Billroth II anastomosis combined with brown anastomosis reduce reflux gastritis in gastric cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: The surgeon performing a distal gastrectomy, has an arsenal of reconstruction techniques at his disposal, Billroth II among them. Braun anastomosis performed during a Billroth II procedure has shown evidence of superiority over typical Billroth II, in terms of survival, with no impact on postoperative morbidity and mortality. AIM: To compare Billroth II vs Billroth II and Braun following distal gastrectomy, regarding their postoperative course. METHODS: Patients who underwent distal gastrectomy during 2002-2021, were separated into two groups, depending on the surgical technique used (Billroth II: 74 patients and Billroth II and Braun: 28 patients). The daily output of the nasogastric tube (NGT), the postoperative day that NGT was removed and the day the patient started per os feeding were recorded. Postoperative complications were at the same time noted. Data were then statistically analyzed. RESULTS: There was difference in the mean NGT removal day and the mean start feeding day. Mean total postoperative NGT output was lower in Braun group (399.17 mL vs 1102.78 mL) and it was statistically significant (P < 0.0001). Mean daily postoperative NGT output was also statistically significantly lower in Braun group. According to the postoperative follow up 40 patient experienced bile reflux and alkaline gastritis from the Billroth II group, while 9 patients who underwent Billroth II and Braun anastomosis were presented with the same conditions (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: There was evidence of superiority of Billroth II and Braun vs typical Billroth II in terms of bile reflux, alkaline gastritis and NGT output.

Development and internal validation of a clinical prediction model for serious complications after emergency laparotomy.

PURPOSE: Emergency laparotomy (EL) is a common operation with high risk for postoperative complications, thereby requiring accurate risk stratification to manage vulnerable patients optimally. We developed and internally validated a predictive model of serious complications after EL. METHODS: Data for eleven carefully selected candidate predictors of 30-day postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grade > = 3) were extracted from the HELAS cohort of EL patients in 11 centres in Greece and Cyprus. Logistic regression with Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) was applied for model development. Discrimination and calibration measures were estimated and clinical utility was explored with decision curve analysis (DCA). Reproducibility and heterogeneity were examined with Bootstrap-based internal validation and Internal-External Cross-Validation. The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program's (ACS-NSQIP) model was applied to the same cohort to establish a benchmark for the new model. RESULTS: From data on 633 eligible patients (175 complication events), the SErious complications After Laparotomy (SEAL) model was developed with 6 predictors (preoperative albumin, blood urea nitrogen, American Society of Anaesthesiology score, sepsis or septic shock, dependent functional status, and ascites). SEAL had good discriminative ability (optimism-corrected c-statistic: 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.79-0.81), calibration (optimism-corrected calibration slope: 1.01, 95% CI 0.99-1.03) and overall fit (scaled Brier score: 25.1%, 95% CI 24.1-26.1%). SEAL compared favourably with ACS-NSQIP in all metrics, including DCA across multiple risk thresholds. CONCLUSION: SEAL is a simple and promising model for individualized risk predictions of serious complications after EL. Future external validations should appraise SEAL's transportability across diverse settings.

Prospective multicenter external validation of postoperative mortality prediction tools in patients undergoing emergency laparotomy.

BACKGROUND: Accurate preoperative risk assessment in emergency laparotomy (EL) is valuable for informed decision making and rational use of resources. Available risk prediction tools have not been validated adequately across diverse health care settings. Herein, we report a comparative external validation of four widely cited prognostic models. METHODS: A multicenter cohort was prospectively composed of consecutive patients undergoing EL in 11 Greek hospitals from January 2020 to May 2021 using the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA) inclusion criteria. Thirty-day mortality risk predictions were calculated using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP), NELA, Portsmouth Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the Enumeration of Mortality and Morbidity (P-POSSUM), and Predictive Optimal Trees in Emergency Surgery Risk tools. Surgeons' assessment of postoperative mortality using predefined cutoffs was recorded, and a surgeon-adjusted ACS-NSQIP prediction was calculated when the original model's prediction was relatively low. Predictive performances were compared using scaled Brier scores, discrimination and calibration measures and plots, and decision curve analysis. Heterogeneity across hospitals was assessed by random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: A total of 631 patients were included, and 30-day mortality was 16.3%. The ACS-NSQIP and its surgeon-adjusted version had the highest scaled Brier scores. All models presented high discriminative ability, with concordance statistics ranging from 0.79 for P-POSSUM to 0.85 for NELA. However, except the surgeon-adjusted ACS-NSQIP (Hosmer-Lemeshow test, p = 0.742), all other models were poorly calibrated ( p < 0.001). Decision curve analysis revealed superior clinical utility of the ACS-NSQIP. Following recalibrations, predictive accuracy improved for all models, but ACS-NSQIP retained the lead. Between-hospital heterogeneity was minimum for the ACS-NSQIP model and maximum for P-POSSUM. CONCLUSION: The ACS-NSQIP tool was most accurate for mortality predictions after EL in a broad external validation cohort, demonstrating utility for facilitating preoperative risk management in the Greek health care system. Subjective surgeon assessments of patient prognosis may optimize ACS-NSQIP predictions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic Test/Criteria; Level II.

The Hellenic Emergency Laparotomy Study (HELAS): A Prospective Multicentre Study on the Outcomes of Emergency Laparotomy in Greece.

BACKGROUND: Emergency laparotomy (EL) is accompanied by high post-operative morbidity and mortality which varies significantly between countries and populations. The aim of this study is to report outcomes of emergency laparotomy in Greece and to compare them with the results of the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA). METHODS: This is a multicentre prospective cohort study undertaken between 01.2019 and 05.2020 including consecutive patients subjected to EL in 11 Greek hospitals. EL was defined according to NELA criteria. Demographics, clinical variables, and post-operative outcomes were prospectively registered in an online database. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify independent predictors of post-operative mortality. RESULTS: There were 633 patients, 53.9% males, ASA class III/IV 43.6%, older than 65 years 58.6%. The most common operations were small bowel resection (20.5%), peptic ulcer repair (12.0%), adhesiolysis (11.8%) and Hartmann's procedure (11.5%). 30-day post-operative mortality reached 16.3% and serious complications occurred in 10.9%. Factors associated with post-operative mortality were increasing age and ASA class, dependent functional status, ascites, severe sepsis, septic shock, and diabetes. HELAS cohort showed similarities with NELA patients in terms of demographics and preoperative risk. Post-operative utilisation of ICU was significantly lower in the Greek cohort (25.8% vs 56.8%) whereas 30-day post-operative mortality was significantly higher (16.3% vs 8.7%). CONCLUSION: In this study, Greek patients experienced markedly worse mortality after emergency laparotomy compared with their British counterparts. This can be at least partly explained by underutilisation of critical care by surgical patients who are at high risk for death.