Incidence and outcomes in patients with acute cholangitis: a population-based study.

OBJECTIVE: The importance of early ERCP (endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography) in patients with acute cholangitis (AC) is controversial. The aims were to compare outcomes in those who had early ERCP within 24 h from diagnosis and those who had ERCP undertaken later and examine the general prognosis of AC patients. METHODS: A prospective endoscopic database was used to identify all patients who underwent ERCP 2010-2021 at Landspitali University Hospital, diagnosed with cholangitis (k83.0) or calculus of bile duct with cholangitis (k80.3) according to ICD-10 diagnostic codes. Tokyo guidelines were used to verify the diagnosis and severity. Sepsis was analyzed by the Sepsis-3 criteria. RESULTS: A total of 240 patients met the inclusion criteria, 107 women (45%), median age 74 years, mostly due to gallstones (75%) and malignancy (19%), 61 (25%) underwent ERCP early. Overall 30-day mortality was 3.3% and was not significantly different between the early and late ERCP groups (4.9% vs 2.5% respectively). Patients who underwent early ERCP were more likely to have severe cholangitis according to the Tokyo guidelines criteria than those who underwent ERCP later (31% vs 18%, p = 0.047) but had a shorter median hospital stay (4 vs. 6 days, p = 0.006). Sepsis was more common among those who had ERCP early than those who had late ERCP (33% vs 19%, p = 0.033). CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that for patients with AC the timing of ERCP is an important factor influencing the hospital stay, with shorter hospital stay for patients receiveing ERCP within 24 h, despite more severe cholangitis at diagnosis.

ERAS guidelines-driven upper gastrointestinal contrast study after esophagectomy can detect delayed gastric conduit emptying and improve outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Delayed gastric conduit emptying can occur after esophagectomy and has been shown to be associated with increased risk for postoperative complications. Application of a standardized clinical protocol after esophagectomy including an upper gastrointestinal contrast study has the potential to improve postoperative outcomes. METHODS: Prospective cohort including all patients operated with esophagectomy at two high-volume centers for esophageal surgery. The standardized clinical protocol included an upper gastrointestinal contrast study on day 2 or 3 after surgery. All images were compiled and evaluated for the purpose of the study. Clinical data was collected in IRB approved institutional databases at the participating centers. RESULTS: The study included 119 patients treated with esophagectomy of whom 112 (94.1%) completed an upper gastrointestinal contrast study. The results showed that 8 (7.1%) patients had radiological delayed gastric conduit emptying defined as no emptying of contrast through the pylorus. Partial conduit emptying was seen in 34 (30.4%) patients, and 70 (62.5%) patients had complete conduit emptying. Complete or partial emptying was associated with significantly earlier nasogastric tube removal (3 vs. 6 days) and hospital discharge 8 vs. 17 days, P < 0.001). Radiological signs of delayed gastric conduit emptying were shown to be associated with increased risk of postoperative complications. There was, however, no association with severe postoperative complications according to Clavien-Dindo score, pulmonary complications, anastomotic leak or need for intensive care. CONCLUSION: The results of the study demonstrate that postoperative upper gastrointestinal contrast studies can be used to assess the level of emptying of the gastric conduit after esophagectomy. Application of upper gastrointestinal contrast study in the ERAS guidelines-driven standardized clinical pathway after esophagectomy has the potential to improve postoperative outcomes.

Diagnostic criteria and symptom grading for delayed gastric conduit emptying after esophagectomy for cancer: international expert consensus based on a modified Delphi process.

Delayed gastric conduit emptying (DGCE) after esophagectomy for cancer is associated with adverse outcomes and troubling symptoms. Widely accepted diagnostic criteria and a symptom grading tool for DGCE are missing. This hampers the interpretation and comparison of studies. A modified Delphi process, using repeated web-based questionnaires, combined with live interim group discussions was conducted by 33 experts within the field, from Europe, North America, and Asia. DGCE was divided into early DGCE if present within 14 days of surgery and late if present later than 14 days after surgery. The final criteria for early DGCE, accepted by 25 of 27 (93%) experts, were as follows: >500 mL diurnal nasogastric tube output measured on the morning of postoperative day 5 or later or >100% increased gastric tube width on frontal chest x-ray projection together with the presence of an air-fluid level. The final criteria for late DGCE accepted by 89% of the experts were as follows: the patient should have 'quite a bit' or 'very much' of at least two of the following symptoms; early satiety/fullness, vomiting, nausea, regurgitation or inability to meet caloric need by oral intake and delayed contrast passage on upper gastrointestinal water-soluble contrast radiogram or on timed barium swallow. A symptom grading tool for late DGCE was constructed grading each symptom as: 'not at all', 'a little', 'quite a bit', or 'very much', generating 0, 1, 2, or 3 points, respectively. For the five symptoms retained in the diagnostic criteria for late DGCE, the minimum score would be 0, and the maximum score would be 15. The final symptom grading tool for late DGCE was accepted by 27 of 31 (87%) experts. For the first time, diagnostic criteria for early and late DGCE and a symptom grading tool for late DGCE are available, based on an international expert consensus process.