Corinna C. Zygourakis September 5, 2017

Journal of Neurosurgery, Ahead of Print. OBJECTIVE Concurrent surgeries, also known as “running two rooms” or simultaneous/overlapping operations, have recently come under intense scrutiny. The goal of this study was to evaluate the operative time and outcomes of concurrent versus nonconcurrent vascular neurosurgical procedures. METHODS The authors retrospectively reviewed 1219 procedures performed by 1 vascular neurosurgeon from 2012 to 2015 at the University of California, San Francisco. Data were collected on patient age, sex, severity of illness, risk of mortality, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) status, procedure type, admission type, insurance, transfer source, procedure time, presence of resident or fellow in operating room (OR), number of co-surgeons, estimated blood loss (EBL), concurrent vs nonconcurrent case, severe sepsis, acute respiratory failure, postoperative stroke causing neurological deficit, unplanned return to OR, 30-day mortality, and 30-day unplanned readmission. For aneurysm clipping cases, data were also obtained on intraoperative aneurysm rupture and postoperative residual aneurysm. Chi-square and t-tests were performed to compare concurrent versus nonconcurrent cases, and then mixed-effects models were created to adjust for different procedure types, patient demographics, and clinical indicators between the 2 groups. RESULTS There was a significant difference in procedure type for concurrent (n = 828) versus nonconcurrent (n = 391) cases. Concurrent cases were more likely to be routine/elective admissions (53% vs 35%, p < 0.001) and physician referrals (59% vs 38%, p < 0.001). This difference in patient/case type was also reflected in the lower severity of illness, risk of death, and ASA class in the concurrent

Leave a comment.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked*

Andoird App