Browsing UMB Open Access Articles by Author "Zafar, S.N."
Laparoscopic Splenectomy for TraumaShamim, A.A.; Zafar, S.N.; Nizam, W. (Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons, 2018)Background and Objectives: The use of laparoscopy in the trauma setting is gaining momentum, with more therapeutic procedures being performed. We evaluated the use of laparoscopic splenectomy among trauma patients with data from the National Trauma Database. We compared outcomes for trauma patients undergoing laparoscopic (LS) versus open splenectomy (OS). Methods: From the National Trauma Database (2007 to 2015), we identified all patients who underwent a total splenectomy. Patients who had other abdominal operations were excluded. All patients were categorized into 1 of 2 groups: LS or OS. Outcomes of in-hospital mortality, postoperative length of stay, and incidence of major complications between the 2 groups were compared. Bivariate parametric and nonparametric analyses were performed. Patients were then matched on baseline demographic and injury characteristics by using propensity score matching techniques, and we compared differences by using regression analysis. Results: A total of 25,408 patients underwent OS and 113 patients underwent LS (0.44%). Patients were significantly different at baseline, with the LS group being less severely injured. Bivariate analysis revealed no difference in length of stay (9 vs 8 days, P = .62), incidence of major complications (10% vs 15%, P = .24), or mortality (6% vs 11%, P = .23). LS was performed in 29.2% of patients beyond 24 hours from presentation compared with 9.5% in the OS (P < .001). Adjusted multivariate analysis showed no overall difference in outcomes. Conclusion: LS for trauma is increasingly being used at many centers throughout the United States. The procedure is safe, with outcomes similar to those of OS in selected trauma patients.
Staple Line Treatment and Bleeding After Laparoscopic Sleeve GastrectomyZafar, S.N.; Felton, J.; Miller, K. (Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons, 2018)Background and Objectives: Staple line treatment during laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) remains a controversial issue among bariatric surgeons. The objective of this study was to compare rates of postoperative bleeding (POB) among various methods of staple line reinforcement. Methods: The Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program 2015 dataset was queried for patients undergoing an LSG. Patients were stratified by staple line treatment groups-no treatment (NT), suture oversewing (OVERSEW), buttressing by a commercial product (BUTTRESS), and both buttress and oversew (COMBINATION). The primary outcome was POB. Multivariable logistic regression was used to compare POB rates among the treatment groups. Results: In the 98,142 LSG patients meeting selection criteria, 623 (0.63%) patients had POB and 181 (0.18%) required reoperation. POB occurred in 0.80% for the NT group, 0.68% for the OVERSEW group, 0.57% for the BUTTRESS group, and 0.55% for the COMBINATION group. On multivariable analyses, all treatment groups were less likely to have POB compared with the NT group-OVERSEW (odds ratio [OR] 0.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.54-0.98), BUTTRESS (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.57-0.84), and COMBINATION (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.50-0.89) (all P < .01). Subset analysis revealed no difference between BUTTRESS and OVERSEW (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.71-1.26, P = .71). Conclusions: Relative to an NT staple line, the use of OVERSEW or BUTTRESS can decrease the rates of POB by up to 30%. The use of these techniques should be strongly considered by the bariatric surgeon.