Haley Nitchie

Background/Objectives: The role of double-lumen endotracheal tube (DLT) versus single-lumen endotracheal tube (SLT) use during lung transplantation (LTx) and its effects on postoperative dysphagia have not yet been studied. It has been shown that new-onset oropharyngeal dysphagia (OPD) is common after various thoracic surgeries including lung transplantation and that OPD is associated with increased postoperative complications. Methods: A single-center, retrospective cohort study was performed using a data exploration tool in the electronic medical record. Data included demographic characteristics, medical history, postoperative dysphagia measured by Functional Oral Intake Scale (FOIS) via modified barium swallow study (MBSS) within 5 days of surgery, and other secondary outcomes. Results: In univariate analysis, participants who had a DLT (49 patients) had significantly higher FOIS scores (indicating better swallowing function) as compared to those with an SLT (21 patients) (p = 0.035). Lumen type remained significant in a multivariable model, with use of a DLT showing more than a 5-fold increase in the odds of a higher FOIS score after controlling for other factors (p = 0.004; cumulative OR (95% CI): 5.2 (1.7–15.9)). Participants who had a DLT had shorter hospital length of stay (LOS) (p = 0.017; single 18 days (IQR = 13), double 14 days (IQR 7)). Those who had a DLT experienced significantly greater ventilator-free time at postoperative day 30 compared to those who received an SLT (p = 0.018). ICU LOS was similar between those who received a DLT vs. SLT. Conclusions: Overall, DLT seems to confer reduced new-onset OPD after lung transplantation surgery when compared with SLT. The use of DLT instead of SLT for lung isolation for LTx may have the potential to reduce morbidity and mortality in this population.

Introduction Postoperative pain after laparoscopic abdominal surgery remains complex. While lateral quadratus lumborum (QL) block and transversus abdominus plane (TAP) block are similar techniques, no studies have examined if one technique has greater dermatomal spread. Methods Laparoscopic colorectal surgical patients were randomized to lateral QL or TAP blocks. Dermatomal anesthetic spread, as measured by loss of sensation to temperature in the postanesthesia care unit, was the primary outcome. If a clear level of dermatomal anesthesia could not be defined, the block was categorized as “indeterminate.” Secondary outcomes included opioid consumption, pain scores, and opioid-related side effects. Results 153 patients completed the study (75 QL and 78 TAP). Mean (95% CI) number of dermatomes with loss of sensation to ice was greater in subjects randomized to QL (4.2 (3.7 to 4.8)) versus TAP (2.7 (2.2 to 3.2); p=0.0001), and the QL group was more likely to have loss of sensation above T8 (p=0.01) and T10 (p=0.02). Indeterminate block was more often noted with TAP blocks (pDiscussion Compared with TAP blocks, QL blocks had greater dermatomal anesthesia spread and lower rates of an indeterminate block. However, differences in pain and opioid consumption were not noted. The clinical importance of these findings should be investigated in future trials. Trial registration number NCT03490357.

Background: The prevalence and significance of digestive manifestations in COVID-19 remain uncertain. Methods: Consecutive patients hospitalized with COVID-19 were identified across a geographically diverse alliance of medical centers in North America. Data pertaining to baseline characteristics, symptomatology, laboratory assessment, imaging, and endoscopic findings from the time of symptom onset until discharge or death were manually abstracted from electronic health records to characterize the prevalence, spectrum, and severity of digestive manifestations. Regression analyses were performed to evaluate the association between digestive manifestations and severe outcomes related to COVID-19. Results: A total of 1992 patients across 36 centers met eligibility criteria and were included. Overall, 53% of patients experienced at least one gastrointestinal symptom at any time during their illness, most commonly diarrhea (34%), nausea (27%), vomiting (16%), and abdominal pain (11%). In 74% of cases, gastrointestinal symptoms were judged to be mild. In total, 35% of patients developed an abnormal alanine aminotransferase or total bilirubin level; these were elevated to less than 5 times the upper limit of normal in 77% of cases. After adjusting for potential confounders, the presence of gastrointestinal symptoms at any time (odds ratio 0.93, 95% confidence interval 0.76-1.15) or liver test abnormalities on admission (odds ratio 1.31, 95% confidence interval 0.80-2.12) were not independently associated with mechanical ventilation or death. Conclusions: Among patients hospitalized with COVID-19, gastrointestinal symptoms and liver test abnormalities were common but the majority were mild and their presence was not associated with a more severe clinical course