Percutaneous Group Research Articles

Open versus percutaneous tracheostomy in patients with COVID-19: retrospective cohort analysis

BackgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, a great number of patients required Mechanical Ventilation (MV). Tracheostomy is the preferred procedure when difficult weaning is presented. Surgical techniques available for performing tracheostomy are open and percutaneous, with contradictory reports on the right choice. This paper aims to describe the clinical results after performing a tracheostomy in patients with COVID-19, regarding both surgical techniques.MethodsAn observational, analytical study of a retrospective cohort was designed. All patients admitted to the Hospital Universitario Mayor Méderi, between March 2020 and April 2021 who presented COVID-19 requiring MV and who underwent tracheostomy were reviewed. Open versus percutaneous tracheostomy groups were compared and the primary outcome evaluated was in-hospital mortality.ResultsA total of 113 patients were included in the final analysis. The median age was 66.0 (IQR: 57.2 – 72.0) years old and 77 (68.14%) were male. Open tracheostomy was performed in 64.6% (n = 73) of the patients and percutaneous tracheostomy in 35.4% (n = 40) with an in-hospital mortality of 65.7% (n = 48) and 25% (n = 10), respectively (p < 0.001). In a multivariate analysis, open tracheostomy technique [OR 9.45 (95% CI 3.20–27.92)], older age [OR 1.05 (95% CI 1.01–1.09)] and APACHE II score [OR 1.10 (95% CI 1.02–1.19)] were identified as independent risk factors for in-hospital mortality. Late tracheostomy (after 14 days) [OR 0.31 (95% CI 0.09–1.02)] and tracheostomy day PaO2/FiO2 [OR 1.10 (95% CI 1.02–1.19)] were not associated to in-hospital mortality.ConclusionsPercutaneous tracheostomy was independently associated with lower in-hospital mortality and should be considered the first option to perform this type of surgery in patients with COVID-19 in extended MV or difficulty weaning.

Clinical outcomes and cost of open, laparoscopic, and percutaneous ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma.

Open (OA), laparoscopic (LA), and percutaneous (PA) ablation are all ablation approaches for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) utilized in the United States today. However, it remains unclear today which approach is (A) most effective, (B) cost-efficient, and (C) nationally practiced. In-hospital mortality and cost were collected from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database for patients undergoing liver ablation from 2011 to 2018. Secondary outcomes included length of stay, disposition, and perioperative composite complications. We used inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) to adjust for differences in patient and hospital baseline characteristics. One thousand and one hundred and twenty-five LA, 1221 OA, and 1068 PA liver ablations were analyzed. After IPTW, in-hospital mortality risk was significantly lower in PA versus OA cohorts (0.57% vs. 2.90%, p < 0.001) and reduced among PA patients, yet not significantly different from the LA cohort (0.57% vs. 1.64%, p = 0.056). The median length of hospital stay was significantly lower in the PA and LA group compared to OA (2 days vs. 6 days, p < 0.001). The median hospitalization costs were significantly lower for PA ($44,884 vs. $90,187, p < 0.001) and LA ($61,445 vs. $90,187, p < 0.001) compared to OA. Moreover, we found significant regional differences regarding the use of each ablation approach, with the Midwest having the lowest rates of PA and LA. Among patients hospitalized after ablation for HCC, PA leads to the lowest hospital cost. Both PA and LA result in lower peri-operative morbidity and mortality relative to OA. Despite these reported advantages, there are significant regional differences with respect to ablation availability suggesting the need to promote the standardization of best practices.

A meta-analysis of closed reduction percutaneous pinning and open reduction with pin fixation of pediatric humeral lateral condylar fracture.

To compare the effectiveness and safety of closed reduction percutaneous pinning vs. open reduction with pin fixation to treat the pediatric humeral lateral condylar fracture. Studies comparing closed reduction percutaneous pinning vs. open reduction with pin fixation for treating pediatric lateral humeral condyle fractures were found by searching Pubmed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases, including randomized/non-randomized controlled, retrospective case-control, and prospective cohort studies. Furthermore, quality evaluation and data retrieval were conducted after the literature review. A meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 software to compare both groups' outcome measures. This Meta-analysis incorporated eight studies with 856 cases. The Meta-analysis found no significant difference in functional outcomes, superficial infection, deep infection, poor fracture union, avascular necrosis of the humeral capitulum, or lateral spur formation between groups. However, the status of unaesthetic scars in the closed reduction percutaneous pinning group was superior. For pediatric humeral lateral condylar fracture surgical therapy, the efficacy and safety of closed reduction percutaneous pinning vs. open reduction with pin fixation were not significantly different; closed reduction percutaneous pinning offered the benefit of eliminating unaesthetic scar. However, further high-quality research is required to verify the conclusions of this Meta-analysis. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/#myprospero, identifier CRD42023392451.

A retrospective study comparing open and percutaneous trigger finger release in the Thai population

Background: Over the years, open surgery has been the primary treatment for trigger finger, a prevalent issue among hand illnesses. There has been some resistance to the technique's routine use, despite the fact that the percutaneous release of triggers provides a quicker recovery than surgery. As a result, the study proposed that the percutaneous release technique outperforms open surgery. The objective of this study was to compares the trigger finger surgery's open and percutaneous releases in terms of short-term results. Methods: From 2014 to 2020, 166 patients who underwent open or percutaneous release surgery for the trigger finger at Naresuan University Hospital were the subjects of this retrospective analysis. For one, three, and six weeks, the initial characteristics and post-operative hemorrhage, digital nerve and artery injury, surgical site pain, inability to flex the finger, and other outcomes were compared. The visual analog scale (VAS) score and the impairments of the arm, shoulder, and hand (DASH) score were also compared between the two groups. Results: The age, sex, and number of patients in both groups were statistically comparable. Before the procedure, there was no difference between the groups in terms of DASH and VAS scores for pain; however, at six weeks, the percutaneous release group showed a substantial difference and low VAS scores. There were no differences between the groups in terms of consequences, including wound pain, damage to digital nerves and arteries, and others. Conclusion: Based on the patients' short-term outcomes, the study found that percutaneous release of the trigger finger is just as successful as traditional open surgery.

Comparative Analysis of Percutaneous Excision and Radiofrequency Ablation for Osteoid Osteoma.

BACKGROUND This retrospective study aims to compare the efficacy of computed tomography-guided percutaneous excision and radiofrequency ablation in the treatment of osteoid osteoma. MATERIAL AND METHODS We evaluated 40 patients with osteoid osteoma who underwent either percutaneous excision or radiofrequency ablation between 2012 and 2015. The cohort consisted of 10 female and 30 male patients, with a mean age of 15.1 years (range: 4-27 years) and a mean follow-up time of 19.02 months (range: 11-39 months). Percutaneous excision was performed in 20 patients, while radiofrequency ablation was performed in the remaining 20 patients. RESULTS The success rates of percutaneous excision and radiofrequency ablation were comparable, with unsuccessful outcomes observed in 10% and 5% of patients, respectively. The reasons for failure in the percutaneous excision group were attributed to a marking error and incomplete excision of the wide-based nidus. Complications were limited to pathological fracture (n=1) and deep infection (n=1) in the percutaneous excision group, while no complications were encountered in the radiofrequency ablation group. CONCLUSIONS Both percutaneous excision and radiofrequency ablation demonstrate high success rates in treating osteoid osteoma. However, radiofrequency ablation offers the advantage of a quicker return to daily activities without the need for activity restrictions or splints. While being a more cost-effective option, percutaneous excision should be considered cautiously to minimize potential complications.

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus percutaneous catheter drainage for acute cholecystitis in high risk patients

Aim: To assess which treatment modality, Patients with AC who are at a high risk should have a cholecystectomy performed using or percutaneous catheter drainage. Methodology: Sixty people were included in this study because they got diagnosed with acute calculous cholecystitis. Both the procedure of laparoscopic cholecystectomy and percutaneous catheter drainage were offered to them at random. Results: In terms of the need for further surgery, there was a statistically significant difference between the groups as there were 2 (6.7%) who needed re-intervention in laparoscopic cholecystectomy group and 14 (46.7%) in percutaneous catheter drainage group (p=0.001*), recurrent biliary disease as there were 2 (6.7%) in laparoscopic cholecystectomy group and 17 (56.7%) in percutaneous catheter drainage group (p&lt;0.001*) and total length of hospital stay as the mean of laparoscopic cholecystectomy group was 4.9 (±2.77 SD) while in percutaneous catheter drainage group was 10.67 (±6.62 SD).Conclusion: Cholecystectomy with laparoscopic is favored over percutaneous drainage for high-risk individuals with acute cholecystitis. When compared to percutaneous catheter drainage, laparoscopic cholecystectomy decreased significant complications but did not affect fatality rates.

The Safety and Effectiveness of the Prostar XL Closure Device Compared to Open Groin Cutdown for Endovascular Aneurysm Repair.

The aim of this study is to compare the outcomes of percutaneous femoral closure with the Prostar XL for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) to those of open femoral cutdown, and to evaluate factors which may predict the failure of percutaneous closure. Patients undergoing endovascular aneurysm repair for an infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm between 2005 and 2013 were included. Patient characteristics, anatomic femoral artery measurements, and postoperative complications were recorded retrospectively. Operator experience was defined with a cut-off point of >30 Prostar XL closures performed. Comparisons were made per access site. A total of 443 access sites were included, with percutaneous closure used in 257 cases (58.0%) and open cutdown in 186 cases (42.0%). The complication rate was 2.7% for the percutaneous and 4.3% for the open cutdown group (P = .482). No significant differences between groups were found with respect to 30-day mortality, wound infections, thrombosis, seromas, or bleeding complications. Fourteen failures (5.4%) of percutaneous closure occurred. The success rates were similar for experienced and unexperienced operators (94.2% vs 95.5%, P = .768). Renal insufficiency was more common in the failed than in the successful percutaneous closure group (64.3% vs 24.7%, P = .003). Common femoral artery calcification or diameter, BMI, sheath size, or operator experience did not predict failure. No further complications were seen in follow-up CT at 1-3years postoperatively. The use of the Prostar XL is safe compared to open cutdown. The success rate is 94.6%. Operator experience, sheath size, obesity, or femoral artery diameter or calcification do not appear to predict a failure of percutaneous closure. Complications seem to occur perioperatively, and late complications are rare.

Outcomes Following Repair of Achilles Midsubstance Tears: Percutaneous Knotless Repair vs Open Repair.

Optimum treatment for acute Achilles tendon rupture results in high mechanical strength, low risk of complications, and return to preinjury activity level. Percutaneous knotless repair is a minimally invasive technique with promising results in biomechanical studies, but few comparison clinical studies exist. Our study purpose was to compare functional outcomes and revision rates following acute Achilles tendon rupture treated between percutaneous knotless repair and open repair techniques. Patients 18 years or older with an acute Achilles tendon rupture, treated by a single surgeon with either open repair or percutaneous knotless repair, and more than 2 years after surgery were assessed for eligibility. Prospective clinical data were obtained from the data registry and standard electronic medical record. Additionally, the patients were contacted to obtain current follow-up questionnaires. Primary outcome measure was Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM) activities of daily living (ADL). Secondary outcome measures were FAAM sports, 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12), Tegner activity scale, patient satisfaction with outcome, complications, and revisions. Postoperative follow-up closest to 5 years was used in this study. In total, 61 patients were included in the study. Twenty-four of 29 patients (83%) in the open repair group and 28 of 32 patients (88%) in the percutaneous knotless repair group completed the questionnaires with average follow-up of 5.8 years and 4.2 years, respectively. We found no significant differences in patient-reported outcomes or patient satisfaction between groups (FAAM ADL: 99 vs 99 points, P = .99). Operative time was slightly longer in the percutaneous knotless repair group (46 vs 52 minutes, P = .02). Two patients in the open group required revision surgery compared to no patients in the percutaneous group. In our study, we did not find significant differences in patient-reported outcomes or patient satisfaction by treating Achilles tendon midsubstance ruptures with percutaneous knotless vs open repair. Level IlI, retrospective cohort study.

Access-related Outcomes After Infrarenal Endovascular Aortic Aneurysms Repair: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study

Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) is the first-line treatment for abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) in fit patients. Percutaneous vascular access (pEVAR) allows to ulteriorly decrease the invasivity of EVAR procedures in comparison to femoral cutdown (sEVAR); however, controversies remain regarding postoperative complications and mortality. The aim of this study is to compare the outcomes of these techniques and their impact on operative time, hospitalization, short-term complications, and mortality. This is a retrospective, observational cohort study from four tertiary referral university hospitals. Baseline and peripoperative data of all patients undergoing EVAR procedures were collected in a prospectively managed dataset at each institution and merged in the Italian Collaborators for EVAR (ICE) registry. Study cohort included standard EVAR interventions between January 2018 and February 2021. Mortality and complication risks have been calculated with dedicated scores (Society for Vascular Surgery/American Association for Vascular Surgery score system, American College of Surgeons [ACS] risk calculator). Primary outcomes were pEVAR technical success (absence of surgical conversion), 30-day mortality, and access-related complications. Operative time, length of hospital stay (LOS), 90-day readmission rate, and type of anesthesia were considered secondary outcomes. During the study time, 608 consecutive patients underwent standard EVAR procedures: 373 (61.3%) pEVAR and 202 (33.2%) sEVAR; 33 (5.4%) patients with one surgical and one percutaneous access were excluded from the final analysis. A higher estimated ACS risk for surgical site infection (0.80% ± 0.65% vs 0.65% ± 0.53%; P = .008) and death (1.66% ± 3.55% vs 0.76% ± 1.60%; P = .001) was found in the pEVAR group. Operative time (median, 80.00 minutes [interquartile range (IQR), 60.00-110.00 minutes] vs 112.50 minutes [IQR, 90.00-144.00 minutes]; P < .001), 90-day readmission rate (1.4% vs 6.9%; P = .001), and LOS (4.00 days [IQR, 3.00-7.00 days] in pEVAR vs 5.00 days [IQR, 3.25-8.00 days] in sEVAR; P = .012) were lower among pEVAR group. Higher rates of local anesthesia were observed in the percutaneous group (71.7% vs 22.8%; P < .001). Technical success rate of pEVAR was 97.3% with lower rates of 30-day mortality (1.4% pEVAR vs 6% sEVAR; P = .004). Early access-related complications showed a higher rate in sEVAR group (5.4% in sEVAR vs 1.6% in pEVAR; P = .02). Percutaneous access for EVAR is safe and feasible when compared with surgical access with a high technical success rate and low complication rate. The results of our analysis demonstrate that percutaneous access was associated with decreasing operative time, length of hospital stay, the use of general anesthesia, and readmission rate. The lower mortality rate, despite a higher estimate, is certainly a promising factor; however, further studies are needed to assess the significance of this results.

Optimizing peritoneal dialysis initiation: A comparative cohort study of catheter placement methods for shortening break-in periods.

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) guidelines recommend a 14-day break-in period after catheter placement, yet this period could be shortened with new insertion techniques. We conducted a prospective cohort study to compare percutaneous vs. surgical catheter insertion in a newly established PD program. The break-in period was intentionally shortened to <24 h to start PD almost immediately. We included 223 subjects who underwent percutaneous (34%) or surgical (66%) catheter placement. Compared to the surgical group, the percutaneous group had a higher proportion of early dialysis initiation within 24 h (97% vs. 8%, p < 0.001), similar successful initiation rates (87% vs. 92%, p = 0.34), and shorter lengths of stay (12 [9-18] vs. 18 [14-22] days, p < 0.001). Percutaneous insertion increased the likelihood of successful PD initiation within 24 h (OR 74, 95% CI 31-182), without increasing major complications. Percutaneous placement could represent a cost-effective and efficient technique to shorten break-in periods.

Sex-Related Disparities in Acute Limb Ischemia Treatment Outcomes

Although a substantial impetus behind disparities research in healthcare exists, those that are sex-related within vascular surgery outcomes are largely unexplored. Consequently, published guidelines lack specificity when it comes to treating male and female patients with vascular disease. Disparities related to patients suffering from chronic limb-threatening ischemia have been broached, although no extensive studies assessing disparities in acute limb ischemia treatment outcomes have come to the forefront. In this study, our aim is to identify and quantify sex-related disparities as they pertain to interventions for acute limb ischemia. Using the TriNetX global research network, we conducted a multicenter query across 48 healthcare organizations spanning five countries for patients treated for acute limb ischemia. We determined the number of male and female patients that received one of the following interventions: open revascularization, percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy, or catheter-directed thrombolysis and/or adjunctive endovascular procedures. Propensity score matching was performed to account for comorbidities. Risk of adverse outcomes within 30 days was calculated for each sex, including re-intervention, major amputation, and death. Risk of adverse outcomes was then compared between treatment groups of the same sex and between sexes. Type I errors were reduced through utilization of the Holm-Bonferroni method to correct P-values. Within our study we noted several important findings. Females were more likely to receive catheter-directed thrombolysis and/or adjunctive endovascular procedures (p = 0.001) than males. There were no significant differences in the rates of open revascularization or percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy between males and females. Overall, females were more likely to die within 30 days (p < 0.0001) and greater number of males required reintervention within 30 days (p < 0.0001). Analyzing outcomes within individual treatment groups, females undergoing open revascularization or catheter-directed thrombolysis and/or adjunctive endovascular intervention demonstrated a profound increase in mortality within 30 days of intervention (p = 0.0072 and p = 0.0206, respectively), but these differences were not reflected in the percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy group. Limb salvage rates in females were higher than males overall although there were no significant sex differences within any treatment groups specifically. In conclusion, there was a significantly higher risk of death in females across all treatment groups in the studied timeframe. Limb salvage rates were higher for females in the OR treatment group, while males were more likely to require a reintervention across all treatment groups. By evaluating these disparities, we can provide greater insight into personalized treatment for patients presenting with acute limb ischemia.

Complications of Percutaneous and Surgical Gastrostomy Placements in Children: a Single-Centre Series.

This is a monocentric retrospective study including children younger than 18 years who underwent gastrostomy placement (percutaneous or surgical) between January 2012 and December 2020. Complications that occurred up to 1 year after placement were collected and classified according to their time of onset, degree of severity, and management. A univariate analysis was conducted to compare the groups and the occurrence of complications. We established a cohort of 124 children. Sixty-three (50.8%) presented a concomitant neurological disease. Fifty-nine patients (47.6%) underwent endoscopic placement, 59 (47.6%) surgical placement, and 6 (4.8%) laparoscopic-assisted percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy. Two hundred and two complications were described, including 29 (14.4%) major and 173 (85.6%) minor. Abdominal wall abscess and cellulitis were reported 13 times. Patients who underwent surgical placement presented more complications (major and minor combined) with a statistically significant difference compared with the endoscopic technique. Patients with a concomitant neurological disease had significantly more early complications in the percutaneous group. Patients with malnutrition had significantly more major complications requiring endoscopic or surgical management. This study highlights a significant number of major complications or complications requiring additional management under general anesthesia. Children with a concomitant neurological disease or malnutrition are at greater risk of severe and early complications. Infections remain a frequent complication, and prevention strategies should be reviewed.

Transcatheter versus surgical closure of ventricular septal defect: a comparative study

BackgroundIn many countries, surgical closure of ventricular septal defects remains the recommended approach of ventricular septal defect closure. The aim of this study is to compare the safety, efficacy, and clinical effects of surgical versus transcatheter closure of a ventricular septal defect.MethodsWe conducted a comparative randomized study on patients undergoing ventricular septal defect closure. Patients were allocated to undergo either surgical (group I) or catheter (group II) ventricular septal defect closure.ResultsSeventy-two patients were included. Operation success was achieved in 100% of the surgical group versus 33 of 36 patients of the percutaneous group (91.6%) (p value 0.076). There was no significant difference regarding the residual ventricular septal defect. The postoperative echo in group I revealed severe tricuspid regurgitation in one patient (2.7%), and one patient needed a permanent pacemaker. On the other hand, in group II, during the procedure, one patient had severe tricuspid regurge (2.7%). There was a significant difference in the postoperative data favoring group II over group I regarding ventilation duration, intensive care unit stay, total hospital stay, and blood transfusion (P value < 0.001 each).ConclusionBoth transcatheter device closure and surgical repair are effective treatments. In contrast, the psychological profile of the transcatheter device was superior to the surgical repair, especially in terms of avoiding sternotomy scar, blood loss and transfusion, and hospital stay. On the other hand, transcatheter intervention is limited only to the anatomically suitable ventricular septal defects, in addition, surgical backup is a must in case of complicated transcatheter closure, which gives the upper hand to surgery to be the recommended approach for most of the ventricular septal defects.Clinical registration numberNCT05306483 registered 04/05/2022 (retrospectively registered) at ClinicalTrials.gov PRS.Graphical

Percutaneous closure versus surgical repair for ruptured sinus of valsalva aneurysm: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Ruptured sinus of Valsalva aneurysm (RSVA) often has an abrupt onset, and can chest pain, acute heart failure, and even sudden death. The effectiveness of different treatment modalities remains controversial. Thus, we completed a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficiency and safety of traditional surgery vs. percutaneous closure (PC) for RSVA. We carried out a meta-analysis using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), WanFang Data, and the China Science and Technology Journal Database. The primary outcome was comparing in-hospital mortality between the two procedures, and the secondary outcome was documenting postoperative residual shunts, postoperative aortic regurgitation, and length of hospital stay in the two groups. Differences were expressed as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to assess the relationships between predefined surgical variables and clinical outcomes. This meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager software (version 5.3). The final qualifying studies included 330 patients from 10 trials (123 in the percutaneous closure group, and 207 in the surgical repair group). When PC was compared to surgical repair, there were no statistically significant differences in in-hospital mortality (overall OR: 0.47, 95%CI 0.05-4.31, P = 0.50). However, percutaneous closure did significantly decrease the average length of hospital stay (OR: -2.13, 95% CI -3.05 to -1.20, P < 0.00001) when compared to surgical repair, but there were no significant between-group differences in the rates of postoperative residual shunts (overall OR: 1.54, 95%CI 0.55-4.34, P = 0.41) or postoperative aortic regurgitation (overall OR: 1.54, 95%CI 0.51-4.68, P = 0.45). PC may become a valuable alternative to surgical repair for RSVA.

Percutaneous tracheostomy in head and neck oncology surgery: How Covid-19 changed our practice

Enhanced experience in performing percutaneous tracheostomies during the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in changes to airway management protocol for patients undergoing major head and neck reconstructive surgery within our department. Most patients now receive a percutaneous tracheostomy over the previously favoured surgical tracheostomy. The aim of this study was to review our experience in performing percutaneous tracheostomies, whilst comparing complication rates with surgical tracheostomies performed in similar settings. All consecutive patients undergoing free flap reconstructive surgery for head and neck cancer between June 2020 and November 2021 were included, with 56 patients receiving a percutaneous tracheostomy. Data across a range of variables including age, BMI, comorbidities and complications was compared with 56 surgical tracheostomies performed for the same group of patients before the COVID-19 pandemic and resultant protocol changes. In the percutaneous group, a marginally lower complication rate was observed over the surgical tracheostomy group; 28.57% and 30.35% respectively. Analysis of the 16 patients who experienced complications in the percutaneous group led to development of selection criteria to identify appropriate patients to receive a percutaneous tracheostomy in future, based on factors such as BMI, bleeding risk and positioning deformities. The COVID-19 pandemic has offered a multitude of learning experiences for healthcare professionals to change our practice. In our unit, this has involved modifying the routine tracheostomy procedure used for airway management intra- and post-operatively in major head and neck reconstruction surgery.

Tracheostomy Outcomes on Trauma Patients.

Tracheostomies are performed in trauma patients for multiple purposes. Approaches to the procedure are usually directed by individual expertise and local preferences. Though generally safe, a tracheostomy can cause serious complications. This study aims to identify complications associated with tracheostomies performed at the level I Trauma Center of the Puerto Rico Medical Center (PRMC) to have an advanced foundation to develop and implement guidelines to improve patient outcomes. A retrospective cross-sectional study. Level I Trauma Center of the PRMC. Medical charts of 113 trauma adult patients that underwent tracheostomy at the PRMC from 2018 to 2020 were reviewed. Data collected included patient demographics, surgical approach, initial tracheostomy tube size (ITTS), intubation period, and flexible laryngoscopic findings. Complications occurring during and after tracheostomy were documented. The unadjusted relationship of the independent variables and outcome measures was assessed using χ 2and Fisher's test for categorical variables and the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney rank-sum test for continuous ones. Abnormal airway findings detected on flexible laryngoscopic examination were reported in 30 patients in the open tracheostomy (OT) group and 43 patients in the percutaneous tracheostomy group (p = 0.007). Peristomal granulation tissue was reported in 10 patients with an ITTS 8, while in only 1 patient with an ITTS 6 (p = 0.026). This study showed several key findings in our cohort. The OT surgical approach was associated with fewer long-term complications when compared to the percutaneous approach. Also, a statistically significant difference in peristomal granulation tissue findings was found between the ITTS,ITTS-6 and ITTS-8, the smaller size being associated with fewer abnormal findings.

Clinical Efficacy and Imaging Observation of Three Surgical Approaches in Treatment of Thoracolumbar Fractures.

To observe the efficacy and imaging of surgical treatment of thoracolumbar fractures via the paravertebral muscle space approach. A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients with thoracolumbar fractures receiving surgery in Baoding First Central Hospital from January 2019 to December 2020. According to different surgical approaches, they were divided into paravertebral approach group, posterior median approach group and minimally invasive percutaneous approach group. They received surgery via the paravertebral muscle space approach, posterior median approach and minimally invasive percutaneous approach, respectively. Statistically significant differences were found in surgical duration, intraoperative bleeding volume, intraoperative fluoroscopy frequency, postoperative drainage volume and hospital stay among the three groups. One year after surgery, the VAS, ADL and JOA scores of the paravertebral approach group and the minimally invasive percutaneous approach group had statistically significant differences from the posterior median approach group (P < 0.05). For the surgical treatment of thoracolumbar fractures, the clinical efficacy of the paravertebral muscle space approach is superior to that of the traditional posterior median approach, and the clinical efficacy of the minimally invasive percutaneous approach is similar to that of the posterior median approach. All the three approaches can effectively improve the postoperative function and pain symptoms of patients without increasing the incidence of complications. Compared with the posterior median approach, the surgery via the paravertebral muscle space and minimally invasive percutaneous approaches presents shorter surgical duration, less bleeding and shorter hospital stay, which is more conducive to postoperative recovery of patients.

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF PERCUTANEOUS NEPHROLITHOTOMY IN SUPINE VERSUS PRONE POSITION

Prone positioning in percutaneous nephrolithotomy is more and more being replaced by supine positioning now a days for its various benefits. This is a prospective study which does Comparative study on percutaneous nephrolithotomy in supine versus prone position and their various outcomes were analysed. There were totally 100 patients included in the study with 50 patients each group (supine versus prone). 57 were male and 43 female patients. Age ranging from 18 to 70 years. Right side stones were 58 and left side was 42. Age, gender and side of stones were similar between two groups. Stone burden were 2.6cm and 2.9cm for supine and prone group respectively. But average operating time were 63.5 minutes ( 35 to 120 minutes) for supine group versus 80 minutes ( 45 to 160 minutes) for prone group. fluoroscopy time was 18.9 minutes for supine group versus 29.4 minutes for prone group. Clearance rate in our study were pretty good in both groups around 90% in both groups (90% vs 88%). five had complications in form of sepsis and bleeding requiring blood transfusion in both groups. Five in supine group and six in prone group required second procedures. Thus Supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy group had significant advantage in terms of less operative duration and less fluoroscopy time than prone percutaneous nephrolithotomy . The stone clearance and complication rates were similar in both the groups

Comparing Outcomes of CT-Guided Percutaneous Pericardial Drainage with Surgical Pericardial Window in Patients with Symptomatic Pericardial Effusions

To compare short-term outcomes of CT-guided percutaneous pericardial drainage (PPD) versus subxiphoid surgical pericardial window (PW) drainage and analyze the risk factors associated with their outcomes. A retrospective chart review of patients who underwent either percutaneous drainage with drainage catheter placement or PW with surgical drain placement for symptomatic pericardial effusion between January 1, 2006 and August 31, 2016 was performed after institutional review board approval (decision number 16-783). The primary objective was to test for associations between the short-term (≤30 days post procedure) complication and recurrence rates in patients with symptomatic pericardial effusions. The secondary objectives were to test for associations between short-term complications with changes in vital signs. Of the 257 procedures included in the final analysis, 142 were in the percutaneous drainage group. Short-term complication rate was significantly greater (p < 0.001) in patients undergoing PW, 17% (19/114), as compared with PPD, 2% (3/142). The estimated odds of having complications in the PW cohort was 9 times greater than the percutaneous drainage cohort (OR=9.3, 95% CI: 2.7-32.3). No significant difference was observed between whether or not a patient experienced a short-term recurrence and any of the explanatory variables (patient demographics, imaging, and vital signs). CT-guided PPD is a safer alternative to surgical PW as it leads to fewer complications without a significant difference in recurrence rate of pericardial effusion.

Hybrid Percutaneous Management of Acute Midsubstance Achilles Tendon Ruptures

Background: Operative management techniques of Achilles tendon ruptures can be categorized into open repair, mini-open repair, or percutaneous repair. Indications: Surgical repair of acute ruptures of the Achilles tendon is indicated in athletic populations, with percutaneous repair being an effective technique with more favorable outcomes. Technique: With the patient prone, the Achilles rupture is identified and the Percutaneous Achilles Repair System (PARS) jig is inserted under the proximal paratenon. A series of Keith needles and flat braided SutureTape sutures are passed transversely across the proximal stump of the tendon. The sutures are then shuttled through the distal stump using a SutureLasso through medial and lateral percutaneous incisions on the distal medial and distal lateral borders of Achilles, respectively. Sutures are passed, tensioned, and secured to the posterior tuberosity of the calcaneus with two SwiveLock anchors. Results: Percutaneous repair, compared with open repair, results in lower wound complication rates, improved cosmetic appearance and fewer adhesions. Following surgery, patients follow a 5-stage rehabilitation protocol with return to sport when patients demonstrate dynamic neuromuscular control during multiplane activities without pain or swelling. Outcome studies have compared percutaneous repairs to open repairs, with percutaneous repairs demonstrating a quicker return to work or baseline activities (2.8 months versus 5.6 months) and a shorter return to play for athletes (average 18 weeks). Also, a greater number of PARS patients were able to return to baseline activities within 5 months (98%), compared with open repair patients (82%; P = .0001). In a prospective randomized controlled trial of 33 patients, Lim et al reported no postoperative wound infections in the percutaneous group and a 21% infection rate in the open repair group ( P = .01). Finally, in a recent systematic review of only percutaneous repairs, reported rates of sural nerve injury and rerupture were only 3.3% and 2.1%, respectively. Discussion/Conclusion: Compared to open repair, percutaneous Achilles repair allows for decreased risk of soft-tissue complications with comparable functional outcomes and earlier return to activity. Patient Consent Disclosure Statement: The author(s) attests that consent has been obtained from any patient(s) appearing in this publication. If the individual may be identifiable, the author(s) has included a statement of release or other written form of approval from the patient(s) with this submission for publication.