Shawn D. St. Peter

The Management of Community-Acquired Pneumonia in Infants and Children Older Than 3 Months of Age: Clinical Practice Guidelines by the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society and the Infectious Diseases Society of America

Abstract Evidenced-based guidelines for management of infants and children with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) were prepared by an expert panel comprising clinicians and investigators representing community pediatrics, public health, and the pediatric specialties of critical care, emergency medicine, hospital medicine, infectious diseases, pulmonology, and surgery. These guidelines are intended for use by primary care and subspecialty providers responsible for the management of otherwise healthy infants and children with CAP in both outpatient and inpatient settings. Site-of-care management, diagnosis, antimicrobial and adjunctive surgical therapy, and prevention are discussed. Areas that warrant future investigations are also highlighted.

The diagnosis and management of empyema in children: a comprehensive review from the APSA Outcomes and Clinical Trials Committee.

The aim of this study is to review the current evidence on the diagnosis and management of empyema. The American Pediatric Surgical Association Outcomes and Clinical Trials Committee compiled 8 questions to address. A comprehensive review was performed on each topic. Topics included the distinction between parapneumonic effusion and empyema, the optimal imaging modality in evaluating pleural space disease, when and how pleural fluid should be managed, the first treatment option and optimal timing in the management of empyema, the optimal chemical debridement agent for empyema, therapeutic options if chemical debridement fails, therapy for parenchymal abscess or necrotizing pneumonia and duration of antibiotic therapy after an intervention. The evidence was graded for each topic to provide grade of recommendation where appropriate.

Initial experience with same day discharge after laparoscopic appendectomy for nonperforated appendicitis.

BACKGROUNDnAlthough many laparoscopic procedures are performed on an outpatient basis, patients who have undergone a laparoscopic appendectomy have typically stayed at least overnight. Recently, data in both the pediatric and adult literature suggest that same day discharge (SDD) for acute nonperforated appendicitis is safe and associated with high patient and parent satisfaction. We have recently begun attempting SDD for nonperforated appendicitis, and this study is an analysis of our initial experience.nnnMETHODSnA retrospective chart review of all patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy for nonperforated appendicitis at our institution from January 2012 to July 2013 was performed. Demographics, length of stay, hospital course, and outcomes were measured. Data are expressed as mean±standard deviation. Comparative analysis was performed using a t-test.nnnRESULTSnA total of 588 laparoscopic appendectomies for nonperforated appendicitis were performed over an 18-mo period. Approximately 28% (n=128) were discharged on the day of surgery. Of the remaining patients, 12.9% (n=59) stayed overnight for medical reasons, 0.4% (n=2) stayed for social reasons, 3.9% (n=18) stayed because the operation ended late in the evening, and 82.8% (n=381) stayed because of clinical care habits. Compared with patients who stayed overnight, there was no statistically significant difference in readmission rates (0.7% versus 1.9%, P=0.6%), follow-up before scheduled appointment (5.4% versus 5.4%, P=1.0), and complication rate (0.7% versus 2.6%, P=0.3). Patients whose operation ended later in the day had a longer hospital stay. We observed a trend toward more SDDs, the further we got from the initiation of our protocol.nnnCONCLUSIONSnSDD is safe for children undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy for nonperforated appendicitis. The two main barriers to SDD were time of day for the operation and provider habit, both of which improved as more practitioners felt comfortable with the concept. SDD requires extensive education within the hospital system, and we have initiated an aggressive prospective protocol to improve the results.

Surgical wound misclassification: A multicenter evaluation

BACKGROUNDnSurgical wound classification (SWC) is used by hospitals, quality collaboratives, and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid to stratify patients for their risk for surgical site infection. Although these data can be used to compare centers, the validity and reliability of SWC as currently practiced has not been well studied. Our objective was to assess the reliability of SWC in a multicenter fashion. We hypothesized that the concordance rates between SWC in the electronic medical record and SWC determined from the operative note review is low and varies by institution and operation.nnnSTUDY DESIGNnSurgical wound classification concordance was assessed at 11 participating institutions between SWC from the electronic medical record and SWC from operative note review for 8 common pediatric surgical operations. Cases with concurrent procedures were excluded. A maximum of 25 consecutive cases were selected per operation from each institution. A designated surgeon reviewed the included operative notes from his/her own institution to determine SWC based on a predetermined algorithm.nnnRESULTSnIn all, 2,034 cases were reviewed. Overall SWC concordance was 56%, ranging from 47% to 66% across institutions. Inguinal hernia repair had the highest overall median concordance (92%) and appendectomy had the lowest (12%). Electronic medical records and reviewer SWC differed by up to 3 classes for certain cases.nnnCONCLUSIONSnSurgical site infection risk stratification by SWC, as currently practiced, is an unreliable methodology to compare patients and institutions. Surgical wound classification should not be used for quality benchmarking. If SWC continues to be used, individual institutions should evaluate their process of assigning SWC to ensure its accuracy and reliability.

The Effects of Irrigation on Outcomes in Cases of Perforated Appendicitis in Children

INTRODUCTIONnAppendicitis is the most common indication for urgent abdominal operation in children. Approximately 20%-30% of patients will have a perforation at operation. Intra-abdominal abscess after appendectomy is reported in 3%-20% of patients and adds significantly to hospital stay with increased morbidity and overall cost. Surgical dogma has long advocated for irrigation in the setting of gross pus to prevent abscess formation.nnnMETHODSnFollowing IRB approval, data were retrospectively collected for children who had undergone appendectomy for perforated appendicitis at one of two childrens hospitals over the course of 5 y. Perforation was determined by review of operative notes. All patients had free fluid in their peritoneal cavity evacuated by suction, whereas some of the patients also had their peritoneal cavity irrigated with normal saline. Postoperative intra-abdominal abscess rates were determined based on clinical symptoms and confirmatory radiologic studies.nnnRESULTSnThere were 99 patients in the suction-only group and 139 in the irrigation group. Standard demographics were relatively similar between the two groups. There were significantly lower rates of intra-abdominal abscess formation (4.0% versus 17.2%, P = 0.002) and wound infection (1.0% versus 8.6%, P = 0.003) in the suction-only group compared with the irrigation group. We further analyzed abscess rates by surgical treatment, either laparoscopic or open appendectomy. There were 85 patients in the laparoscopic group and 152 patients in the open appendectomy group. In this subgroup analysis, there were also significantly lower rates of abscess formation in patients treated with suction only compared with irrigation in the laparoscopic (3.5% versus 18.8%, P = 0.012) and open appendectomy groups (4.2% versus 16.3%, P = 0.036).nnnCONCLUSIONSnResults of this retrospective review indicate that a suction-only approach significantly decreased rates of abscess formation and wound infections compared to irrigation in cases of perforated appendicitis in children.

Improving gastroschisis outcomes: Does birth place matter?

PURPOSEnBabies born in the hospital where they obtain definitive surgical care do not require transportation between institutions and may have shorter time to surgical intervention. Whether these differences result in meaningful improvement in outcomes has been debated. A multi-institutional retrospective study was performed comparing outcomes based on birthplace.nnnMETHODSnSix institutions within the PedSRC reviewed infants born with gastroschisis from 2008 to 2013. Birthplace, perinatal, and postoperative data were collected. Based on the P-NSQIP definition, inborn was defined as birth at the pediatric hospital where repair occurred. The primary outcome was days to full enteral nutrition (FEN; 120kcal/kg/day).nnnRESULTSn528 patients with gastroschisis were identified: 286 inborn, 242 outborn. Days to FEN, time to bowel coverage and abdominal wall closure, primary closure rate, and length of stay significantly favored inborn patients. In multivariable analysis, birthplace was not a significant predictor of time to FEN. Gestational age, presence of atresia or necrosis, primary closure rate, and time to abdominal wall closure were significant predictors.nnnCONCLUSIONSnInborn patients had bowel coverage and definitive closure sooner with fewer days to full feeds and shorter length of stay. Birthplace appears to be important and should be considered in efforts to improve outcomes in patients with gastroschisis.

Prevention of infectious complications after elective colorectal surgery in children: an American Pediatric Surgical Association Outcomes and Clinical Trials Committee comprehensive review

OBJECTIVEnThis goal of this review was to examine the clinical evidence in support of commonly utilized measures intended to reduce complications following elective colorectal surgery.nnnDATA SOURCEnLiterature searches were performed to identify relevant studies from Medline, PubMed, and Cochrane databases.nnnSTUDY SELECTIONnThe American Pediatric Surgery Association Outcomes and Clinical Trials Committee selected eight questions to address this topic systematically in the context of three management areas: 1) appropriate utilization of systemic antibiotics for colorectal procedures, 2) reduction of stool burden through mechanical bowel preparation, and 3) intraluminal gut decontamination through use of enteral nonabsorbable antibiotics. Primary outcomes of interest included the occurrence of infectious and mechanical complications related to stool burden and intraluminal bacterial concentration (incisional surgical site infection, anastomotic leakage, and intraabdominal abscess).nnnRESULTSnThe evidence in support of each management category was systematically reviewed, graded, and summarized in the context of the reviews primary outcomes. Practice recommendations were made as deemed appropriate by the committee.nnnCONCLUSIONSnClinical evidence in support of interventions to reduce infectious complications following colorectal surgery is derived almost exclusively from the adult literature. High-quality evidence to guide clinical practice in children is sorely needed, as the available data may have only limited relevance to pediatric colorectal diseases.

Advances in paediatric gastroenterology

Recent developments in paediatric gastrointestinal surgery have focused on minimally invasive surgery, the accumulation of high-quality clinical evidence, and scientific research. The benefits of minimally invasive surgery for common disorders like appendicitis and hypertrophic pyloric stenosis are all supported by good clinical evidence. Although minimally invasive surgery has been extended to neonatal surgery, it is difficult to establish its role for neonatal disorders such as oesophageal atresia and biliary atresia through clinical trials because of the rarity of these disorders. Advances in treatments for biliary atresia and necrotising enterocolitis have been achieved through specialisation, multidisciplinary management, and multicentre collaboration in research; similarly robust clinical evidence for other rare gastrointestinal disorders is needed. As more neonates with gastrointestinal diseases survive into adulthood, their long-term sequelae will also need evidence-based multidisciplinary care. Identifying cures for long-term problems of a complex developmental anomaly such as Hirschsprungs disease will rely on unravelling its pathogenesis through genetics and the development of stem-cell therapy.

Outcomes research in pediatric surgery Part 1: overview and resources ☆

Outcomes research in pediatric surgery can be defined as the analysis of pediatric surgical outcomes and their predictors at different levels in the health care delivery system. The objectives of this article are to understand the differences between outcomes research and clinical trials as well as to gain familiarity with public multispecialty and specialty-specific databases. The utility of outcomes research extends to benchmarking the quality of care, refinement of management strategies, patient education, and marketing. Assessment of the integration of a new surgical technique into the health care system is best determined by examining a population-based registry, whereas comparative efficacy of surgical procedures is best assessed by randomized clinical trials. In the first part of this 2-part series, an overview and brief outline of available resources for outcomes research in pediatric surgery are reviewed. In part 2, a template is presented on how to structure and design an outcomes research question.

A multicenter, pediatric quality improvement initiative improves surgical wound class assignment, but is it enough? ☆ ☆☆ ★

BACKGROUND/PURPOSEnSurgical wound classification (SWC) is widely utilized for surgical site infection (SSI) risk stratification and hospital comparisons. We previously demonstrated that nearly half of common pediatric operations are incorrectly classified in eleven hospitals. We aimed to improve multicenter, intraoperative SWC assignment through targeted quality improvement (QI) interventions.nnnMETHODSnA before-and-after study from 2011-2014 at eleven childrens hospitals was conducted. The SWC recorded in the hospitals intraoperative record (hospital-based SWC) was compared to the SWC assigned by a surgeon reviewer utilizing a standardized algorithm. Study centers independently performed QI interventions. Agreement between the hospital-based and surgeon SWC was analyzed with Cohens weighted kappa and chi square.nnnRESULTSnSurgeons reviewed 2034 cases from 2011 (Period 1) and 1998 cases from 2013 (Period 2). Overall SWC agreement improved from 56% to 76% (p<0.01) and weighted kappa from 0.45 (95% CI 0.42-0.48) to 0.73 (95% CI 0.70-0.75). Median (range) improvement per institution was 23% (7-35%). A dose-response-like pattern was found between the number of interventions implemented and the amount of improvement in SWC agreement at each institution.nnnCONCLUSIONSnIntraoperative SWC assignment significantly improved after resource-intensive, multifaceted interventions. However, inaccurate wound classification still commonly occurred. SWC used in SSI risk-stratification models for hospital comparisons should be carefully evaluated.