Dataset Information

An international comparison of the utilisation of and outcomes from minimal access surgery for the treatment of common abdominal surgical emergencies.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Minimal access surgery (MAS) has suggested improvements in clinical outcomes compared to open surgery in several abdominal elective and emergency surgeries. The aims of this study were to compare England with the United States in the utilisation of MAS and mortality from four common abdominal surgical emergencies.

Methods

Between 2006 and 2012, the rate of MAS and in-hospital mortality for appendicitis, incarcerated or strangulated abdominal hernia, small or large bowel and peptic ulcer perforation were compared between England and the United States. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to adjust for differences in baseline patient demographics.

Results

132,364 admissions in England were compared to an estimated 1,811,136 admissions in the United States. Minimal access surgery was used less commonly in England for appendicitis (odds ratio (OR) 0.27, 95% CI 0.267-0.278), abdominal hernia (OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.15-0.17), small or large bowel perforation (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.32-0.35) and peptic ulcer perforation (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.87-0.99). In-hospital mortality was increased in England compared to the United States for all four conditions: appendicitis (OR 2.11, 95% CI 1.66-2.68), abdominal hernia (OR 3.25, 95% CI 3.10-3.40), small or large bowel perforation (OR 3.88, 95% CI 3.76-3.99) and peptic ulcer perforation (OR 3.09, 95% CI 2.94-3.25). In England, after adjustment for patient demographics, open surgery was associated with increased in-hospital mortality for abdominal hernia (OR 1.80, 95% CI 1.26-2.71), small or large bowel perforation (OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.37-1.87) and peptic ulcer perforation (OR 2.31, 95% CI 1.91-2.82).

Conclusions

Minimal access surgery was performed less commonly and in-hospital mortality was increased in England compared to the United States for common abdominal surgical conditions. Therefore, strategies to enhance adoption of MAS in emergency conditions in England need to be optimised and include appropriate patient selection and improved surgeon MAS training.

SUBMITTER: Tukanova K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7113203 | biostudies-literature | 2020 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

An international comparison of the utilisation of and outcomes from minimal access surgery for the treatment of common abdominal surgical emergencies.

Tukanova Karina K Markar Sheraz R SR Jamel Sara S Vidal-Diez Alberto A Hanna George B GB

Surgical endoscopy 20190819 5

<h4>Background</h4>Minimal access surgery (MAS) has suggested improvements in clinical outcomes compared to open surgery in several abdominal elective and emergency surgeries. The aims of this study were to compare England with the United States in the utilisation of MAS and mortality from four common abdominal surgical emergencies.<h4>Methods</h4>Between 2006 and 2012, the rate of MAS and in-hospital mortality for appendicitis, incarcerated or strangulated abdominal hernia, small or large bowel ...[more]

PMID: 31428852

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn chronic anticoagulant users undergoing surgery, bleeding and thromboembolism are common and serious complications. Many studies on mainly elective or minor emergency surgical procedures with low associated risks have focused on these outcomes. In comparison, patients undergoing high-risk emergency abdominal surgical procedures have not received sufficient attention. This study aimed to compare outcomes between oral anticoagulant users and nonusers who required emergency laparotomy for high-risk abdominal emergencies.MethodsPatients who underwent surgery for abdominal emergencies at our institution between January 2012 and July 2019 were retrospectively reviewed.ResultsThere were 875 patients, including 370 anticoagulant users and 505 nonusers. Of the 370 anticoagulant users, 189 (51.3), 77 (20.8%), 45 (12.2%), and 59 (15.9%) were prescribed antiplatelets, a vitamin k antagonist, a direct oral anticoagulant, and a combination drug regimen, respectively. The most common high-risk emergencies requiring surgery in both groups were perforated viscus (25.7% vs 40.9%), mesenteric ischemia with enteric necrosis (27% vs 12.8%), and bowel obstruction (17.6% vs 28.1%). The overall bleeding rate was higher (29.2% vs 22%, p = 0.015) in anticoagulant users than in nonusers, but the major bleeding rate was similar (17.8% vs 14.1%, p = 0.129) between the two groups. The rates of thromboembolic events and mortality were significantly higher in anticoagulant users than in nonusers (25.7% vs 9.7%, p < 0.0001 and 39.7% vs 31.1%, p = 0.01, respectively). Liver cirrhosis, peripheral arterial diseases, reoperation, and blood product transfusion were independent predictors of the overall risk of bleeding or TEEs, according to the multivariate analysis. In this model, liver cirrhosis had the largest overall effect on mortality, followed by pneumonia, thromboembolism, peripheral arterial disease, blood product transfusion, and atrial fibrillation. The use of oral anticoagulants was not an independent predictor of either bleeding or in-hospital mortality. The use of oral anticoagulants was associated with a decreased risk of all-cause in-hospital mortality.ConclusionBased on our results, the continued use of oral anticoagulants is more protective than harmful considering the overall outcomes in this subset of patients.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Few diseases truly require emergency surgery today. We investigated the relationship between access to operating room (OR) and outcomes for patients with life-threatening emergency general surgery (LT-EGS) diseases at US hospitals. METHODS:In 2015, we surveyed 2,811 US hospitals on EGS practices, including how OR access is assured (e.g., OR staffing, block time). There were 1,690 (60%) hospitals that responded. We anonymously linked survey data to 2015 Statewide Inpatient Sample data (17 states) using American Hospital Association identifiers. Adults admitted with life-threatening diagnoses (e.g., necrotizing fasciitis, perforated viscus) who underwent operative intervention the same calendar day as hospital admission were included. Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Univariate and multivariable regression analyses, clustered by treating hospital and adjusted for patient factors, were performed to examine hospital-level OR access variables. RESULTS:Overall, 3,620 patients were admitted with LT-EGS diseases. The median age was 63 years (interquartile range, 51-75), with half having three or more comorbidities (50%). Thirty-four percent had one or more major systemic complication, and 5% died. The majority got care at hospitals with less than 1 day of EGS block time but with policies to ensure emergency access to the OR. After adjusting for age, sex, race, insurance status, comorbidities, systemic complications, and surgical complications, we found that less presence of an in-house EGS surgeon, compared with around the clock, was associated with increased mortality (rarely/never in-house surgeon: odds ratio, 2.4; 95% confidence interval [CI],1.1-5.3; sometimes in-house surgeon: odds ratio, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.3). In addition, after controlling for other factors, on-call overnight recovery room nurse, compared with in-house, was associated with an increased mortality (odds ratio, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.5-3.1). CONCLUSION:Round-the-clock availability of personnel, specifically emergency general surgeons and recovery room nurses, is associated with decreased mortality. These findings have implications for the creation of EGS patient triage criteria and Acute Care Surgery Centers of Excellence. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Therapeutic, level III.

Project description:BackgroundThe number of older patients with multiple comorbidities in the emergency service is increasingly frequent, which implies the risk of incurring in futile surgical interventions. Some interventions generate false expectations of survival or quality of life in patients and families and represent a negligible therapeutic benefit in patients whose chances of survival are minimal. In order to address this dilemma, we describe mortality in a cohort of patients undergoing emergency laparotomy with a risk ≥ 75% per the ACS NSQIP Surgical Risk Calculator.MethodsA retrospective observational study was designed to analyze postoperative mortality and factors associated with postoperative mortality in a cohort of patients undergoing emergency laparotomy between January 2018 and December 2021 in a high-complexity hospital who had a mortality risk ≥ 75% per the ACS NSQIP Surgical Risk Calculator.ResultsA total of 890 emergency laparotomies were performed during the study period, and 50 patients were included for the analysis. Patient median age was 82.5 (IQR: 18.25) years old and 33 (66.00%) were male. The most frequent diagnoses were mesenteric ischemia 21 (42%) and secondary peritonitis 18 (36%). Mortality in the series was 92%. Twenty-four (54.34%) died within the first 24 h of the postoperative period; 11 (23.91%) within 72 h and 10 (21.73%) within 30 days. APACHE II and SOFA scores were statistically significantly higher in patients who died.ConclusionsAll available tools should be used to make decisions, with the most reliable and objective information possible, and be particularly vigilant in patients at extreme risk (mortality risk greater than 75% according to ACS NSQIP Surgical Risk Calculator) to avoid futility and its consequences. The available information should be shared with the patient, the family, or their guardians through an assertive and empathetic communication strategy. It is necessary to insist on a culture of surgical ethics based on reflection and continuous improvement in patient care and to know how to accompany them in order to have a proper death.

Dataset Information

An international comparison of the utilisation of and outcomes from minimal access surgery for the treatment of common abdominal surgical emergencies.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

An international comparison of the utilisation of and outcomes from minimal access surgery for the treatment of common abdominal surgical emergencies.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets