Browsing by Author "Faiza, Zainab"

Now showing 1 - 6 of 6
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Eleven-Year Experience Treating Blunt Thoracic Aortic Injury at a Tertiary Referral Center
    (Elsevier, 2020) McCurdy, Chelsea M.; Faiza, Zainab; Namburi, Niharika; Hartman, Timothy J.; Corvera, Joel S.; Jenkins, Peter; Timsina, Lava R.; Lee, Lawrence S.; Surgery, School of Medicine
    Background Blunt thoracic aortic injury treatment has evolved over the past decade particularly with respect to endovascular intervention options. We investigated the trends in blunt thoracic aortic injury management and outcomes over an 11-year span at the sole tertiary referral center in our state. Methods We retrospectively reviewed all patients who presented to our institution with blunt traumatic aortic injury between 2007 and 2017. Baseline demographics including aortic injury grade, injury severity score, and abbreviated injury scale were collected. Outcomes were compared by type and timing of treatment, which included either nonoperative management, endovascular repair, or open surgical repair. Bivariate and multivariable analyses were performed to examine treatment group differences and factors associated with 30-day mortality. Results In total, 229 patients were reviewed. The distribution of injury severity was grade 1 (30%), grade 2 (8%), grade 3 (30%), and grade 4 (31%). Overall, 27% of patients underwent endovascular repair, 29% open surgery, and 44% definitive nonoperative management. Over the study period, there was a dramatic decline in open surgery and a corresponding rise in endovascular treatment. Thirty-day mortality for the entire cohort was 22%. Mortality by treatment subgroup was 30% for nonoperative management, 8.2% for endovascular treatment, and 21% for open surgery. Delaying endovascular or open surgical treatment by at least 24 hours after admission was associated with significantly improved 30-day survival. Conclusions Procedural intervention, whether endovascular or surgical, is associated with improved mortality compared with nonoperative treatment. Delayed intervention, particularly in the case of high-grade injuries, may allow for initial patient stabilization and improved outcomes.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Enhanced recovery after cardiac surgery protocol reduces perioperative opioid use
    (Elsevier, 2022-09-06) Loria, Chelsea M.; Zborek, Kirsten; Millward, James B.; Anderson, Matthew P.; Richardson, Cynthia M.; Namburi, Niharika; Faiza, Zainab; Timsina, Lava R.; Lee, Lawrence S.; Surgery, School of Medicine
    Objective: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery protocols are relatively new in cardiac surgery. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery addresses perioperative analgesia by implementing multimodal pain control regimens that include both opioid and nonopioid components. We investigated the effects of an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery protocol at our institution on postoperative outcomes with particular focus on analgesia. Methods: Single-center retrospective study comparing perioperative opioid use before and after implementation of an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery protocol at our institution. Subjects were divided into 2 cohorts: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (study group from year 2020) and pre-Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (control group from year 2018). Baseline and perioperative variables including total opioid use from the day of surgery to postoperative day 5 were collected. Opioid use was calculated as morphine milligram equivalents and compared between the 2 cohorts. Results: A total of 466 patients were included: 250 in the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery group and 216 in the pre-Enhanced Recovery After Surgery group. Both groups had similar baseline characteristics, but the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery group had significantly more subjects with intravenous drug use history (P < .0001), endocarditis (P < .0001), and liver disease (P = .007) compared with the pre-Enhanced Recovery After Surgery group. Every day from the day of surgery to postoperative day 5, the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery group had significant reduction (57%) in opioid use compared with the pre-Enhanced Recovery After Surgery group. Total opioid use for the entire length of stay was 259 morphine milligram equivalents in the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery group versus 452 morphine milligram equivalents in the pre-Enhanced Recovery After Surgery group (P < .0001). Subgroup analysis of subjects with intravenous drug use history did not demonstrate a significant reduction in opioid use. Conclusions: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery protocols with an emphasis on multimodal pain management throughout perioperative care are associated with a significant reduction in the postoperative use of opioid analgesics.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Fifteen-year experience with pericardiectomy at a tertiary referral center
    (BMC, 2021-06-22) Faiza, Zainab; Prakash, Anjali; Namburi, Niharika; Johnson, Bailey; Timsina, Lava; Lee, Lawrence S.; Medicine, School of Medicine
    Purpose: Pericardiectomy has traditionally carried relatively high perioperative mortality and morbidity, with few published reports of intermediate- and long- term outcomes. We investigated our 15-year experience performing pericardiectomy at our institution. Methods: Retrospective study of all patients who underwent pericardiectomy at our institution between 2005 and 2019. Baseline demographics, intraoperative details, and postoperative outcomes including long-term survival were analyzed. Results: Sixty-three patients were included in the study. 66.7% of subjects underwent isolated pericardiectomy while 33.3% underwent pericardiectomy concomitantly with another cardiac surgical procedure. The most common indications for pericardiectomy were constrictive (79.4%) and hemorrhagic (9.5%) pericarditis. Preoperatively, 76.2% of patients were New York Heart Association class II and III, while postoperatively, 71.4% were class I and II. One-, three-, five-, and ten- year overall mortality was 9.5, 14.3, 20.6, and 25.4%, respectively. Overall pericarditis recurrence rate was 4.8%. Conclusion: Pericardiectomy carries relatively high overall mortality rates, which likely reflects underlying disease etiology and comorbidities. Patients with prior cardiac intervention, history of dialysis, and immunocompromised state are associated with worse outcomes.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Impact of time between diagnosis to treatment in Acute Type A Aortic Dissection
    (Springer Nature, 2021-02-10) Matthews, Caleb R.; Madison, Mackenzie; Timsina, Lava R.; Namburi, Niharika; Faiza, Zainab; Lee, Lawrence S.; Medicine, School of Medicine
    There is a paucity of data describing the effect of time interval between diagnosis and surgery for Acute Type A Aortic Dissection. We describe our 8-year experience and investigate the impact of time interval between symptom onset, diagnosis and surgery on outcomes. Retrospective single-center study utilizing our Society of Thoracic Surgeons registry and patient records. Subjects were grouped by time interval between radiographic diagnosis and surgical treatment: Group A (0–4 h), Group B (4.1–8 h), Group C (8.1–12 h), and Group D (12.1 + h). Data were analyzed to identify factors associated with mortality and outcomes. 164 patients were included. Overall mortality was 21.3%. Group C had the greatest intervals between symptom onset to diagnosis to surgery, and also the highest mortality (66.7%). Preoperative tamponade, cardiac arrest, malperfusion, elevated creatinine, cardiopulmonary bypass time, and blood transfusions were associated with increased mortality, while distance of referring hospital was not. Time intervals between symptom onset, diagnosis and surgery have a significant effect on mortality. Surgery performed 8–12 h after diagnosis carries the highest mortality, which may be exacerbated by longer interval since symptom onset. Time-dependent effects should be considered when determining optimal strategy especially if inter-facility transfer is necessary.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Outcomes of surgical coronary revascularization performed pre-solid abdominal organ transplant
    (Elsevier, 2020) Matthews, Caleb R.; Millward, James B.; Faiza, Zainab; Namburi, Niharika; Timsina, Lava; Hess, Philip J.; Corvera, Joel S.; Everett, Jeffrey E.; Beckman, Daniel J.; Lee, Lawrence S.; Surgery, School of Medicine
    Background Cardiac risk stratification and coronary angiography are routinely performed as part of kidney and liver transplant candidacy evaluation. There are limited data on the outcomes of surgical coronary revascularization in this patient population. We investigated outcomes in patients with end stage renal or hepatic disease undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) to attain kidney or liver transplant candidacy. Methods Retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent isolated CABG at our institution between 2010 and 2016. Patients were divided into two cohorts: Pre-transplant (those undergoing surgery to attain renal or hepatic transplant candidacy) and Non-transplant (all others). Baseline characteristics and postoperative outcomes were compared between groups. Results A total of 1801 patients were included: 28 in Pre-transplant (n=22 kidney, n=7 liver) and 1773 in Non-transplant. Major adverse postoperative outcomes were significantly greater in Pre-transplant compared to Non-transplant: 30-day mortality (14.3% vs. 2.8%, p=0.009), neurologic events (17.9% vs. 4.8%, p=0.011), re-intubation (21.4% vs. 5.8%, p=0.005) and total postoperative ventilation (5.2 vs. 5.0 hours, p=0.0124). One- and five-year mortality in Pre-transplant was 17.9% and 53.6%, respectively. Of the Pre-transplant cohort, three patients (10.7%) underwent organ transplantation (all kidneys) at a mean 436 days after CABG. No patients received liver transplantation. Conclusions Outcomes following CABG in the pre-kidney and pre-liver transplant population are poor. Despite surgical revascularization, the vast majority of patients do not ultimately undergo transplantation. Revascularization strategies and optimal management in this high-risk population warrants further study.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Preoperative stroke before cardiac surgery does not increase risk of postoperative stroke
    (Springer Nature, 2021-04-27) Matthews, Caleb R.; Hartman, Timothy; Madison, Mackenzie; Villelli, Nicolas W.; Namburi, Niharika; Colgate, Cameron L.; Faiza, Zainab; Lee, Lawrence S.; Medicine, School of Medicine
    The optimal time when surgery can be safely performed after stroke is unknown. The purpose of this study was to investigate how cardiac surgery timing after stroke impacts postoperative outcomes between 2011–2017 were reviewed. Variables were extracted from the institutional Society of Thoracic Surgeons database, statewide patient registry, and medical records. Subjects were classified based upon presence of endocarditis and further grouped by timing of preoperative stroke relative to cardiac surgery: Recent (stroke within two weeks before surgery), Intermediate (between two and six weeks before), and Remote (greater than six weeks before). Postoperative outcomes were compared amongst groups. 157 patients were included: 54 in endocarditis and 103 in non-endocarditis, with 47 in Recent, 26 in Intermediate, and 84 in Remote. 30-day mortality and postoperative stroke rate were similar across the three subgroups for both endocarditis and non-endocarditis. Of patients with postoperative stroke, mortality was 30% (95% CI 4.6–66). Timing of cardiac surgery after stroke occurrence does not seem to affect postoperative stroke or mortality. If postoperative stroke does occur, subsequent stroke-related mortality is high.