Standardization of the strategy for open abdomen in nontrauma emergency laparotomy: A prospective study of outcomes in primary versus temporary abdominal closure.

BACKGROUND: The indications for temporary abdominal closure in nontrauma surgery are heterogeneous and with limited data on clinical outcomes. This study aimed to report the outcomes of primary closure compared with temporary abdominal closure after nontrauma emergency laparotomy within a standardized clinical setting adapted from international guidelines. METHODS: Included were all nontrauma patients undergoing emergency laparotomy between January 1, 2021, and December 31, 2022, at Copenhagen University Hospital Herlev in Denmark. All patients received treatment on the basis of standardized bundle of care trajectory for major emergency abdominal surgery. Mortality, risks of re-laparotomy, and postoperative complications were assessed using Kaplan-Meier plots and multiple logistic regression modeling. RESULTS: Of the 576 included patients, temporary abdominal closure was performed in 57 (10%) patients in the initial surgery. Indications for temporary abdominal closure included damage control strategy as the result of considerable hemodynamic instability in 21 (37%) patients, need for reassessment of bowel viability in 21 (37%) patients, and loss of domain in 15 (25%) patients. Fascial closure was achieved after a median period of 2 days. Sixty-seven patients (12%) underwent re-laparotomy, with temporary abdominal closure performed in 10 (15%) of the cases. Patients with temporary abdominal closure had a significantly greater risk of postoperative complications (odds ratio 2.58, 95% confidence interval 1.38-4.89, P = .003). There were no significant differences in the risks of fascial dehiscence, re-laparotomy, or 30- or 90-days mortality. CONCLUSION: Temporary abdominal closure was performed in 10% of patients undergoing nontrauma emergency laparotomy, with the primary indications being damage control strategy and need for reassessment of bowel viability. Patients undergoing temporary abdominal closure had a significantly greater risk of postoperative complications.

Understanding early deaths after major emergency abdominal surgery: An observational study of 754 patients.

BACKGROUND: Major emergency abdominal surgery is associated with severe postoperative complications and high short- and long-term mortality. Despite recent advancements in standardizing multidisciplinary care bundles, a subgroup of patients continues to face a heightened risk of short-term mortality. This study aimed to identify and describe the high-risk surgical patients and risk factors for short-term postoperative mortality. METHODS: In this study, we included all patients undergoing major emergency abdominal surgery over 2 years and collected data on demographics, intraoperative variables, and short-term outcomes. The primary outcome measure was short-term mortality and secondary outcome measures were pre, intra, and postoperative risk factors for premature death. Multivariable binary regression analysis was performed to determine possible risk factors for short-term mortality. RESULTS: Short-term mortality within 14 days of surgery in this cohort of 754 consecutive patients was 8%. Multivariable analysis identified various independent risk factors for short-term mortality throughout different phases of patient care. These factors included advanced age, preoperative history of myocardial infarction or ischemic heart disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, liver cirrhosis, chronic kidney disease, and vascular bowel ischemia or perforation of the stomach or duodenum during the primary surgery. CONCLUSION: Patients at high risk of early mortality following major emergency abdominal surgery exhibited distinct perioperative risk factors. This study underscores the importance of clinicians identifying and managing these factors in high-risk patients to ensure optimal care.

Health-related quality of life is a predictor of readmission following emergency laparotomy.

BACKGROUND: Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is a multidimensional concept used to examine the impact of patient-perceived health status on quality of life. Patients' perception of illness affects outcomes in both medical and elective surgical patients; however, not much is known about how HRQoL effects outcomes in the emergency surgical setting. This study aimed to examine if patient-reported HRQoL was a predictor of unplanned readmission after emergency laparotomy. METHODS: This study included 215 patients who underwent emergency laparotomy at the Copenhagen University Hospital, Herlev, between August 1, 2021, and July 31, 2022. Patient-reported HRQoL was assessed with the EuroQol group EQ5D index (EQ5D5L descriptive system and EQ-VAS). The population was followed from 0 to 180 days after discharge, and readmissions and days alive and out of hospital were registered. A Cox proportional hazard model was used to examine HRQoL and the risk of readmission within 30 and 180 days. RESULTS: Within 30 days, 28.4% of patients were readmitted; within 180 days, the number accumulated to 45.1%. Low self-evaluated HRQoL predicted 180-day readmission and was significantly associated with fewer days out of hospital within both 90 and 180 days. Low HRQoL and discharge with rehabilitation were independent risk factors for short- (30-day) and long-term (180-day) emergency readmission. CONCLUSION: Patient-perceived quality of life is an independent predictor of 180-day readmission, and the number of days out of hospital was correlated to self-reported HRQoL.

Impact of clinical frailty on surgical and non-surgical complications after major emergency abdominal surgery.

BACKGROUND: Major emergency abdominal surgery is associated with a high risk of morbidity and mortality. Given the ageing and increasingly frail population, understanding the impact of frailty on complication patterns after surgery is crucial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between clinical frailty and organ-specific postoperative complications after major emergency abdominal surgery. METHODS: A prospective cohort study including all patients undergoing major emergency abdominal surgery at Copenhagen University Hospital Herlev, Denmark, from 1 October 2020 to 1 August 2022, was performed. Clinical frailty scale scores were determined for all patients upon admission and patients were then analysed according to clinical frailty scale groups (scores of 1-3, 4-6, or 7-9). Postoperative complications were registered until discharge. RESULTS: A total of 520 patients were identified. Patients with a low clinical frailty scale score (1-3) experienced fewer total complications (120 complications per 100 patients) compared with patients with clinical frailty scale scores of 4-6 (250 complications per 100 patients) and 7-9 (277 complications per 100 patients) (P < 0.001). A high clinical frailty scale score was associated with a high risk of pneumonia (P = 0.009), delirium (P < 0.001), atrial fibrillation (P = 0.020), and infectious complications in general (P < 0.001). Patients with severe frailty (clinical frailty scale score of 7-9) suffered from more surgical complications (P = 0.001) compared with the rest of the cohort. Severe frailty was associated with a high risk of 30-day mortality (33% for patients with a clinical frailty scale score of 7-9 versus 3.6% for patients with a clinical frailty scale score of 1-3, P < 0.001). In a multivariate analysis, an increasing degree of clinical frailty was found to be significantly associated with developing at least one complication. CONCLUSION: Patients with frailty have a significantly increased risk of postoperative complications after major emergency abdominal surgery, especially atrial fibrillation, delirium, and pneumonia. Likewise, patients with frailty have an increased risk of mortality within 90 days. Thus, frailty is a significant predictor for adverse events after major emergency abdominal surgery and should be considered in all patients undergoing major emergency abdominal surgery.

Association between reduced physical performance measures and short-term consequences after major emergency abdominal surgery: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Major emergency abdominal surgery is associated with high morbidity with outcomes worse than for similar elective surgery, including complicated physical recovery, increased need for rehabilitation, and prolonged hospitalisation. PURPOSE: To investigate whether low physical performance test scores were associated with an increased risk of postoperative complications, and, furthermore, to investigate the feasibility of postoperative performance tests in patients undergoing major emergency abdominal surgery. We hypothesize that patients with low performance test scores suffer more postoperative complications. METHODS: The study is a prospective observational cohort study including all patients who underwent major abdominal surgery at the Department of Surgery at Zealand University Hospital between 1st March 2017 and 31st January 2019. Patients were evaluated with De Morton Mobility Index (DEMMI) score, hand grip strength, and 30-s chair-stand test. RESULTS: The study included 488 patients (median age 69, 50.6% male). Physiotherapeutic evaluation including physical performance tests with DEMMI and hand grip strength in the immediate postoperative period were feasible in up to 68% of patients undergoing major emergency abdominal surgery. The 30-s chair-stand test was less viable in this population; only 21% of the patients could complete the 30-s chair-stand test during the postoperative period. In logistic regression models low DEMMI score (< 40) and ASA classification and low hand grip strength (< 20 kg for women, < 30 kg for men were independent risk factors for the development of postoperative severe complications Clavien-Dindo (CD) grade ≥ 3. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing major emergency surgery low performance test scores (DEMMI and hand grip strength), were independently associated with the development of significant postoperative complications CD ≥ 3.

Short and long-term readmission after major emergency abdominal surgery: a prospective Danish study.

PURPOSE: Major emergency abdominal surgery is associated with severe in-hospital complications and loss of performance. After discharge, a substantial fraction of patients are readmitted emergently; however, limited knowledge exists of the long-term consequences. The aim of this study was to examine the risks and causes of short-term (30-day) and long-term (180-day) readmission among patients undergoing major emergency abdominal surgery. METHODS: This study included 504 patients who underwent major emergency abdominal surgery at the Zealand University Hospital between March 1, 2017, and February 28, 2019. The population was followed from 0 to 180 days after discharge, and detailed readmission information was registered. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to examine the independent risk factors for readmission within 30 and 180 days. RESULTS: From 0 to 30 days after discharge, 161 (31.9%) patients were readmitted emergently, accumulating to 241 (47.8%) patients within 180 days after discharge. The main reasons for short-term readmission were related to the gastrointestinal tract and surgical wounds, whereas long-term readmissions were due to infections, cardiovascular complications, and abdominal pain. Stomal placement was an independent risk factor for short-term readmission, whereas an ASA score of 3 was a risk factor for both short-term and long-term readmission. CONCLUSION: Close to 50% of all patients who underwent major emergency abdominal surgery had one or more emergency readmission within 180 days of discharge, and these data points towards the risk factors involved.

The ARISCAT score is a promising model to predict postoperative pulmonary complications after major emergency abdominal surgery: an external validation in a Danish cohort.

PURPOSE: Postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) occur in up to 30% of patients undergoing surgery and are a significant contributor to the overall risk of surgery. A preoperative risk prediction tool for postoperative pulmonary complications could succour clinical identification of patients at increased risk and support clinical decision making. This original study aimed to externally validate a risk model for predicting postoperative pulmonary complications (ARISCAT) in a cohort of patients undergoing major emergency abdominal surgery at a Danish University Hospital. METHODS: ARISCAT was validated prospectively in a cohort of patients undergoing major emergency abdominal surgery between March 2017 and January 2019. Predicted PPCs by ARISCAT were compared with observed PPCs. ARISCAT was validated with calibration, discrimination and accuracy and in adherence to the TRIPOD statement. RESULTS: The study included a total of 585 patients with a median age of 70 years. The majority of patients underwent emergency laparotomy without bowel resection. The predicted PPC frequency by ARISCAT was 24.9%, while the observed frequency of PPCs in the cohort was 36.1%. The slope of the calibration plot was 0.9546, the y axis interception was 0.1269 and the plot was well fitted to a linear slope. The Hosmer Lemeshow goodness-of-fit analysis showed good calibration (p > 0.25). ARISCAT showed good discrimination with AUC 0.83 (95% CI 0.79-0.86) on a receiver-operating characteristics curve and the accuracy was also good with a Brier score of 0.19. CONCLUSIONS: ARISCAT was a promising tool to predict PPCs in a high-risk surgical population undergoing major emergency abdominal surgery.

Validation of the preoperative score to predict postoperative mortality (POSPOM) in patients undergoing major emergency abdominal surgery.

PURPOSE: Patients undergoing major emergency abdominal surgery have a high mortality rate. Preoperative risk prediction tools of in-hospital mortality could assist clinical identification of patients at increased risk and thereby aid clinical decision-making and postoperative pathways. The aim of this study was to validate the preoperative score to predict mortality (POSPOM) in a population of patients undergoing major emergency abdominal surgery. METHODS: POSPOM was investigated in a retrospectively collected cohort of patients undergoing major emergency abdominal surgery at a Danish University Hospital from 2010 to 2016. Predicted in-hospital mortality by POSPOM was compared to observed in-hospital mortality. Calibration was assessed by Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit and calibration plot. Discrimination was assessed by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and accuracy was assessed with Brier score. RESULTS: The study included 979 patients (513 females) with a median age of 64 (IQR 55-77) years. The majority of patients underwent open surgery (94.5%). The observed in-hospital mortality rate was 10.9%. The estimated mean in-hospital mortality rate by POSPOM was 6.7%. POSPOM showed a good discrimination [AUC 0.82 (95% CI 0.78-0.85)] and an excellent accuracy [Brier score 0.09 (95% CI 0.07-0.10)]. However, a poor calibration was found (p < 0.01) as POSPOM underestimated in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: POSPOM is not an ideal prediction model for in-hospital mortality in patients undergoing major emergency abdominal surgery due a poor calibration.

The effect of postoperative respiratory and mobilization interventions on postoperative complications following abdominal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Up to 30% of patients undergoing abdominal surgery suffer from postoperative pulmonary complications. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analyses was to investigate whether postoperative respiratory interventions and mobilization interventions compared with usual care can prevent postoperative complications following abdominal surgery. METHODS: The review was conducted in line with PRISMA and GRADE guidelines. MEDLINE, Embase, and PEDRO were searched for randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing postoperative respiratory interventions and mobilization interventions with usual care in patients undergoing abdominal surgery. Meta-analyses with trial sequential analysis on the outcome pulmonary complications were performed. Review registration: PROSPERO (identifier: CRD42019133629) RESULTS: Pulmonary complications were addressed in 25 studies containing 2068 patients. Twenty-three studies were included in the meta-analyses. Patients predominantly underwent open elective upper abdominal surgery. Postoperative respiratory interventions consisted of expiratory resistance modalities (CPAP, EPAP, BiPAP, NIV), assisted inspiratory flow modalities (IPPB, IPAP), patient-operated ventilation modalities (spirometry, PEP), and structured breathing exercises. Meta-analyses found that ventilation with high expiratory resistance (CPAP, EPAP, BiPAP, NIV) reduced the risk of pulmonary complications with OR 0.42 (95% CI 0.18-0.97, p = 0.04, I2 = 0%) compared with usual care, however, the trial sequential analysis revealed that the required information size was not met. Neither postoperative assisted inspiratory flow therapy, patient-operated ventilation modalities, nor breathing exercises reduced the risk of pulmonary complications. CONCLUSION: The use of postoperative expiratory resistance modalities (CPAP, EPAP, BiPAP, NIV) after abdominal surgery might prevent pulmonary complications and it seems the preventive abilities were largely driven by postoperative treatment with CPAP.

Effect of High Inspiratory Oxygen Fraction on Endothelial Function in Healthy Volunteers: A Randomized Controlled Crossover Pilot Study.

It has been suggested that high inspiratory oxygen concentrations during anesthesia may be associated with higher postoperative mortality due to endothelial dysfunction. A randomized controlled crossover study was conducted with 25 healthy male volunteers. They inhaled an oxygen concentration of 30% and 80%. The endothelial function was assessed using noninvasive digital pulse amplitude tonometry (EndoPAT) supported by endothelial biomarkers. The difference in endothelial function between the 2 treatments was 0.05 (95% confidence interval, -0.36 to 0.27; P = .77). Endothelial biomarkers were unaffected. Inhalation of a high oxygen fraction in healthy volunteers did not result in a significant reduction of endothelial function.

Systemic inflammatory response after hernia repair: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: All surgical procedures elicit a complex systemic inflammatory response effectuated and modulated by cytokines. The purpose of this systematic review was to present an overview of the inflammatory response and the serum markers associated with hernia repair and to compare the response between patients treated with and without mesh. METHODS: The review was conducted in line with PRISMA guidelines. The outcomes of interest were serum concentration of leukocytes, cytokines, and acute phase proteins before and after hernia repair with or without mesh reinforcement. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane ROBINS-I tool for non-randomized studies of intervention. RESULTS: A total of 31 studies were included in the systematic review including 1326 patients with a mean age ranging from 33 to 67 years. The studies predominantly included males (95.0% males, 5.0% female) with inguinal hernias (98.5% inguinal hernias, 1.5% incisional hernias). The inflammatory response after hernia repair was characterized by an increase in CRP, IL-6, leukocytes, neutrophils, IL-1, IL-10, fibrinogen, and α1-antitrypsin and a decrease in lymphocytes and albumin within the first 24 postoperative hours. The systemic inflammatory response was normalized before or on the seventh postoperative day. A higher CRP and IL-6 serum concentration was found in patients treated with mesh compared with sutured repairs. CONCLUSIONS: Hernia repair elicits a systemic inflammatory response characterized by an increase in CRP, IL-6, leukocytes, neutrophils, IL-1, IL-10, fibrinogen, and α1-antitrypsin and a decrease in lymphocytes and albumin. A higher inflammatory response was found after mesh repair compared with non-mesh repair and after open mesh repair compared with laparoscopic mesh repair.

Long-term Recurrence and Complications Associated With Elective Incisional Hernia Repair.

Importance: Prosthetic mesh is frequently used to reinforce the repair of abdominal wall incisional hernias. The benefits of mesh for reducing the risk of hernia recurrence or the long-term risks of mesh-related complications are not known. Objective: To investigate the risks of long-term recurrence and mesh-related complications following elective abdominal wall hernia repair in a population with complete follow-up. Design, Setting, and Participants: Registry-based nationwide cohort study including all elective incisional hernia repairs in Denmark from January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2010. A total of 3242 patients with incisional repair were included. Follow-up until November 1, 2014, was obtained by merging data with prospective registrations from the Danish National Patient Registry supplemented with a retrospective manual review of patient records. A 100% follow-up rate was obtained. Exposures: Hernia repair using mesh performed by either open or laparoscopic techniques vs open repair without use of mesh. Main Outcomes and Measures: Five-year risk of reoperation for recurrence and 5-year risk of all mesh-related complications requiring subsequent surgery. Results: Among the 3242 patients (mean age, 58.5 [SD, 13.5] years; 1720 women [53.1%]), 1119 underwent open mesh repair (34.5%), 366 had open nonmesh repair (11.3%), and 1757 had laparoscopic mesh repair (54.2%). The median follow-up after open mesh repair was 59 (interquartile range [IQR], 44-80) months, after nonmesh open repair was 62 (IQR, 44-79) months, and after laparoscopic mesh repair was 61 (IQR, 48-78) months. The risk of the need for repair for recurrent hernia following these initial hernia operations was lower for patients with open mesh repair (12.3% [95% CI, 10.4%-14.3%]; risk difference, -4.8% [95% CI, -9.1% to -0.5%]) and for patients with laparoscopic mesh repair (10.6% [95% CI, 9.2%-12.1%]; risk difference, -6.5% [95% CI, -10.6% to -2.4%]) compared with nonmesh repair (17.1% [95% CI, 13.2%-20.9%]). For the entirety of the follow-up duration, there was a progressively increasing number of mesh-related complications for both open and laparoscopic procedures. At 5 years of follow-up, the cumulative incidence of mesh-related complications was 5.6% (95% CI, 4.2%-6.9%) for patients who underwent open mesh hernia repair and 3.7% (95% CI, 2.8%-4.6%) for patients who underwent laparoscopic mesh repair. The long-term repair-related complication rate for patients with an initial nonmesh repair was 0.8% (open nonmesh repair vs open mesh repair: risk difference, 5.3% [95% CI, 4.4%-6.2%]; open nonmesh repair vs laparoscopic mesh repair: risk difference, 3.4% [95% CI, 2.7%-4.1%]). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients undergoing incisional repair, sutured repair was associated with a higher risk of reoperation for recurrence over 5 years compared with open mesh and laparoscopic mesh repair. With long-term follow-up, the benefits attributable to mesh are offset in part by mesh-related complications.

[Transscrotal and transurethral cholecystectomy: a meta-analysis]. / Transskrotal og transuretral kolecystektomi: en metaanalyse

INTRODUCTION: Patients treated with transvaginal cholecystectomy have less post-operative pain and improved cosmesis compared to patients treated with conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy. No systematic review or meta-analysis has been conducted focusing on similar beneficial surgeries for men. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare transscrotal and transurethral cholecystectomy with conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy. METHODS: PubMed and Embase were systematically searched for observational and randomized controlled trials comparing transscrotal and transurethral cholecystectomy with conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The primary outcome was post-operative complications. Cosmetic satisfaction and whether the patient would recommend the surgery to others were assessed as secondary outcome. RESULTS: No observational or randomized controlled trials comparing transscrotal and transurethral cholecystectomy with conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy was found. CONCLUSIONS: Sufficient evidence to illustrate the advantages of transscrotal and transurethral cholecystectomy compared with conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy cannot be provided currently. There is an urgent need for qualified data in this surgical field. Large randomized controlled trials assessing this topic would be appreciated. FUNDING: none. TRIAL REGISTRATION: none.