Dataset Information

Assessing differences in surgical outcomes following emergency abdominal exploration for complications of elective surgery and high-risk primary emergencies.

ABSTRACT: Irrespective of its etiology, emergency surgical abdominal exploration (EAE) is considered a high-risk procedure with mortality rates exceeding 20%. The aim of this study was to evaluate differences in outcomes in patients who required EAE due to complications of complex elective abdominal procedures and those who required EAE due to high-risk primary abdominal emergencies. Patients undergoing EAE for acute surgical complications of complex abdominal elective surgical procedures (N = 293; Elective group) and patients undergoing EAE for high-risk primary abdominal emergencies (N = 776; Emergency group) from 2012 to 2019 at our institution were retrospectively assessed for morbidity and mortality. Postoperative complications occurred in 196 patients (66.94%) in the elective group and 585 patients (75.4%) in the emergency group. The relatively low complication burden in the elective group was also evidenced by a significantly lower comprehensive complication index score (54.00 ± 37.36 vs. 59.25 ± 37.08, p = 0.040). The in-hospital mortality rates were 31% (91 of 293) and 38% (295 of 776) in the elective and emergency groups, respectively. This difference between the two groups was statistically significant (p = 0.035). In multivariate analysis, age, peripheral artery disease, pneumonia, thromboembolic events, ICU stay, ventilator dependence, acute kidney failure and liver failure were independent predictors of mortality. Our data show that patients undergoing EAE due to acute complications of major elective surgery tolerate the procedure relatively well compared with patients undergoing EAE due to primary high-risk abdominal emergencies.

SUBMITTER: Kassahun WT

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8789789 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPatients undergoing abdominal surgery for solid tumours frequently develop major postoperative complications, which negatively affect quality of life, costs of care and survival. Few studies have identified the determinants of perioperative complications in this group.MethodsWe performed a prospective observational study including all patients (age?>?18) undergoing abdominal surgery for cancer at a single institution between June 2011 and August 2013. Patients undergoing emergency surgery, palliative procedures, or participating in other studies were excluded. Primary outcome was a composite of 30-day all-cause mortality and infectious, cardiovascular, respiratory, neurologic, renal and surgical complications. Univariate and multiple logistic regression analyses were performed to identify predictive factors for major perioperative adverse events.ResultsOf a total 308 included patients, 106 (34.4%) developed a major complication during the 30-day follow-up period. Independent predictors of postoperative major complications were: age (odds ratio [OR] 1.03 [95% CI 1.01-1.06], p?=?0.012 per year), ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists) physical status greater than or equal to 3 (OR 2.61 [95% CI 1.33-5.17], p?=?0.003), a preoperative haemoglobin level lower than 12 g/dL (OR 2.13 [95% CI 1.21-4.07], p?=?0.014), intraoperative use of colloids (OR 1.89, [95% CI 1.03-4.07], p?=?0.047), total amount of intravenous fluids (OR 1.22 [95% CI 0.98-1.59], p?=?0.106 per litre), intraoperative blood losses greater than 500 mL (2.07 [95% CI 1.00-4.31], p?=?0.043), and hypotension needing vasopressor support (OR 4.68 [95% CI 1.55-27.72], p?=?0.004). The model had good discrimination with the area under the ROC curve being 0.80 (95% CI 0.75-0.84, p?<?0.001).ConclusionsOur findings suggest that a perioperative strategy aimed at reducing perioperative complications in cancer surgery should include treatment of preoperative anaemia and an optimal fluid strategy, avoiding fluid overload and intraoperative use of colloids.

Project description:IntroductionDiabetes has an increasing worldwide prevalence. It is known to be a predisposing factor for postoperative complications. Preoperative glycaemic control strategies should be pursued as glycaemic control could serve as a modifiable risk factor. Glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), a marker of 3-month average glycaemic control, has been shown in meta-analyses to predict postoperative complications in cardiothoracic, bariatric and orthopaedic surgery. However, there is no meta-analysis in the major abdominal surgery population, in whom morbidity may be higher due to the nature of the surgery. Understanding the association between HbA1c and postoperative complications could help in preoperative risk prognostication, counselling and glycaemic target selection. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate all evidence on the association between preoperative HbA1c and postoperative complications in elective major abdominal surgery, and to investigate the threshold HbA1c level before postoperative complication rates increase.Methods and analysisThis review will be performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols guidelines. PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Google Scholar and China National Knowledge Infrastructure will be searched for all original studies. Study selection, data extraction, risk of bias and quality assessment will be conducted by two independent reviewers. The primary outcome is the association between preoperative HbA1c and major postoperative complications (Clavien Dindo 3-5), and the secondary outcome is the association between HbA1c and overall postoperative complications. Data management and synthesis will be performed using Microsoft Excel and Stata to derive pool estimates.Ethics and disseminationNo ethics approval is required as only secondary data will be used. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and conference presentations.Prospero registration numberCRD42020167347.

Project description:Background:Postoperative complications and delayed physical recovery are significant problems following emergency abdominal surgery. Physiotherapy aims to aid recovery and prevent complications in the acute phase after surgery and is commonplace in most first-world hospitals. Despite ubiquitous service provision, no well-designed, adequately powered, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial has investigated the effect of physiotherapy on the incidence of respiratory complications, paralytic ileus, rate of physical recovery, ongoing need for formal sub-acute rehabilitation, hospital length of stay, health-related quality of life, and mortality following emergency abdominal surgery. We hypothesise that an enhanced physiotherapy care package of additional education, breathing exercises, and early rehabilitation prevents postoperative complications and improves physical recovery following emergency abdominal surgery compared to standard care alone. Methods:The Incidence of Complications following Emergency Abdominal surgery: Get Exercising (ICEAGE) trial is a pragmatic, investigator-initiated, multicentre, patient- and assessor-blinded, parallel-group, active-placebo controlled randomised trial, powered for superiority. ICEAGE will compare standard care physiotherapy to an enhanced physiotherapy care package in 288 participants admitted for emergency abdominal surgery at three Australian hospitals. Participants will be randomised using concealed allocation to receive either standard care physiotherapy (education, single session of coached breathing exercises, and daily early ambulation for 15 min) or an enhanced physiotherapy care package (education, twice daily coached breathing exercises for a minimum 2 days, and 30 min of daily supervised early rehabilitation for minimum five postoperative days). The primary outcome is a respiratory complication within the first 14 postoperative hospital days assessed daily with standardised diagnostic criteria. Secondary outcomes include referral for sub-acute rehabilitation services, discharge destination, paralytic ileus, hospital length of stay and costs, intensive care unit utilisation, 90-day patient-reported complications and health-related quality of life and physical capacity, and mortality at 30 days and at 1 year following surgery. Discussion:The morbidity, mortality, and fiscal burdens following emergency abdominal surgery are some of the worst within surgery. Physiotherapy may be an effective, low-cost, minimal harm intervention to improve outcomes and reduce hospital utilisation following this surgery type. ICEAGE will test the benefits of this commonly provided intervention within a methodologically robust, multicentre, double-blinded, active-placebo controlled randomised trial. Trial registration:ACTRN 12615000318583. Registered 8 April 2015.

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:ImportanceThe association of the nasal microbiome with outcomes in surgical patients is poorly understood.ObjectiveTo characterize the composition of nasal microbiota in patients undergoing clean elective surgical procedures and to examine the association between characteristics of preoperative nasal microbiota and occurrence of postoperative infection.Design, setting, and participantsUsing a nested matched case-control design, 53 individuals who developed postoperative infection were matched (approximately 3:1 by age, sex, and surgical procedure) with 144 individuals who were not infected (ie, the control group). The 2 groups were selected from a prospective cohort of patients undergoing surgical procedures at 2 tertiary care university hospitals in Baltimore, Maryland, who were at high risk for postoperative infectious complications. Included individuals were aged 40 years or older; had no history of autoimmune disease, immunocompromised state, immune-modulating medication, or active infection; and were scheduled to undergo elective cardiac, vascular, spinal, or intracranial surgical procedure. Data were analyzed from October 2015 through September 2020.ExposuresNasal microbiome cluster class served as the main exposure. An unsupervised clustering method (ie, grades of membership modeling) was used to classify nasal microbial samples into 2 groups based on features derived from 16S ribosomal RNA gene sequencing. The microbiome cluster groups were derived independently and agnostic of baseline clinical characteristics and infection status.Main outcomes and measuresComposite of surgical site infection, bacteremia, and pneumonia occurring within 6 months after surgical procedure.ResultsAmong 197 participants (mean [SD] age, 64.1 [10.6] years; 63 [37.7%] women), 553 bacterial taxa were identified from preoperative nasal swab samples. A 2-cluster model (with 167 patients in cluster 1 and 30 patients in cluster 2) accounted for the largest proportion of variance in microbial profiles using grades of membership modeling and was most parsimonious. After adjusting for potential confounders, the probability of assignment to cluster 2 was associated with 6-fold higher odds of infection after surgical procedure (odds ratio [OR], 6.18; 95% CI, 3.33-11.7; P < .001) independent of baseline clinical characteristics, including nasal carriage of Staphylococcus aureus. Intrasample (ie, α) diversity was inversely associated with infectious outcome in both clusters (OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.42-0.75; P < .001); however, probability of assignment to cluster 2 was associated with higher odds of infection independent of α diversity (OR, 4.61; 95% CI, 2.78-7.86; P < .001).Conclusions and relevanceThese findings suggest that the nasal microbiome was an independent risk factor associated with infectious outcomes among individuals who underwent elective surgical procedures and may serve as a biomarker associated with infection susceptibility in this population.

Project description:BackgroundMinimal 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.MethodsBetween 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.Results132,364 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).ConclusionsMinimal 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.

Project description:There is still a lack of relevant studies on surgical site infection (SSI) after emergency abdominal surgery (EAS) in China. This study aims to understand the incidence of SSI after EAS in China and discuss its risk factors. All adult patients who underwent EAS in 47 hospitals in China from May 1 to 31, 2018, and from May 1 to June 7, 2019, were enrolled in this study. The basic information, perioperative data, and microbial culture results of infected incision were prospectively collected. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of SSI after EAS, and the secondary outcome variables were postoperative length of stay, ICU admission rate, ICU length of stay, 30-day postoperative mortality, and hospitalization cost. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression were used to analyze the risk factors. The results were expressed as the odds ratio and 95% confidence interval. A total of 953 patients [age 48.8 (SD: 17.9), male 51.9%] with EAS were included in this study: 71 patients (7.5%) developed SSI after surgery. The main pathogen of SSI was Escherichia coli (culture positive rate 29.6%). Patients with SSI had significantly longer overall hospital (p < 0.001) and ICU stays (p < 0.001), significantly higher ICU admissions (p < 0.001), and medical costs (p < 0.001) than patients without SSI. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that male (P = 0.010), high blood glucose level (P < 0.001), colorectal surgery (P < 0.001), intestinal obstruction (P = 0.045) and surgical duration (P = 0.007) were risk factors for SSI, whereas laparoscopic surgery (P < 0.001) was a protective factor. This study found a high incidence of SSI after EAS in China. The occurrence of SSI prolongs the patient's hospital stay and increases the medical burden. The study also revealed predictors of SSI after EAS and provides a basis for the development of norms for the prevention of surgical site infection after emergency abdominal surgery.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Postoperative ileus is a major complication for persons undergoing abdominal surgery. Daikenchuto, a Japanese traditional medicine (Kampo), is a drug that may reduce postoperative ileus. OBJECTIVES:To assess the efficacy and safety of Daikenchuto for reducing prolonged postoperative ileus in persons undergoing elective abdominal surgery. SEARCH METHODS:We searched the following databases on 3 July 2017: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, ICHUSHI, WHO (World Health Organization) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), EU Crinical Trials registry (EU-CTR), UMIN Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN-CTR), ClinicalTrials.gov, The Japan Society for Oriental Medicine (JSOM), American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endscopic Surgeons (SAGES). We set no limitations on language or date of publication. SELECTION CRITERIA:We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing Daikenchuto with any control condition in adults, 18 years of age or older, undergoing elective abdominal surgery. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:We applied standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two review authors independently reviewed the articles identified by literature searches, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias of the included studies using the Cochrane software Review Manager 5. MAIN RESULTS:We included seven RCTs with a total of 1202 participants. Overall, we judged the risk of bias as low in four studies and high in three studies. We are uncertain whether Daikenchuto reduced time to first flatus (mean difference (MD) -11.32 hours, 95% confidence interval (CI) -17.45 to -5.19; two RCTs, 83 participants; very low-quality evidence), or time to first bowel movement (MD -9.44 hours, 95% CI -22.22 to 3.35; four RCTs, 500 participants; very low-quality evidence) following surgery. There was little or no difference in time to resumption of regular solid food following surgery (MD 3.64 hours, 95% CI -24.45 to 31.74; two RCTs, 258 participants; low-quality evidence). There were no adverse events in either arm of the five RCTs that reported on drug-related adverse events (risk difference (RD) 0.00, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.02, 568 participants, low-quality evidence). We are uncertain of the effect of Daikenchuto on patient satisfaction (MD 0.09, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.37; one RCT, 81 participants; very low-quality of evidence). There was little or no difference in the incidence of any re-interventions for postoperative ileus before leaving hospital (risk ratio (RR) 0.99, 95% CI 0.06 to 15.62; one RCT, 207 participants; moderate-quality evidence), or length of hospital stay (MD -0.49 days, 95% CI -1.21 to 0.22; three RCTs, 292 participants; low-quality evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:Evidence from current literature was unclear whether Daikenchuto reduced postoperative ileus in patients undergoing elective abdominal surgery, due to the small number of participants in the meta-analyses. Very low-quality evidence means we are uncertain whether Daikenchuto improved postoperative flatus or bowel movement. Further well-designed and adequately powered studies are needed to assess the efficacy of Daikenchuto.

Dataset Information

Assessing differences in surgical outcomes following emergency abdominal exploration for complications of elective surgery and high-risk primary emergencies.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets