Edwards, Michael A.

The Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 is associated with milder symptoms and lower hospitalization and mortality rates than Delta variants, although the impact of Omicron on immunocompromised patients, especially solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients, is still unclear. This study compares the hospitalization rate and outcomes between immunocompromised, immunocompetent, and SOT patients during the Delta and Omicron periods. We included adult patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 on PCR or nasopharyngeal antigen test between 26 June 2021 to 8 September 2022, at our institution. A total of 12,401 COVID-19 patients were included, of which 11,055 were immunocompetent, and 1346 were immunocompromised (375 SOT recipients). Throughout the Delta and Omicron outbreaks, immunocompromised patients exhibited higher comorbidities and 30-day hospitalizations, but rates of mechanical ventilation and ICU-level care were like immunocompetent patients. During the Omicron wave, immunocompromised patients had higher unadjusted relative risk estimates (RR = 2.37, 95% CI 1.96–2.87, p < 0.05) than Delta (RR = 1.58, 95% CI 1.24–2.01, p < 0.05), with higher adjusted relative risk for hospitalization in Omicron (RR = 1.50, 95% CI 1.10–2.03, p = 0.01). Analyses show increased hospitalization risk in immunocompromised during the Omicron wave compared to the Delta wave, with no significant difference in hospitalization outcomes. The relative risk of hospitalization for SOT patients was higher in both waves.

Background Ketamine has demonstrated efficacy in treatment-resistant depression, primarily in psychiatric or outpatient populations. Its use in ICU patients remains underexplored, with limited data beyond case reports and small series. This study evaluated the association between subanesthetic ketamine infusions and improvement in depressive symptoms and hemodynamic changes in ICU patients. Methods We conducted a retrospective study of adults admitted to the ICU who received IV ketamine (0.3-0.75 mg/kg over 40 min on three consecutive days) for depressive symptoms. Changes in depressive symptoms were assessed using routine clinical documentation by physicians, nurses, and occupational and physical therapists. Hemodynamic parameters (blood pressure and heart rate) were recorded before and up to 120 min after infusion. The primary outcome was to evaluate depressive symptoms while the secondary outcome was to assess hemodynamic changes post transfusion. Results Thirty-four patients met criteria, including 18 solid organ transplant recipients. Median age was 59 years; 61.8% were male. Ketamine was associated with improvement in apparent sadness (90.0% vs 52.2%, P < .05) and reported sadness (95.0% vs 59.1%, P < .05). In transplant recipients, improvement in apparent sadness remained significant (80.0% vs 41.7%, P < .05). Hemodynamic parameters remained stable; heart rate increased transiently at 15-30 min post-infusion, returning to baseline by 60-90 min. Adverse effects observed were anxiety (12.5%), restlessness and/or agitation (10.4%), and dissociation (8.16%). Conclusion Subanesthetic ketamine improved specific depressive symptoms in critically ill ICU patients without significant hemodynamic instability. These findings support its potential as a rapid-acting antidepressant in the ICU, warranting further prospective trials.

Objectives: Surgical site infections (SSIs) are the most common hospital-acquired infections in the United States, of which methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) accounts for 43%. Preoperative povidone-iodine nasal swab (PNS) is considered an effective and cost-saving treatment for Staphylococcus aureus decolonization. We aim to assess the impact of preoperative PNS on SSI incidence. Materials and Methods: This retrospective observational study utilized elective surgical cases between January 1, 2018 and May 31, 2023, at a single academic medical center. The cohort was divided into PNS and no PNS groups. The cohort was propensity-matched, and Pearson χ2/Kruskal-Wallis tests were performed to compare group differences. Multivariable logistic regression was utilized to compare events between cohorts before and after matching. An alpha of <0.05 was considered significant. Results: A total of 45,998 (22,999 per group) matched participants were evaluated. On multivariate regression, the non-PNS treatment group was associated with an increase in hospital overall SSI occurrence (OR: 1.48, P = 0.02) but not specifically in-hospital methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus SSI, MRSA-SSI, or any 30-day SSI (P > 0.05). Compared with PNS treatment and prophylactic antibiotics, in-hospital SSI was higher in the absence of PNS treatment (OR: 1.83, P < 0.001), antibiotic (OR: 2.63, P < 0.001), or both (OR: 2.06, P < 0.01). Compared with PNS treatment plus prophylactic antibiotic, in-hospital MRSA-SSI was only higher in the absence of antibiotic (OR: 2.92, P < 0.01) treatment. Conclusions: Preoperative treatment with PNS may reduce overall in-hospital SSI but has no independent impact on MRSA SSI.

Objective: To determine out-of-pocket (OOP) costs 2 years after sleeve gastrectomy (SG) or initiating Ozempic for patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and obesity. Background: Individuals with obesity and T2D have a variety of treatment options. The risks and benefits of these treatment options are becoming more well-documented; however, the real-world patient costs of these options are not known. Methods: Adults with body mass index of 35 kg/m2 or higher and T2D who had an SG or used Ozempic were identified in the employer-based retrospective claims database Merative (previously Truven IBM Marketscan) from 2017 to 2021. SG cohort was defined as having an SG (without filling a prescription for Ozempic), and the Ozempic cohort was defined as continuously filling a prescription for Ozempic for at least 2 years (and not having any bariatric surgery). Individuals in each cohort were 1:1 propensity matched on demographics, obesity-related comorbidities, and baseline OOP costs. in the year before treatment. OOP costs were compared in the 2 years after treatment using paired t tests. Results: A total of 302 SGs were matched to 302 Ozempic patients (mean age: 50, mean baseline body mass index: 40, 41% males). OOP health care costs were similar for the SG ($2267) and Ozempic ($2131) cohorts 1 year after the index date (difference = $136, P = 0.19). OOP health care costs were significantly lower in the SG cohort ($1155 vs $2,084, P < 0.01) 2 years after the index date. Conclusions: Within 2 years of starting treatment, OOP health care costs were significantly lower among individuals who had a SG versus those treated with Ozempic.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism occurs in approximately 2% of patients undergoing abdominal and pelvic surgery for cancers of the colon, rectum, and anus and is considered preventable. The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons recommends extended prophylaxis in high-risk patients, but there is low adherence to the guidelines. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to analyze the impact of venous thromboembolism risk-guided prophylaxis in patients undergoing elective abdominal and pelvic surgeries for colorectal and anal cancers from 2016 to 2021. DESIGN: This was a retrospective analysis. SETTING: The study was conducted at a multisite tertiary referral academic health care system. PATIENTS: Patients who underwent elective abdominal or pelvic surgery for colon, rectal, or anal cancer. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Receipt of Caprini-guided venous thromboembolism prophylaxis, 90-day postoperative rate of deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, venous thromboembolism, and bleeding events. RESULTS: A total of 3504 patients underwent elective operations, of whom 2224 (63%) received appropriate thromboprophylaxis in the inpatient setting. In the postdischarged cohort of 2769 patients, only 2% received appropriate thromboprophylaxis and no thromboembolic events were observed. In the group receiving inappropriate thromboprophylaxis, at 90 days postdischarge, the deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and venous thromboembolism rates were 0.60%, 0.40%, and 0.88%, respectively. Postoperative bleeding was not different between the 2 groups. LIMITATIONS: Limitations to our study include its retrospective nature, use of aggregated electronic medical records, and single health care system experience. CONCLUSION: Most patients in our health care system undergoing abdominal or pelvic surgery for cancers of the colon, rectum, and anus were discharged without appropriate Caprini-guided venous thromboembolism prophylaxis. Risk-guided prophylaxis was associated with decreased rates of inhospital and postdischarge venous thromboembolism without increased bleeding complications. See Video Abstract. MARGEN DE MEJORA: EL IMPACTO DE LA TROMBOPROFILAXIS RECOMENDADA POR LAS DIRECTRICES EN PACIENTES SOMETIDOS A CIRUGÍA ABDOMINAL POR CÁNCER COLORRECTAL Y ANAL EN UN CENTRO DE REFERENCIA TERCIARIO ANTECEDENTES: El tromboembolismo venoso ocurre en aproximadamente el 2% de los pacientes sometidos a cirugía abdominal y pélvica por cánceres de colon, recto y ano, y se considera prevenible. La Sociedad Estadounidense de Cirujanos de Colon y Recto recomienda una profilaxis prolongada en pacientes de alto riesgo, pero el cumplimiento de las directrices es bajo. OBJETIVO: Este estudio tiene como objetivo analizar el impacto de la profilaxis guiada por el riesgo de tromboembolismo venoso (TEV) en pacientes sometidos a cirugías abdominales y pélvicas electivas por cáncer colorrectal y anal entre 2016 y 2021. DISEÑO: Este fue un análisis retrospectivo. AJUSTE: El estudio se llevó a cabo en un sistema de salud académico de referencia terciaria de múltiples sitios. PACIENTES: Pacientes sometidos a cirugía abdominal o pélvica electiva por cáncer de colon, recto o ano. PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO: Recepción de profilaxis de tromboembolismo venoso guiada por Caprini, tasa postoperatoria de 90 días de trombosis venosa profunda, embolia pulmonar, tromboembolismo venoso y eventos de sangrado. RESULTADOS: Un total de 3.504 pacientes se sometieron a operaciones electivas, de los cuales 2.224 (63%) recibieron tromboprofilaxis adecuada en el ámbito hospitalario. En el cohorte de 2.769 pacientes después del alta, solo el 2% recibió tromboprofilaxis adecuada en la que no se observaron eventos tromboembólicos. En el grupo que recibió tromboprofilaxis inadecuada, a los 90 días después del alta, las tasas de trombosis venosa profunda, embolia pulmonar y tromboembolia venosa fueron del 0,60%, 0,40% y 0,88%, respectivamente. El sangrado posoperatorio no fue diferente entre los dos grupos. LIMITACIONES: Las limitaciones de nuestro estudio incluyen su naturaleza retrospectiva, el uso de registros médicos electrónicos agregados y la experiencia de un solo sistema de atención médica. CONCLUSIÓN: La mayoría de los pacientes en nuestro sistema de salud sometidos a cirugía abdominal o pélvica por cánceres de colon, recto y ano fueron dados de alta sin una profilaxis adecuada de TEV guiada por Caprini. La profilaxis guiada por el riesgo se asoció con menores tasas de tromboembolismo venoso hospitalario y dado de alta sin un aumento de las complicaciones de sangrado. (Traducción—Dr. Aurian Garcia Gonzalez)

ObjectiveThe aim was to determine the utilization of Caprini guideline‐indicated venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis and impact on VTE and bleeding outcomes in otolaryngology (ORL) surgery patients.MethodsElective ORL surgeries performed between 2016 and 2021 were retrospectively identified. Logistic regression models were used to examine the association between patient characteristics and receiving appropriate prophylaxis, inpatient, 30‐ and 90‐day VTE and bleeding events.ResultsA total of 4955 elective ORL surgeries were analyzed. Thirty percent of the inpatient cohort and 2% of the discharged cohort received appropriate risk‐stratified VTE prophylaxis. In those who did not receive appropriate prophylaxis, overall inpatient VTE was 3.5‐fold higher (0.73% vs. 0.20%, p = 0.015), and all PE occurred in this cohort (0.47% vs. 0.00%, p = 0.005). All 30‐ and 90‐day discharged VTE events occurred in those not receiving appropriate prophylaxis. Inpatient, 30‐ and 90‐day discharged bleeding rates were 2.10%, 0.13%, and 0.33%, respectively. Although inpatient bleeding was significantly higher in those receiving appropriate prophylaxis, all 30‐ and 90‐day post‐discharge bleeding events occurred in patients not receiving appropriate prophylaxis. On regression analysis, Caprini score was significantly positively associated with likelihood of receiving appropriate inpatient prophylaxis (odds ratio [OR] 1.05, confidence interval [CI] 1.03–1.07) but was negatively associated in the discharge cohort (OR 0.43, CI 0.36–0.51). Receipt of appropriate prophylaxis was associated with reduced odds of inpatient VTE (OR 0.24, CI 0.06–0.69), but not with risk of bleeding.ConclusionAlthough Caprini VTE risk‐stratified prophylaxis has a positive impact in reducing inpatient and post‐discharge VTE, it must be balanced against the risk of inpatient postoperative bleeding.Level of Evidence3 Laryngoscope, 134:1169–1182, 2024

Abstract Purpose Surgical patients with a penicillin allergy label (PAL) are less likely to receive β-lactams for surgical site infection (SSI) prophylaxis and more likely to receive second-line antibiotics, which may increase the risk of SSI, drug toxicities, and associated costs. We assessed the impact of implementing a pharmacist-led quality improvement project to increase the use of cefazolin as a first-line agent in this population. Summary After implementation of a pilot project in December 2021, all patients with a PAL and orders for preoperative antibiotics were risk stratified into high- or low-risk categories by a pharmacist. For the low-risk group, cefazolin was recommended. For the high-risk group, cefazolin was avoided and a second-line agent was administered. Our analysis compared 422 preintervention patients (August 15 to November 15, 2021) to 492 postintervention patients (December 15 to March 15, 2022). During the postintervention period, β-lactam usage increased (from 12.6% to 37.8%, P &lt; 0.001), while usage of vancomycin (45.5% vs 29.5%, P &lt; 0.001) and other second-line antibiotics (87.4% vs 62.2%, P &lt; 0.001) declined. There were no adverse reactions reported in the preintervention cohort, with 2 potential adverse reactions reported after the intervention (0% vs 0.4%, P = 0.190). Medication costs based on claims data were 50% to 80% lower for patients receiving cefazolin. Conclusion In our cohort, a pharmacy-led antibiotic selection algorithm for patients with a PAL receiving perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis resulted in increased use of β-lactam antibiotics, decreased use of second-line antibiotics, and decreased costs without a significant change in the incidence of adverse reactions.