PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

W Haun

Publications and source records attributed to W Haun.

8 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2001

Prophylactic antibiotics are not indicated in clean general surgery cases.

BACKGROUND: In assigning risk of infection, the traditional wound classification system has been replaced by the National Nosocomial Infection Surveillance (NNIS) system. NNIS classification is determined by procedure length, wound cleanliness, and ASA status. To date, no prophylactic antibiotic guidelines have been proposed for the NNIS system. METHODS: Clean general surgery cases were retrospectively reviewed in our hospital for infection and prophylactic antibiotic use. These cases were then stratified per the NNIS system. RESULTS: One thousand twenty-three clean general surgery cases had 16 (1%) surgical site infections. The infection rate in NNIS class 0, 1, and 2 cases not given prophylactic antibiotics was 1.21%, 3.03%, and 0%, respectively. The infection rate in NNIS class 0, 1, and 2 cases given prophylactic antibiotics was 0.94%, 2.44%, and 6.67%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: No statistically significant decrease in infection rate was demonstrated by us using prophylactic antibiotics, regardless of the NNIS classification in clean general surgery cases.

Antibiotic Prophylaxis↗
PubMed2000

Does peer-reviewed publication change the habits of surgeons?

BACKGROUND: From April 1994 to December 1995 a prospective randomized trial was conducted at our institution comparing outcomes of laparoscopic and open appendectomy. It demonstrated no significant advantage to laparoscopic appendectomy. Our current study evaluates whether surgeon's habits at our hospital have been influenced by our previously published study. METHODS: Charts were reviewed for patients who underwent appendectomy from August 1998 to December 1998. In addition, a formal survey was conducted of all staff surgeons to ascertain their procedure of choice for appendicitis, and the reasons for their preference. RESULTS: Seventy-nine percent of the appendectomies were attempted laparoscopically. The median operative time was longer for laparoscopic appendectomy, and median hospital charges were higher. Survey results showed that most staff surgeons prefer laparoscopic appendectomy. CONCLUSION: Despite our own published paper supporting open appendectomy over laparoscopic appendectomy, laparoscopic appendectomy has become the standard of care at our institution for the treatment of appendicitis.

Appendectomy↗
PubMed2000

The value of limited computed tomography with rectal contrast in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis.

BACKGROUND: Multiple nonrandomized studies demonstrate the accuracy of computed tomography (CT) scan in diagnosing appendicitis. This study compared CT scan with standard management in diagnosing appendicitis. METHODS: This was a prospective randomized study of patients who received general surgery consultation for appendicitis. Patients were randomized to receive CT scan or standard management. RESULTS: There were 65 patients in the CT scan group and 63 patients in the standard management group. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of CT scan were 94%, 100%, and 96%, respectively. CT scan positively altered the management in 26% and made alternative diagnoses in 14%. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the standard management group were 100%, 79%, and 89%, respectively. The standard management group had a negative appendectomy rate of 19%. CONCLUSION: CT scan with rectal contrast is an effective method for diagnosing appendicitis and should be performed in all patients suspected of having appendicitis.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed1999

Prophylactic antibiotics for elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy: are they necessary?

HYPOTHESIS: Prophylactic antibiotic treatment in elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy does not lower the already low infection rate associated with this procedure. DESIGN AND SETTING: Prospective double-blind randomized trial at a community-based training hospital. PATIENTS: Four hundred fifty patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomized into 1 of 3 treatment arms: (1) preoperative cefotetan disodium, 1g intravenously; (2) preoperative cefazolin, 1g intravenously; and (3) intravenous placebo. There were no demographic differences between groups in age, smoking history, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, infection risk class, time of antibiotic administration prior to surgery, and type of skin preparation. INTERVENTIONS: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy was attempted in all cases; however, 10 patients required conversion to an open cholecystectomy and they were included in the statistical analysis. Preoperatively, all patients were randomized in a blinded manner and received cefotetan, cefazolin, or placebo intravenously. RESULTS: There were 10 postoperative infections. In the cefotetan group, there were 3 cases of superficial surgical site infections. In the cefazolin group, there were 2 superficial surgical site infections-1 pneumonia and 1 rhinosinusitis. In the placebo group, there were 2 superficial surgical site infections and 1 urinary tract infection. The overall infection rate in this series was 2.4%. Follow-up was performed at routine postoperative visits and by telephone contact. Data were evaluated using the chi2 test and analysis of variance with Duncan post hoc test (P<.05). CONCLUSION: Based on our data, use of prophylactic antibiotics does not decrease the rate of wound infections in elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Antibiotic Prophylaxis↗
PubMed1997

Laparoscopic vs open appendectomy. Prospective randomized study of outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To compare open appendectomy (OA) with laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) for length of the operation, complications, postoperative pain control, length of hospitalization, postdischarge recovery time, and hospital charges. DESIGN: Prospective randomized clinical trial of patients with acute appendicitis. SETTING: Tertiary care, urban teaching hospital. PATIENTS: A population-based sample of patients (aged > or = 12 years; weight, > 49.7 kg) admitted to a surgical teaching service with a clinical diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Patients were prospectively randomized to either OA or LA during a 20-month period (from April 1, 1994, to December 31, 1995). Fifty-seven patients were initially enrolled in the study; 7 did not complete the study because of a protocol violation. All remaining patients completed the study, including postdischarge follow-up. INTERVENTIONS: Two (7.4%) of the 27 patients in the LA group required conversion to OA because of technical difficulties. One patient (in the OA group) underwent a second surgical procedure for drainage of a pelvic abscess. Three patients (in the LA group) required second surgical procedures. For analysis, no crossovers were allowed and all patients remained in their originally randomized group. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Length of the operation, intraoperative and postoperative complications, postoperative pain control, length of hospitalization, postdischarge recovery time, and hospital charges. RESULTS: Fifty patients (19 women and 31 men) were examined. Twenty-seven patients underwent LA, 2 requiring conversion to an OA. Twenty-three patients underwent an OA. Patient demographics were similar between groups. Statistical differences between the 2 groups were found for (1) length of the operation (median, 81.7 vs 66.8 minutes, LA vs OA groups: P < .002), (2) operating room charges (median, $3191 vs $1514, LA vs OA group; P < .001), and (3) total hospital charges (median, $5430 vs $3673, LA vs OA group; P < .001). No statistical differences between the 2 groups were found for (1) length of hospitalization (median, 1.1 vs 1.2 days, LA vs OA group), (2) pain control (mean, 4 vs 3.7 of 10 [0 indicates least pain; 10, most pain], LA vs OA group), (3) recovery time (time necessary before returning to work or school) (median, 14.0 days for both groups), and (4) complications (5 vs 1, LA vs OA group). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic appendectomies and OAs are comparable for complications, postoperative pain control, length of hospitalization, and recovery time. Patients who underwent an OA had a shorter operative time and lower operating room and hospital charges. Laparoscopic appendectomy does not offer any proved benefits compared with the open approach for the routine patient with acute appendicitis.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1997

Use of fine needle aspiration for solid breast lesions is accurate and cost-effective.

BACKGROUND: Palpable breast tumors have traditionally been diagnosed with open biopsy or core biopsy. We propose fine needle aspiration biopsy (FNA) as a reliable, cost-saving initial procedure in these patients. METHODS: Eighty-five palpable solid breast masses of the breast in 85 patients were classified by a combination of physical examination, mammography, and/or ultrasound as probably benign, indeterminate, or highly suspicious for cancer. All tumors had FNA biopsies. All patients had either a confirmatory open biopsy (55) or close clinical follow-up (30) with a mean follow-up of 29 months (range 6 to 36). RESULTS: Thirty-four patients classified as clinically benign had a benign FNA biopsy. No cancers were detected in this group by either open surgical biopsy or clinical follow-up. Twenty patients were classified clinically as indeterminate. All had FNA biopsies, and 6 were either positive for cancer or suspicious for cancer. Fourteen patients had negative FNA biopsies. Five of the 6 abnormal biopsies had cancer on open biopsies. The 1 false-positive result occurred in a lactating patient. Thirty-one patients were classified clinically as highly suspicious for cancer. Twenty-three were confirmed as cancer with FNA biopsy. Eight needed open surgical biopsy to confirm cancer. All 31 patients clinically suspicious for cancer had cancer. In patients classified clinically as highly suspicious or probably benign, FNA was a reliable first diagnostic step (100% positive predictive value, 100% specificity, 87% sensitivity, and 89% negative predictive value). CONCLUSIONS: Fine needle aspiration biopsy of solid palpable breast lesions should be the diagnostic procedure of choice for those patients classified clinically as probably benign or clinically as highly suspicious for cancer. Cost analysis revealed elimination of an open biopsy in such cases would save $1,100 per patient. For highly suspicious cases, a negative fine needle aspiration should not deter an open surgical biopsy. For patients classified as indeterminate, fine needle aspiration biopsy results are not reliable enough to determine treatment.

Biopsy, Needle↗