Browsing by Author "Ball, Chad G"

Now showing 1 - 14 of 14
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Acute care and emergency general surgery in patients with chronic liver disease: how can we optimize perioperative care? A review of the literature
    (2018-07-18) Bleszynski, Michael S; Bressan, Alexsander K; Joos, Emilie; Morad Hameed, S.; Ball, Chad G
    Abstract The increasing prevalence of advanced cirrhosis among operative candidates poses a major challenge for the acute care surgeon. The severity of hepatic dysfunction, degree of portal hypertension, emergency of surgery, and severity of patients’ comorbidities constitute predictors of postoperative mortality. Comprehensive history taking, physical examination, and thorough review of laboratory and imaging examinations typically elucidate clinical evidence of hepatic dysfunction, portal hypertension, and/or their complications. Utilization of specific scoring systems (Child-Pugh and MELD) adds objectivity to stratifying the severity of hepatic dysfunction. Hypovolemia and coagulopathy often represent major preoperative concerns. Resuscitation mandates judicious use of intravenous fluids and blood products. As a general rule, the most expeditious and least invasive operative procedure should be planned. Laparoscopic approaches, advanced energy devices, mechanical staplers, and topical hemostatics should be considered whenever applicable to improve safety. Precise operative technique must acknowledge common distortions in hepatic anatomy, as well as the risk of massive hemorrhage from porto-systemic collaterals. Preventive measures, as well as both clinical and laboratory vigilance, for postoperative hepatic and renal decompensation are essential.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Canadian Practice Guidelines for Surgical Intra-Abdominal Infections
    (2010-01-01) Chow, Anthony W; Evans, Gerald A; Nathens, Avery B; Ball, Chad G; Hansen, Glen; Harding, Godfrey KM; Kirkpatrick, Andrew W; Weiss, Karl; Zhanel, George G
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Challenges and potential solutions to the evaluation, monitoring, and regulation of surgical innovations
    (2019-08-27) Roberts, Derek J; Zygun, David A; Ball, Chad G; Kirkpatrick, Andrew W; Faris, Peter D; James, Matthew T; Mrklas, Kelly J; Hemmelgarn, Brenda D; Manns, Braden; Stelfox, Henry T
    Abstract Background As it may be argued that many surgical interventions provide obvious patient benefits, formal, staged assessment of the efficacy and safety of surgical procedures has historically been and remains uncommon. The majority of innovative surgical procedures have therefore often been developed based on anatomical and pathophysiological principles in an attempt to better manage clinical problems. Main Body In this manuscript, we sought to review and contrast the models for pharmaceutical and surgical innovation in North America, including their stages of development and methods of evaluation, monitoring, and regulation. We also aimed to review the present structure of academic surgery, the role of methodological experts and funding in conducting surgical research, and the current system of regulation of innovative surgical procedures. Finally, we highlight the influence that evidence and surgical history, education, training, and culture have on elective and emergency surgical decision-making. The above discussion is used to support the argument that the model used for assessment of innovative pharmaceuticals cannot be applied to that for evaluating surgical innovations. It is also used to support our position that although the evaluation and monitoring of innovative surgical procedures requires a rigorous, fit-for-purpose, and formal system of assessment to protect patient safety and prevent unexpected adverse health outcomes, it will only succeed if it is supported and championed by surgical practice leaders and respects surgical history, education, training, and culture. Conclusion We conclude the above debate by providing a recommended approach to the evaluation, monitoring, and regulation of surgical innovations, which we hope may be used as a guide for all stakeholders involved in interpreting and/or conducting future surgical research.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Closed Or Open after Source Control Laparotomy for Severe Complicated Intra-Abdominal Sepsis (the COOL trial): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
    (2018-06-22) Kirkpatrick, Andrew W; Coccolini, Federico; Ansaloni, Luca; Roberts, Derek J; Tolonen, Matti; McKee, Jessica L; Leppaniemi, Ari; Faris, Peter; Doig, Christopher J; Catena, Fausto; Fabian, Timothy; Jenne, Craig N; Chiara, Osvaldo; Kubes, Paul; Manns, Braden; Kluger, Yoram; Fraga, Gustavo P; Pereira, Bruno M; Diaz, Jose J; Sugrue, Michael; Moore, Ernest E; Ren, Jianan; Ball, Chad G; Coimbra, Raul; Balogh, Zsolt J; Abu-Zidan, Fikri M; Dixon, Elijah; Biffl, Walter; MacLean, Anthony; Ball, Ian; Drover, John; McBeth, Paul B; Posadas-Calleja, Juan G; Parry, Neil G; Di Saverio, Salomone; Ordonez, Carlos A; Xiao, Jimmy; Sartelli, Massimo
    Abstract Background Severe complicated intra-abdominal sepsis (SCIAS) has an increasing incidence with mortality rates over 80% in some settings. Mortality typically results from disruption of the gastrointestinal tract, progressive and self-perpetuating bio-mediator generation, systemic inflammation, and multiple organ failure. Principles of treatment include early antibiotic administration and operative source control. A further therapeutic option may be open abdomen (OA) management with active negative peritoneal pressure therapy (ANPPT) to remove inflammatory ascites and ameliorate the systemic damage from SCIAS. Although there is now a biologic rationale for such an intervention as well as non-standardized and erratic clinical utilization, this remains a novel therapy with potential side effects and clinical equipoise. Methods The Closed Or Open after Laparotomy (COOL) study will constitute a prospective randomized controlled trial that will randomly allocate eligible surgical patients intra-operatively to either formal closure of the fascia or use of the OA with application of an ANPTT dressing. Patients will be eligible if they have free uncontained intra-peritoneal contamination and physiologic derangements exemplified by septic shock OR a Predisposition-Infection-Response-Organ Dysfunction Score ≥ 3 or a World-Society-of-Emergency-Surgery-Sepsis-Severity-Score ≥ 8. The primary outcome will be 90-day survival. Secondary outcomes will be logistical, physiologic, safety, bio-mediators, microbiological, quality of life, and health-care costs. Secondary outcomes will include days free of ICU, ventilation, renal replacement therapy, and hospital at 30 days from the index laparotomy. Physiologic secondary outcomes will include changes in intensive care unit illness severity scores after laparotomy. Bio-mediator outcomes for participating centers will involve measurement of interleukin (IL)-6 and IL-10, procalcitonin, activated protein C (APC), high-mobility group box protein-1, complement factors, and mitochondrial DNA. Economic outcomes will comprise standard costing for utilization of health-care resources. Discussion Although facial closure after SCIAS is considered the current standard of care, many reports are suggesting that OA management may improve outcomes in these patients. This trial will be powered to demonstrate a mortality difference in this highly lethal and morbid condition to ensure critically ill patients are receiving the best care possible and not being harmed by inappropriate therapies based on opinion only. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT03163095 .
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Efficacy and safety of active negative pressure peritoneal therapy for reducing the systemic inflammatory response after damage control laparotomy (the Intra- peritoneal Vacuum Trial): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
    (BioMed Central, 2013-05-16) Roberts, Derek J; Jenne, Craig N; Ball, Chad G; Tiruta, Corina; Léger, Caroline; Xiao, Zhengwen; Faris, Peter D; McBeth, Paul B; Doig, Christopher J; Skinner, Christine R; Ruddell, Stacy G; Kubes, Paul; Kirkpatrick, Andrew W
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Getting the invite list right: a discussion of sepsis severity scoring systems in severe complicated intra-abdominal sepsis and randomized trial inclusion criteria
    (2018-04-06) Tolonen, Matti; Coccolini, Federico; Ansaloni, Luca; Sartelli, Massimo; Roberts, Derek J; McKee, Jessica L; Leppaniemi, Ari; Doig, Christopher J; Catena, Fausto; Fabian, Timothy; Jenne, Craig N; Chiara, Osvaldo; Kubes, Paul; Kluger, Yoram; Fraga, Gustavo P; Pereira, Bruno M; Diaz, Jose J; Sugrue, Michael; Moore, Ernest E; Ren, Jianan; Ball, Chad G; Coimbra, Raul; Dixon, Elijah; Biffl, Walter; MacLean, Anthony; McBeth, Paul B; Posadas-Calleja, Juan G; Di Saverio, Salomone; Xiao, Jimmy; Kirkpatrick, Andrew W
    Abstract Background Severe complicated intra-abdominal sepsis (SCIAS) is a worldwide challenge with increasing incidence. Open abdomen management with enhanced clearance of fluid and biomediators from the peritoneum is a potential therapy requiring prospective evaluation. Given the complexity of powering multi-center trials, it is essential to recruit an inception cohort sick enough to benefit from the intervention; otherwise, no effect of a potentially beneficial therapy may be apparent. An evaluation of abilities of recognized predictive systems to recognize SCIAS patients was conducted using an existing intra-abdominal sepsis (IAS) database. Methods All consecutive adult patients with a diffuse secondary peritonitis between 2012 and 2013 were collected from a quaternary care hospital in Finland, excluding appendicitis/cholecystitis. From this retrospectively collected database, a target population (93) of those with either ICU admission or mortality were selected. The performance metrics of the Third Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock based on both SOFA and quick SOFA, the World Society of Emergency Surgery Sepsis Severity Score (WSESSSS), the APACHE II score, Manheim Peritonitis Index (MPI), and the Calgary Predisposition, Infection, Response, and Organ dysfunction (CPIRO) score were all tested for their discriminant ability to identify this subgroup with SCIAS and to predict mortality. Results Predictive systems with an area under-the-receiving-operating characteristic (AUC) curve > 0.8 included SOFA, Sepsis-3 definitions, APACHE II, WSESSSS, and CPIRO scores with the overall best for CPIRO. The highest identification rates were SOFA score ≥ 2 (78.4%), followed by the WSESSSS score ≥ 8 (73.1%), SOFA ≥ 3 (75.2%), and APACHE II ≥ 14 (68.8%) identification. Combining the Sepsis-3 septic-shock definition and WSESSS ≥ 8 increased detection to 80%. Including CPIRO score ≥ 3 increased this to 82.8% (Sensitivity-SN; 83% Specificity-SP; 74%. Comparatively, SOFA ≥ 4 and WSESSSS ≥ 8 with or without septic-shock had 83.9% detection (SN; 84%, SP; 75%, 25% mortality). Conclusions No one scoring system behaves perfectly, and all are largely dominated by organ dysfunction. Utilizing combinations of SOFA, CPIRO, and WSESSSS scores in addition to the Sepsis-3 septic shock definition appears to offer the widest “inclusion-criteria” to recognize patients with a high chance of mortality and ICU admission. Trial registration https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03163095 ; Registered on May 22, 2017.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Intraoperative surgical site infection control and prevention: a position paper and future addendum to WSES intra-abdominal infections guidelines
    (2020-02-10) De Simone, Belinda; Sartelli, Massimo; Coccolini, Federico; Ball, Chad G; Brambillasca, Pietro; Chiarugi, Massimo; Campanile, Fabio C; Nita, Gabriela; Corbella, Davide; Leppaniemi, Ari; Boschini, Elena; Moore, Ernest E; Biffl, Walter; Peitzmann, Andrew; Kluger, Yoram; Sugrue, Michael; Fraga, Gustavo; Di Saverio, Salomone; Weber, Dieter; Sakakushev, Boris; Chiara, Osvaldo; Abu-Zidan, Fikri M; ten Broek, Richard; Kirkpatrick, Andrew W; Wani, Imtiaz; Coimbra, Raul; Baiocchi, Gian L; Kelly, Micheal D; Ansaloni, Luca; Catena, Fausto
    Abstract Background Surgical site infections (SSI) represent a considerable burden for healthcare systems. They are largely preventable and multiple interventions have been proposed over past years in an attempt to prevent SSI. We aim to provide a position paper on Operative Room (OR) prevention of SSI in patients presenting with intra-abdominal infection to be considered a future addendum to the well-known World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) Guidelines on the management of intra-abdominal infections. Methods The literature was searched for focused publications on SSI until March 2019. Critical analysis and grading of the literature has been performed by a working group of experts; the literature review and the statements were evaluated by a Steering Committee of the WSES. Results Wound protectors and antibacterial sutures seem to have effective roles to prevent SSI in intra-abdominal infections. The application of negative-pressure wound therapy in preventing SSI can be useful in reducing postoperative wound complications. It is important to pursue normothermia with the available resources in the intraoperative period to decrease SSI rate. The optimal knowledge of the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic characteristics of antibiotics helps to decide when additional intraoperative antibiotic doses should be administered in patients with intra-abdominal infections undergoing emergency surgery to prevent SSI. Conclusions The current position paper offers an extensive overview of the available evidence regarding surgical site infection control and prevention in patients having intra-abdominal infections.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    A multicenter review of deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis practice patterns for blunt hepatic trauma
    (BioMed Central, 2009-06) Datta, Indraneel; Ball, Chad G; Rudmik, Lucas R.; Paton-Gay, Damian; Bhayana, Deepak; Salat, Peter; Schieman, Colin; Smith, Dean F.; vanWijngaarden-Stephens, Mary; Kortbeek, John B.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Outcomes of selective nonoperative management of civilian abdominal gunshot wounds: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    (2018-11-27) Al Rawahi, Aziza N; Al Hinai, Fatma A; Boyd, Jamie M; Doig, Christopher J; Ball, Chad G; Velmahos, George C; Kirkpatrick, Andrew W; Navsaria, Pradeep H; Roberts, Derek J
    Abstract Background Although mandatory laparotomy has been standard of care for patients with abdominal gunshot wounds (GSWs) for decades, this approach is associated with non-therapeutic operations, morbidity, and long hospital stays. This systematic review and meta-analysis sought to summarize outcomes of selective nonoperative management (SNOM) of civilian abdominal GSWs. Methods We searched electronic databases (March 1966–April 1, 2017) and reference lists of articles included in the systematic review for studies reporting outcomes of SNOM of civilian abdominal GSWs. We meta-analyzed the associated risks of SNOM-related failure (defined as laparotomy during hospital admission), mortality, and morbidity across included studies using DerSimonian and Laird random-effects models. Between-study heterogeneity was assessed by calculating I2 statistics and conducting tests of homogeneity. Results Of 7155 citations identified, we included 41 studies [n = 22,847 patients with abdominal GSWs, of whom 6777 (29.7%) underwent SNOM]. The pooled risk of failure of SNOM in hemodynamically stable patients without a reduced level of consciousness or signs of peritonitis was 7.0% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 3.9–10.1%; I2 = 92.6%, homogeneity p < 0.001] while the pooled mortality associated with use of SNOM in this patient population was 0.4% (95% CI = 0.2–0.6%; I2 = 0%, homogeneity p > 0.99). In patients who failed SNOM, the pooled estimate of the risk of therapeutic laparotomy was 68.0% (95% CI = 58.3–77.7%; I2 = 91.5%; homogeneity p < 0.001). Risks of failure of SNOM were lowest in studies that evaluated patients with right thoracoabdomen (3.4%; 95% CI = 0–7.0%; I2 = 0%; homogeneity p = 0.45), flank (7.0%; 95% CI = 3.9–10.1%), and back (3.1%; 95% CI = 0–6.5%) GSWs and highest in those that evaluated patients with anterior abdomen (13.2%; 95% CI = 6.3–20.1%) GSWs. In patients who underwent mandatory abdominopelvic computed tomography (CT), the pooled risk of failure was 4.1% versus 8.3% in those who underwent selective CT (p = 0.08). The overall sample-size-weighted mean hospital length of stay among patients who underwent SNOM was 6 days versus 10 days if they failed SNOM or developed an in-hospital complication. Conclusions SNOM of abdominal GSWs is safe when conducted in hemodynamically stable patients without a reduced level of consciousness or signs of peritonitis. Failure of SNOM may be lower in patients with GSWs to the back, flank, or right thoracoabdomen and be decreased by mandatory use of abdominopelvic CT scans.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Severe traumatic injury during long duration spaceflight: Light years beyond ATLS
    (BioMed Central, 2009) Kirkpatrick, Andrew W.; Ball, Chad G; Campbell, Mark; Williams, David R; Parazynski, Scott E; Mattox, Kenneth L; Broderick, Timothy J
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Ten years of major equestrian injury: are we addressing functional outcomes?
    (BioMed Central, 2009) Ball, Jill E; Ball, Chad G; Mulloy, Robert H; Datta, Indraneel; Kirkpatrick, Andrew W.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    The prognostic value of serum procalcitonin measurements in critically injured patients: a systematic review
    (2019-12-03) AlRawahi, Aziza N; AlHinai, Fatma A; Doig, Christopher J; Ball, Chad G; Dixon, Elijah; Xiao, Zhengwen; Kirkpatrick, Andrew W
    Abstract Background Major trauma is associated with high incidence of septic complications and multiple organ dysfunction (MOD), which markedly influence the outcome of injured patients. Early identification of patients at risk of developing posttraumatic complications is crucial to provide early treatment and improve outcomes. We sought to evaluate the prognostic value of serum procalcitonin (PCT) levels after trauma as related to severity of injury, sepsis, organ dysfunction, and mortality. Methods We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Database, and references of included articles. Two investigators independently identified eligible studies and extracted data. We included original studies that assessed the prognostic value of serum PCT levels in predicting severity of injury, sepsis, organ dysfunction, and mortality among critically injured adult patients. Results Among 2015 citations, 19 studies (17 prospective; 2 retrospective) met inclusion criteria. Methodological quality of included studies was moderate. All studies showed a strong correlation between initial PCT levels and Injury Severity Score (ISS). Twelve out of 16 studies demonstrated significant elevation of initial PCT levels in patients who later developed sepsis after trauma. PCT level appeared a strong predictor of MOD in seven out of nine studies. While two studies did not show association between PCT levels and mortality, four studies demonstrated significant elevation of PCT levels in non-survivors versus survivors. One study reported that the PCT level of ≥ 5 ng/mL was associated with significantly increased mortality (OR 3.65; 95% CI 1.03–12.9; p = 0.04). Conclusion PCT appears promising as a surrogate biomarker for trauma. Initial peak PCT level may be used as an early predictor of sepsis, MOD, and mortality in trauma population.