional loss. Herein we describe our experience with such infections. Methods Records for adult patients from two academic, tertiary facilities with culture-proven NTMI involving the upper extremity were retrospectively reviewed. Demographic information, co-morbidities, laboratory and microbiological evaluation, management, and outcomes were extracted. Patients were analyzed based on pathogen identified and immune suppression. Results 77 patients were identified. The mean age was 59 years and 65% of patients were male. 48% reported a preceding injury, with the hand being most frequently involved (58%). 41% were considered immune compromised; 19% of them were organ transplant recipients. Mean symptom duration prior to presentation was 203 days. Mean time to culture identification was 33 days, and 25 different species of NTM were identified (subcategorized as rapid or slow growers). 77% had solitary lesions, with cutaneous/subcutaneous location as the most common site. All patients underwent surgical debridement with four undergoing amputation to control infection. 69% received combination antimicrobial therapy for a mean duration of 184 days. Immunosuppressed patients were treated with antimicrobial therapy for a longer duration (mean 243 vs 155 days). One-third of patients experienced complications and/or recurrence regardless of organism type. Conclusion NTMI of the upper extremity is often misdiagnosed leading to significant delays in appropriate management. Knowledge of its protean manifestations and early consideration in the differential diagnosis of chronic, painful swelling of the hand or wrist, nodular or inflammatory lesions, or septic arthritis is crucial. A low threshold for surgical or biopsy with specimens sent for histopathology as well as microbiologic analysis is warranted. A combined approach with surgical debridement and prolonged combination antimicrobial therapy is necessary for optimal outcomes; however, adverse reactions from such therapy are commonly encountered. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Study Design. Retrospective cohort study. Objective. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of two-level cervical disc replacement (CDR) in the outpatient setting. Summary of Background Data. Despite growing interest in CDR, limited data exist evaluating the safety of two-level CDR in the outpatient setting. Methods. The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database was queried for all two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and CDR procedures between 2015 and 2018. Demographics, comorbidities, and 30-day postoperative complication rates of outpatient two-level CDR were compared to those of inpatient two-level CDR and outpatient two-level ACDF. Radiographic data are not available in the NSQIP. Results. A total of 403 outpatient CDRs were compared to 408 inpatient CDRs and 4134 outpatient ACDFs. Outpatient CDR patients were older and more likely to have pulmonary comorbidities compared to inpatient CDR (P < 0.03). Outpatient CDR patients were less likely to have an American Society of Anesthesiologists class ≥2 and have hypertension compared to outpatient ACDF patients (P < 0.0001). Outpatient CDR had a lower 30-day readmission rate (0.5% vs. 2.5%, P = 0.02) and lower 30-day reoperation rate (0% vs. 1%, P = 0.047) compared to inpatient CDR. Outpatient CDR had a lower readmission rate (0.5% vs. 2.1%, P = 0.03) compared to outpatient ACDF, but there was no difference in reoperation rates between the two procedures (0% vs. 0.8%, P = 0.07). Outpatient CDR had an overall complication rate of 0.2%, inpatient CDR had a complication rate of 0.9%, and outpatient ACDF had a complication rate of 1.3%. These differences were not significant. Conclusion. To our knowledge, this is the largest multicenter study examining the safety of two-level outpatient CDR procedures. Outpatient two-level CDR was associated with similarly safe outcomes when compared to inpatient two-level CDR and outpatient two-level ACDF. This suggests that two-level CDR can be performed safely in the outpatient setting. Level of Evidence: 3

INTRODUCTION: As multidisciplinary treatment modalities for rectal cancer continue to evolve, neoadjuvant chemoradiation then surgical resection is a common approach. Robotic-assisted abdominoperineal resection is becoming more prevalent in part because of better visualization and instrument mobility within the pelvis. After abdominoperineal resection, postoperative perineal wound complications remain a significant risk. Pelvic reconstruction lowers this risk, and a pedicled rectus abdominis muscle flap is frequently used to achieve this. Traditional flap harvest requires laparotomy, resulting in violation of both rectus sheaths and a large midline scar. Robotic harvest of the rectus abdominis muscle for pelvic reconstruction after abdominoperineal resection is a novel approach with foreseeable benefits. TECHNIQUE: After completion of abdominoperineal resection, 2 additional trocars are inserted in the lateral abdomen, and the robot is reoriented toward the posterior abdominal wall. The peritoneum and posterior rectus sheath are incised, and dissection is carried superiorly and inferiorly in a sagittal plane to reveal the rectus abdominis muscle. The muscle body is separated from the anterior rectus sheath. Once the inferior epigastric artery is identified, the superior pole of the muscle is transected. Continued lateral dissection ensures flap mobility for placement within the pelvis. After obtaining proper reach, the robot is undocked, and the flap is sutured in place through the perineal defect. RESULTS: After trocar placement and robot repositioning, both the colorectal and plastic surgeons trade places at the console. Robotic flap harvest precludes the need for laparotomy. The anterior rectus sheath remains unviolated and the patient avoids an additional midline scar. The aforementioned benefits of robot-assisted abdominoperineal resection, namely increased visualization and maneuverability, were also found applicable when robotically harvesting this flap. CONCLUSIONS: This technique exemplifies an additional minimally invasive technique for patients pursuing abdominoperineal resection. With knowledge of this novel approach, surgeons can better tailor their operations to benefit the patient.