Validation of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma grading system for acute mesenteric ischemia-More than anatomic severity is needed to determine risk of mortality.

BACKGROUND: Acute mesenteric ischemia (AMI) is a highly morbid disease with a diverse etiology. The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) proposed disease-specific grading scales intended to quantify severity based upon clinical, imaging, operative, and pathology findings. This grading scale has not been yet been validated for AMI. The goal of this study was to evaluate the correlation between the grading scale and complication severity. METHODS: Patients for this single center retrospective chart review were identified using diagnosis codes for AMI (ICD10-K55.0, ICD9-557.0). Inpatients >17 years old from the years 2008 to 2015 were included. The AAST grades (1-5) were assigned after review of clinical, imaging (computed tomography), operative and pathology findings. Two raters applied the scales independently after dialog with consensus on a learning set of cases. Mortality and Clavien-Dindo complication severity were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 221 patients were analyzed. Overall grade was only weakly correlated with Clavien-Dindo complication severity (rho = 0.27) and mortality (rho = 0.21). Computed tomography, pathology, and clinical grades did not correlate with mortality or outcome severity. There was poor interrater agreement between overall grade. A mortality prediction model of operative grade, use of vasopressors, preoperative serum creatinine and lactate levels showed excellent discrimination (c-index = 0.93). CONCLUSION: In contrast to early application of other AAST disease severity scales, the AMI grading scale as published is not well correlated with outcome severity. The AAST operative grade, in conjunction with vasopressor use, creatinine, and lactate were strong predictors of mortality. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic study, III.

Enteral nutrition improves clinical outcome and reduces costs of acute mesenteric ischaemia after recanalisation in the intensive care unit.

BACKGROUND: Little data evaluate the enteral nutrition (EN) for patients with acute mesenteric ischaemia (AMI) in the intensive care unit (ICU). This study assessed the outcomes of EN for recanalised AMI patients in the ICU. METHODS: In this retrospective study, 183 AMI patients with mesenteric recanalisation admitted to two surgical ICUs were included. Patients were divided into EN (EN within first week, n = 95) and total parenteral nutrition (TPN) group (TPN in 1st week, n = 88). The etiology, outcomes and complications were compared. Nutritional, immunologic, inflammatory response and mesenteric reperfusion were evaluated. Subgroup analysis and cost-assessment were performed. RESULTS: No significant difference of demographics and illness severity at baseline were found. The rates of TPN for ≥6 months (7.4% vs. 18.2%, P < 0.01), infectious complications (7.4% vs. 20.5%, P = 0.01) and acute respiratory distress syndrome (4.2% vs. 13.6%, P < 0.01) were lower in EN group. For patients with mesenteric infarction (n = 101), EN was associated with earlier bowel continuity restoration (P < 0.01) and lower 30-day mortality (7.3% vs. 26.1%, P = 0.01). For patients without initial bowel resection (n = 82), length of ICU and hospital stay was significantly shortened in EN group. The 1-year survival was 88.4% in EN group and 78.4% in TPN group (P = 0.031). EN was cost-effective, with improved inflammatory response and elevated peak velocity of mesenteric flow. CONCLUSIONS: For recanalised AMI patients, EN starting within the first week represents a favourable alternative to TPN. A multicentre randomised controlled trial with high level of evidence is warranted in the future. CLINICAL RELEVANCY STATEMENT: Acute mesenteric ischaemia (AMI) is a catastrophic abdominal vascular emergency in the surgical intensive care unit (ICU), and the mortality of AMI remains unchanged despite significant progress of endovascular techniques. A multidisciplinary and multimodal management approach of AMI in the ICU has been recently proposed to improve patient's survival and prevent the intestinal failure. Post-recanalisation nutrition therapy may significantly improve the overall survival of AMI patients is quite underemphasised in the ICU. Definitive data comparing EN with TPN for this patient population are very lacking. This study provides the clinical data to suggest that early EN starting after ICU admission represents a favourable alternative to TPN for recanalised AMI patients. The nutrition therapy protocol in the ICU for this special cohort needs to be updated with more high-level evidence in the future.

Sickle cell disease is associated with higher mortality among patients hospitalized with ischemic bowel disease.

BACKGROUND: Sickle cell disease (SCD) is the most common inheritable hematologic disorder in the USA and is associated with ischemic organ diseases. SCD-associated ischemic bowel disease is increasing being recognized, and studies on the hospitalization outcomes of such patients are limited. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the inpatient outcomes of ischemic bowel disease among patients with SCD compared with patients without SCD. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a case-control study using data from the National Inpatient Sample Database (2007-2014). We analyzed and compared outcomes between cases (ischemic bowel disease with SCD) and controls (ischemic bowel disease without SCD), matched in a 1 : 5 ratio. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality, and the secondary outcomes were healthcare resource utilization including mechanical ventilation, hemodialysis, transfusion, length of stay, and hospital charges. RESULTS: Of the 194 262 patients admitted with ischemic bowel disease, 98 had a diagnosis of SCD and were matched successfully to the controls. In multivariate analysis, patients with SCD had twice the mortality odds of those without (adjusted odds ratio=2.06, 95% confidence intervals: 1.13-3.74). They were more likely to require mechanical ventilation and blood transfusion, and to be discharged to secondary health facilities [1.68 (1.02-2.76), 3.32 (2.15-5.12), and 1.84 (1.02-3.35)]. Patients with SCD also had a higher frequency of pneumonia, acute respiratory failure, and hemodialysis for acute renal failure. There was no significant difference in the length of stay or the total hospital charge between the two groups. CONCLUSION: In patients hospitalized with ischemic bowel disease, SCD is associated with significantly increased mortality and healthcare burden.

Endovascular interventions decrease length of hospitalization and are cost-effective in acute mesenteric ischemia.

OBJECTIVE: Acute mesenteric ischemia (AMI) continues to be one of the most devastating diagnoses requiring emergent vascular intervention. There is a national trend toward increased use of endovascular procedures, with improved survival for the treatment of these patients. Our aim was to evaluate whether this trend has changed the treatment of AMI and the subsequent impact on length of hospitalization and hospitalization costs. METHODS: We identified all patients admitted for AMI from the National Inpatient Sample from 2004 to 2014 who received open surgical revascularization (OPEN) or an endovascular intervention (ENDO). Primary end points included length of hospital stay and cost of hospitalization. Our secondary end points included acute kidney injury (AKI), in-hospital mortality, and routine discharge. RESULTS: Among 10,381 discharges identified in the data set, 3833 (37%; 97.5% confidence interval [CI], 35%-39%) were male patients with a mean age of 69 years (range, 18-98 years); 4543 (44%; 97.5% CI, 41%-47%) patients were treated ENDO, and 5839 (56%; 97.5% CI, 53%-59%) patients were treated OPEN. Although a higher proportion of patients in the ENDO group (28%; 97.5% CI, 24%-31%) vs the OPEN group (14%; 97.5% CI, 11%-16%) had a moderate to severe Charlson Comorbidity Index (P < .0001), ENDO was associated with a lower mortality rate (12.3% [97.5% CI, 9.8%-14.8%] vs 33.1% [97.5% CI, 29.9%-36.2%]; P < .0001) and a lower mean hospitalization cost ($41,615 [97.5% CI, $38,663-$44,567] vs $60,286 [97.5% CI, $56,736-$63,836]; P < .0001). After propensity-adjusted logistic regression analysis, OPEN retained a significant association with higher mortality than ENDO (odds ratio, 3.0; 97.5% CI, 2.2-4.1) and with higher costs (mean, $9196; 97.5% CI, $3797-$14,595). Patients in the OPEN group had higher risk for AKI (P < .0001) and discharge to a skilled nursing facility (P < .0001) rather than home. CONCLUSIONS: Although the rate of ENDO continues to rise nationally, it still has not surpassed OPEN revascularization in the face of AMI. Patients treated endovascularly demonstrated one-third the rate of in-hospital mortality (odds ratio, 3.0; 97.5% CI, 2.2-4.1), an increased hazard ratio for discharge alive (hazard ratio, 2.27; 97.5% CI, 2.00-2.58), and a cost saving of $9196 (97.5% CI, $3797-$14,595) per hospitalization. Furthermore, they were less likely to develop AKI and to be discharged home after hospitalization.

Endovascular Versus Surgical Revascularization for Chronic Mesenteric Ischemia: Insights From the National Inpatient Sample Database.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare in-hospital major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) following endovascular therapy with open surgery for chronic mesenteric ischemia (CMI). BACKGROUND: There are limited contemporary data on in-hospital cardiovascular outcomes among patients with CMI undergoing revascularization via endovascular therapy versus open surgery in the United States. METHODS: Patients with CMI undergoing endovascular or surgical (mesenteric bypass or endarterectomy) revascularization between 2007 and 2014 were identified from the National Inpatient Sample. Weighted national estimates were obtained. Primary and secondary endpoints were MACCE (death, myocardial infarction, stroke, cardiac post-operative complications) and composite in-hospital complications (MACCE + post-operative peripheral vascular complications, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, major bleeding, and bowel resection), respectively. Propensity score matching was used to obtain a balanced cohort of 880 unweighted patients in each group. RESULTS: Of 4,150 patients with CMI, 3,206 (77.2%) underwent endovascular therapy and 944 (22.8%) underwent surgery (weighted national estimates of 15,850 and 4,687, respectively). In the propensity-matched cohort, MACCE and composite in-hospital complications occurred significantly less often after endovascular therapy than surgery (8.6% vs. 15.9%; p < 0.001; and 15.3% vs. 20.3%; p < 0.006). Endovascular therapy was also associated with lower median hospital costs ($20,807.00 [interquartile range: $13,640.20 to $32.754.50] vs. $31,137.00 [interquartile range: $21,680.40 to $52,152.20]; p < 0.001, respectively) and shorter length of stay (5 [interquartile range: 2 to 10] vs. 10 [interquartile range: 7 to 17] days, respectively; p < 0.001) compared with open surgery. CONCLUSIONS: In a large, retrospective analysis of patients with CMI, endovascular therapy remained the dominant revascularization modality, and was associated with lower rates of MACCE, composite in-hospital complications, lower costs, and shorter length of stay compared with surgery.

Mortality of acute mesenteric ischemia remains unchanged despite significant increase in utilization of endovascular techniques.

INTRODUCTION: In this study, we evaluated if increase in utilization of endovascular surgery has affected in-hospital mortality rates among patients with acute mesenteric ischemia. METHODS: The National Inpatient Sample (2003-2011) was queried for acute mesenteric ischemia using ICD-9 code for acute mesenteric ischemia (557.1). This cohort was divided into patients treated with open vascular surgery (open vascular group) and by endovascular therapies (endovascular group) based on the ICD-9CM procedure codes. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine temporal trend for mortality while adjusting for confounding variables. RESULTS: There was 1.45-fold increase in utilization of endovascular techniques in this study. In-hospital mortality rate, total median charges and length of stay were significantly lower among the endovascular group than the open vascular group despite having significantly higher Elixhauser comorbidities index (3 ± 0.1 vs. 2.7 ± 0.1, p = .003). Over the course of the study period, there was no change in the overall mortality rate despite higher endovascular utilization. Factors associated with increased mortality included age, open surgical repair (Odds ratio: 1.45, 95% Confidence Interval: 1.10-1.91, p = .016) and bowel resection Odds ratio: 2.88, 95% Confidence Interval: 2.01-4.12). CONCLUSION: The mortality rate for acute mesenteric ischemia remains unchanged throughout this contemporary study. Open surgical intervention, bowel resection and age were associated with increased mortality. Endovascular group patients had better survival despite higher morbidity indices.