Nearly one-quarter of bowel obstructions occur in the large bowel. As with all bowel obstructions, large bowel obstructions have three defining characteristics: partial or complete, intrinsic or extrinsic, benign or malignant. The work-up for a large bowel obstruction should focus on the etiology of the obstruction as well as severity. Management strategy is contingent on the previous characteristics and can include endoscopy, diversion, or resection. This chapter will discuss common and rare etiologies of large bowel obstructions as well as management strategies for clinical guidance.
The data reported here have been supplied by the Hennepin Healthcare Research Institute (HHRI) as the contractor for the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR). The interpretation and reporting of these data are the responsibility of the author(s) and in no way should be seen as an official policy of or interpretation by the SRTR or the US Government.
Background: Societal factors that influence wait-listing for transplantation are complex and poorly understood. Social determinants of health (SDOH) affect rates of and outcomes after transplantation. Methods: This cross-sectional study investigated the impact of SDOH on additions to state-level, 2017-2018 kidney and liver wait-lists. Principal components analysis, starting with 127 variables among 3142 counties, was used to derive novel, comprehensive state-level composites, designated (1) health/economics and (2) community capital/urbanicity. Stepwise multivariate linear regression with backwards elimination (n = 51; 50 states and DC) tested the effects of these composites, Medicaid expansion, and center density on adult disease burden-adjusted wait-list additions.Results: SDOH related to increased community capital/urbanicity were independently associated with wait-listing (starting models: B = .40, P = .010 Kidney; B = .36, P = .038 Liver) (final models: B = .31, P = .027 Kidney, B = .34, P = .015 Liver). In contrast and surprisingly, no other covariates were associated with wait-listing (P ≥ .122).
ImportanceAvailability of organs inadequately addresses the need of patients waiting for a transplant.ObjectiveTo estimate the true number of donor patients in the United States and identify inefficiencies in the donation process as a way to guide system improvement.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsA retrospective cross-sectional analysis was performed of organ donation across 13 different hospitals in 2 donor service areas covered by 2 organ procurement organizations (OPOs) in 2017 and 2018 to compare donor potential to actual donors. More than 2000 complete medical records for decedents were reviewed as a sample of nearly 9000 deaths. Data were analyzed from January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2018.ExposureDeaths of causes consistent with donation according to medical record review, ventilated patient referrals, center acceptance practices, and actual deceased donors.Main Outcomes and MeasuresPotential donors by medical record review vs actual donors and OPO performance at specific hospitals.ResultsCompared with 242 actual donors, 931 potential donors were identified at these hospitals. This suggests a deceased donor potential of 3.85 times (95% CI, 4.23-5.32) the actual number of donors recovered. There was a surprisingly wide variability in conversion of potential donor patients into actual donors among the hospitals studied, from 0% to 51.0%. One OPO recovered 18.8% of the potential donors, whereas the second recovered 48.2%. The performance of the OPOs was moderately related to referrals of ventilated patients and not related to center acceptance practices.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this cross-sectional study of hospitals served by 2 OPOs, wide variation was found in the performance of the OPOs, especially at individual hospitals. Addressing this opportunity could greatly increase the organ supply, affirming the importance of recent efforts from the federal government to increase OPO accountability and transparency.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.