Publications by authors named "Ailene Nguyen"

4 Publications

  • Page 1 of 1

Hypoalbuminemia and Elevated CRP are Risk Factors for Deep Infections and Urinary Tract Infections After Lumbar Spine Surgery in a Large Retrospective Patient Population.

Global Spine J 2021 Feb 1:2192568221990647. Epub 2021 Feb 1.

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Keck School of Medicine of the University of Southern California, Los Angels, CA, USA.

Study Design: Retrospective cross-sectional study.

Objectives: To determine if pre-operative albumin and CRP can predict post-operative infections after lumbar surgery.

Methods: Patients who underwent an anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF), or lumbar discectomy were identified using a patient record database (PearlDiver) and were included in this retrospective study. Patients were stratified by Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) scores and pre-operative albumin and CRP status. Post-operative complications included deep infections and urinary tract infections within 3 months of the surgery and revisions within 1 year of the surgery.

Results: 74,280 patients were included in this study. 21,903 had pre-operative albumin or CRP lab values. 7,191 (33%), 12,183 (56%), and 2,529 (12%) patients underwent an ALIF, PLIF, and a lumbar discectomy, respectively. 16,191 did not have any complication (74%). The most common complication was UTI (16%). Among all patients, hypoalbuminemia was a significant risk factor for deep infection and UTI after ALIF, deep infection, UTI, and surgical revision after PLIF, and deep infection after lumbar discectomy. Elevated CRP was a significant risk factor for deep infection after ALIF, UTI after PLIF, and deep infection after lumbar discectomy in patients with a CCI ≤ 3.

Conclusions: Pre-operative hypoalbuminemia and elevated CRP were significant risk factors for deep infection, UTI, and/or revision, after ALIF, PLIT, and/or lumbar discectomy. Future studies with a larger population of patients with low albumin and high CRP values are needed to further elaborate on the current findings.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568221990647DOI Listing
February 2021

A Survey to Assess Agreement Between Pelvic Surgeons on the Outcome of Examination Under Anesthesia for Lateral Compression Pelvic Fractures.

J Orthop Trauma 2020 09;34(9):e304-e308

Department of Orthopaedics, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA.

Objectives: To assess agreement among pelvic surgeons regarding the interpretation of examination under anesthesia (EUA), the methodology by which EUA should be performed, and the definition of a positive examination.

Design: Survey.

Patients/participants: Ten patients who presented to our Level 1 trauma center with a pelvic ring injury were selected as clinical vignettes. Vignettes were distributed to 15 experienced pelvic surgeons.

Intervention: Examination under anesthesia.

Main Outcome Measurements: Agreement regarding pelvic fracture stability (defined as >80% similar responses), need for surgical fixation, definition of an unstable EUA, and method of performing EUA.

Results: There was agreement that a pelvic fracture was stable or unstable in 8 (80%) of 10 cases. There was agreement that fixation was required or not required in 6 (60.0%) of 10 cases. Seven (46.7%) surgeons endorsed performing a full 15-part EUA, whereas the other 8 (53.3%) used an abbreviated or alternative method. Eight (53.3%) surgeons provided a definition of what constitutes a positive EUA, whereas the remaining 7 did not endorse adhering to a strict definition.

Conclusions: Pelvic surgeons generally agree on what constitutes a positive or negative EUA but not necessarily the implications of a positive or negative examination. There is no clear consensus among surgeons regarding the method of performing EUA nor regarding the definition of a positive EUA.

Level Of Evidence: Prognostic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/BOT.0000000000001759DOI Listing
September 2020

Big Data in Transplantation Practice-the Devil Is in the Detail-Fontan-associated Liver Disease.

Transplantation 2021 01;105(1):18-22

Liver Transplant Center, Division of Abdominal Organ Transplantation, Department of Surgery, Children's Hospital-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA.

Background: As a result of the Fontan procedure, the prognosis of congenital single-ventricle heart disease has improved, with many affected children surviving into adulthood. However, the unanticipated consequences of chronic exposure to Fontan hemodynamics have revealed a new set of secondary noncardiac complications. Fontan-associated liver disease (FALD) is characterized by progressive hepatic fibrosis in nearly all patients post-Fontan, with the potential to develop cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma, and the need for liver transplantation. A lack of data regarding FALD-related prognosis makes consideration of indications for and timing of heart alone versus combined heart-liver transplantation challenging.

Methods: A multidisciplinary group within the American Society for Transplantation analyzed several administrative datasets to study the epidemiology of FALD.

Results: This approach presented several obstacles, and efforts to characterize FALD were limited by a lack of Fontan- and FALD-specific diagnostic codes and an inability to follow individual patients through multiple health systems. Several ongoing Fontan registries were also reviewed but these do not adequately capture FALD-related variables. Such barriers highlight the need for large-scale data collection in patients post-Fontan to better understand and care for this complex population.

Conclusions: This study emphasizes the challenges of studying emerging transplant-related diagnoses in existing datasets and the need for mechanisms to adapt registries to appropriately identify patients with rare or emerging conditions.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/TP.0000000000003308DOI Listing
January 2021

Cervical Disc Replacement: Trends, Costs, and Complications.

Asian Spine J 2020 Oct 30;14(5):647-654. Epub 2020 Mar 30.

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Study Design: Retrospective review of insurance database.

Purpose: To investigate national trends, complications, and costs after cervical disc replacement (CDR) using an administrative insurance database representative of the United States population.

Overview Of Literature: As CDR continues to be used to treat patients with cervical stenosis, it is important to gain a better understanding of its use on a national level, potential complications, and cost. This information will allow for optimal patient counseling, risk stratification, and healthcare cost assessments. Several prior studies have investigated complications associated with CDR, but they have been limited by small sample size, single institution experiences, limited follow-up, and potential conflicts of interest.

Methods: Patients who underwent single or multilevel CDR between 2007 and 2015 were identified using an insurance database. We collected data on annual trends, reimbursement costs, patient demographic information, hospital information, and information on complications from the time of operation to 1 year postoperative.

Results: Total of 293 patients underwent either single or multilevel CDR. The number of procedures increased nonlinearly over time at an average of 17% per year, with a greater increase seen in the outpatient setting. Less than 3.7% of patients had new onset pain within 1 year after CDR. Within 1 year, 12.3% of patients reported a mechanical and/or bone-related complication. There were no patients who indicated a new nerve injury within 6 months of follow-up. Less than 3.7% of patients presented with dysphagia or dysphonia within 6 months, infection within 3 months, or a revision or reoperation within 1 year. Average reimbursement for single-level inpatient versus outpatient CDR was US $33,696.28 and US $34,675.12, respectively (p=0.29).

Conclusions: This study demonstrated that the use of CDR continued to increase. The most common complication was mechanical and/or bone-related, and cost analysis demonstrated no significant difference between inpatient and outpatient CDR.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.31616/asj.2019.0246DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7595820PMC
October 2020