The effect of intra-operative hypotension on acute kidney injury, postoperative mortality and length of stay following emergency hip fracture surgery.

The association between intra-operative hypotension and postoperative acute kidney injury, mortality and length of stay has not been comprehensively evaluated in a large single-centre hip fracture population. We analysed electronic anaesthesia records of 1063 patients undergoing unilateral hip fracture surgery, collected from 2015 to 2018. Acute kidney injury, 3-, 30- and 365-day mortality and length of stay were evaluated to assess the relationship between intra-operative hypotension absolute values (≤ 55, 60, 65, 70 and 75 mmHg) and duration of hypotension. The rate of acute kidney injury was 23.7%, mortality at 3-, 30- and 365 days was 3.7%, 8.0% and 25.3%, respectively, and median (IQR [range]) length of stay 8 (6-12 [0-99]) days. Median (IQR [range]) time ≤ MAP 55, 60, 65, 70 and 75 mmHg was 0 (0-0.5[0-72.1]); 0 (0-4.4 [0-104.9]); 2.2 (0-8.7 [0-144.2]); 6.6 (2.2-19.7 [0-198.8]); 17.5 (6.6-37.1 [0-216.3]) minutes, and percentage of surgery time below these thresholds was 1%, 2.5%, 7.9%, 12% and 21% respectively. There were some univariate associations between hypotension and mortality; however, these were no longer evident in multivariable analysis. Multivariable analysis found no association between hypotension and acute kidney injury. Acute kidney injury was associated with male sex, antihypertensive medications and cardiac/renal comorbidities. Three-day mortality was associated with delay to surgery ? 48 hours, whilst 30-day and 365-day mortality was associated with delay to surgery ≥ 48 hours, impaired cognition and cardiac/renal comorbidities. While the rate of acute kidney injury was similar to other studies, use of vasopressors and fluids to reduce the time spent at hypotensive levels failed to reduce this complication. Intra-operative hypotension at the levels observed in this cohort may not be an important determinant of acute kidney injury, postoperative mortality and length of stay.

The preoperative risk tool SURPAS accurately predicts outcomes in emergency surgery

O Sistema de Avaliação Pré-operatória de Risco Cirúrgico (SURPAS) utiliza oito variáveis para prever com precisão complicações pós-operatórias , mas não foi suficientemente estudado em cirurgia de emergência. Avaliamos o SURPAS em cirurgia de emergência, comparando-o com o Emergency Surgery Score (ESS). As estimativas SURPAS e ESS de mortalidade em 30 dias e morbidade geral foram calculadas para operações de emergência no banco de dados ACS-NSQIP de 2009­2018 e comparadas usando gráficos e taxas observadas com as esperadas, índices c e pontuações de Brier. Foram excluídos os casos com dados incompletos. Em 205.318 pacientes de emergência, o SURPAS subestimou (8,1%; 35,9%) enquanto a ESS superestimou (10,1%; 43,8%) observou mortalidade e morbidade (8,9%; 38,8%). Cada um mostrou boa calibração em gráficos observados e esperados. O SURPAS apresentou melhores índices c (0,855 vs. 0,848 de mortalidade; 0,802 vs. 0,755 de morbidade), enquanto o escore de Brier foi melhor para ESS para mortalidade (0,0666 vs. 0,0684) e para SURPAS para morbidade (0,1772 vs. 0,1950). O SURPAS previu com precisão a mortalidade e a morbidade em cirurgias de emergência usando oito variáveis preditoras.

Safety of emergency, elective and day case operating during the winter period at East Suffolk and North Essex NHS Foundation Trust: lessons from the outcomes of 4,254 surgical patients from the first COVID-19 wave.

BACKGROUND: There is limited evidence on perioperative outcomes of surgical patients during the COVID-19 pandemic to inform continued operating into the winter period. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed the rate of 30-day COVID-19 transmission and mortality of all surgical patients in the three hospitals in our trust in the East of England during the first lockdown in March 2020. All patients who underwent a swab were swabbed on or 24 hours prior to admission. RESULTS: There were 4,254 patients and an overall 30-day mortality of 0.99%. The excess surgical mortality in our region was 0.29%. There were 39 patients who were COVID-19 positive within 30 days of admission, 12 of whom died. All 12 were emergency admissions with a length of stay longer than 24 hours. There were three deaths among those who underwent day case surgery, one of whom was COVID-19 negative, and the other two were not swabbed but not suspected to have COVID-19. There were two COVID-19 positive elective cases and none in day case elective or emergency surgery. There were no COVID-19 positive deaths in elective or day case surgery. CONCLUSIONS: There was a low rate of COVID-19 transmission and mortality in elective and day case operations. Our data have allowed us to guide patients in the consent process and provided the evidence base to restart elective and day case operating with precautions and regular review. A number of regions will be similarly affected and should perform a review of their data for the winter period and beyond.

The Obesity Paradox in Elderly Patients Undergoing Emergency Surgery: A Nationwide Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Obesity has long been considered a risk factor for postoperative adverse events in surgery. We sought to study the impact of body mass index (BMI) on the clinical outcomes of the high-risk emergency general surgery (EGS) elderly patients. METHODS: All EGS ≥65 years old patients in the 2007-2016 ACS-NSQIP database, identified using the variables 'emergency' and 'surgspec,' were included. Patients were classified into five groups: normal weight: BMI <25 kg/m2, overweight: BMI ≥25 kg/m2 and <30 kg/m2, Class I: BMI ≥30 kg/m2 and <35 kg/m2, Class II: BMI ≥35 kg/m2 and <40 kg/m2, and Class III: BMI ≥40 kg/m2. Patients with BMI<18.5 kg/m2 were excluded. Multivariable logistic regression models were built to assess the relationship between obesity and 30-day postoperative mortality, overall morbidity, and individual postoperative complications after adjusting for demographics (e.g., age, gender), comorbidities (e.g., diabetes mellitus, heart failure), laboratory tests (e.g., white blood cell count, albumin), and operative complexity (e.g., ASA classification). RESULTS: A total of 78,704 patients were included, of which 26,011 were overweight (33.1%), 13,897 (17.6%) had Class I obesity, 5904 (7.5%) had Class II obesity, and 4490 (5.7%) had Class III obesity. On multivariable analyses, compared to the nonobese, patients who are overweight or with Class I-III obesity paradoxically had a lower risk of mortality, bleeding requiring transfusion, pneumonia, stroke and myocardial infarction (MI). Additionally, the incidence of MI and stroke decreased in a stepwise fashion as BMI progressed from overweight to severely obese (MI: OR: 0.84 [0.73-0.95], OR: 0.73 [0.62-0.86], OR: 0.66 [0.52-0.83], OR: 0.51 [0.38-0.68]; stroke: OR: 0.80 [0.65-0.99], OR: 0.79 [0.62-1.02], OR: 0.71 [0.50-1.00], OR: 0.43 [0.28-0.68]). CONCLUSION: In our study of elderly EGS patients, overweight and obese patients had a lower risk of mortality, bleeding requiring transfusion, pneumonia, reintubation, stroke, and MI. Further studies are needed to confirm and investigate the obesity paradox in this patient population.

Increasing Frailty in Geriatric Emergency General Surgery: A Cause for Concern.

BACKGROUND: Emergency general surgery (EGS) presents a challenge for frail, geriatric individuals who often have extensive comorbidities affecting postoperative recovery. Previous studies have shown an association between increasing frailty and adverse outcomes following elective and EGS; no study has explored the same for the geriatric patient population using the modified 5-item frailty index (mFI-5) score. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed using the 2012-2017 American College of Surgeons - National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database to identify geriatric patients (≥65 years) undergoing EGS procedures within 48 h of admission. The previously validated mFI-5 score was used to assess preoperative frailty. The study cohort was divided into four groups: mFI-5 = 0, mFI-5 = 1, mFI-5 = 2, and mFI-5 ≥ 3; the impact of increasing mFI-5 score on failure-to-rescue (FTR), 30-day complications, readmissions, reoperations, and mortality was assessed. RESULTS: A total of 47,216 patients were included: 27.4% with mFI-5 = 0, 45% with mFI-5 = 1, 22.1% with mFI-5 = 2, and 5.5% with mFI-5 ≥ 3. Following multivariate analyses, increasing mFI-5 score was associated with higher odds of FTR (mFI-5 = 1: odds ratio (OR) 1.48, p=0.003; mFI-5 = 2: OR 2.66, p <0.001; mFI-5 ≥ 3: OR 3.97, p <0.001), 30-day complications (mFI-5 = 1: OR 1.46, p <0.001; mFI-5 = 2: OR 2.48, p <0.001; mFI-5≥3: OR 5.01, p <0.001), reoperation (mFI-5 = 1: OR 1.42, p = 0.020; mFI-5 = 2: OR 1.70, p = 0.021; mFI-5 ≥ 3: OR 2.18, p = 0.009) and all-cause mortality (mFI-5 = 1: OR 1.49, p=0.001; mFI-5 = 2: OR 2.67, p <0.001; mFI-5 ≥ 3: 3.96, p <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Increasing frailty in geriatric EGS patients is associated with significantly higher rates of FTR, 30-day complications, reoperations, and all-cause mortality. The mFI-5 score can be used to assess frailty and better anticipate the postoperative course of vulnerable geriatric patients.

Emergency general surgery: Impact of hospital and surgeon admission case volume on mortality.

BACKGROUND: Emergency general surgery (EGS) is a high-volume and high-risk surgical service. Interhospital variation in EGS outcomes exists, but there is disagreement in the literature as to whether hospital admission volume affects in-hospital mortality. Scotland collects high-quality data on all admitted patients, whether managed operatively or nonoperatively. Our aim was to determine the relationship between hospital admission volume and in-hospital mortality of EGS patients in Scotland. Second, to investigate whether surgeon admission volume affects mortality. METHODS: This national population-level cohort study included EGS patients aged 16 years and older, who were admitted to a Scottish hospital between 2014 and 2018 (inclusive). A logistic regression model was created, with in-hospital mortality as the dependent variable, and admission volume of hospital per year as a continuous covariate of interest, adjusted for age, sex, comorbidity, deprivation, surgeon admission volume, surgeon operative rate, transfer status, diagnosis, and operation category. RESULTS: There were 376,076 admissions to 25 hospitals, which met our inclusion criteria. The EGS hospital admission rate per year had no effect on in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR], 1.000; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.000-1.000). Higher average surgeon monthly admission volume increased the odds of in-hospital mortality (>35 admissions: OR, 1.139; 95% CI, 1.038-1.250; 25-35 admissions: OR, 1.091; 95% CI, 1.004-1.185; <25 admissions was the referent). CONCLUSION: In Scotland, in contrast to other settings, EGS hospital admission volume did not influence in-hospital mortality. The finding of an association between individual surgeons' case volume and in-hospital mortality warrants further investigation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Care management, Level IV.

Differences in outcomes after emergency general surgery between Hispanic subgroups in the New Jersey State Inpatient Database (2009-2014): The Hispanic population is not monolithic.

BACKGROUND: Our aim was to examine differences in clinical outcomes between Hispanic subgroups who underwent emergency general surgery (EGS). METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of the HCUP State Inpatient Database from New Jersey (2009-2014), including Hispanic and non-Hispanic White (NHW) adult patients who underwent EGS. Multivariable analyses were performed on outcomes including 7-day readmission and length of stay (LOS). RESULTS: 125,874 patients underwent EGS operations. 22,971 were Hispanic (15,488 with subgroup defined: 7,331 - Central/South American; 4,254 - Puerto Rican; 3,170 - Mexican; 733 - Cuban). On multivariable analysis, patients in the Central/South American subgroup were more likely to be readmitted compared to the Mexican subgroup (OR 2.02; p < 0.001, respectively). Puerto Rican and Central/South American subgroups had significantly shorter LOS than Mexican patients (Puerto Rico -0.58 days; p < 0.001; Central/South American -0.30 days; p = 0.016). CONCLUSIONS: There are significant differences in EGS outcomes between Hispanic subgroups. These differences could be missed when data are aggregated at Hispanic ethnicity.

The effects of early enteral nutrition on mortality after major emergency abdominal surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis with Trial Sequential Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Early oral or enteral nutrition (EEN) has been proven safe, tolerable, and beneficial in elective surgery. In emergency abdominal surgery no consensus exists regarding postoperative nutrition standard regimens. This review aimed to assess the safety and clinical outcomes of EEN compared to standard care after emergency abdominal surgery. METHODS: The review protocol was performed according to the Cochrane Handbook and reported according to PRISMA. Clinical outcomes included mortality, specific complication rates, length of stay, and serious adverse events. Risk of bias was assessed by Cochrane risk of bias tool and Downs and Black. GRADE assessment of each outcome was performed, and Trial Sequential Analysis was completed to obtain the Required Information Size (RIS) of each outcome. RESULTS: From a total of 4741 records screened, a total of five randomized controlled trials and two non-randomized controlled trials were included covering 1309 patients. The included studies reported no safety issues regarding the use of EEN. A significant reduction in the mortality rate of EEN compared with standard care was seen (OR 0.59 (CI 95% 0.34-1.00), I2 = 0%). Meta-analyses on sepsis and postoperative pulmonary complications showed non-significant tendencies in favor of EEN compared with standard care. GRADE assessment of all outcomes was evaluated 'low' or 'very low'. Trial Sequential Analysis revealed that all outcomes had insufficient RIS to confirm the effects of EEN. CONCLUSION: EEN after major emergency surgery is correlated with reduced mortality, however, more high-quality data regarding the optimal timing and composition of nutrition are needed before final conclusions regarding the effects of EEN can be made.

Postoperative complications and mortality following emergency digestive surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic: A multicenter collaborative retrospective cohort study protocol (COVID-CIR).

ABSTRACT: Infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus seems to contribute significantly to increased postoperative complications and mortality after emergency surgical procedures. Additionally, the fear of COVID-19 contagion delays the consultation of patients, resulting in the deterioration of their acute diseases by the time of consultation. In the specific case of urgent digestive surgery patients, both factors significantly worsen the postoperative course and prognosis. Main working hypothesis: infection by COVID-19 increases postoperative 30-day-mortality for any cause in patients submitted to emergency/urgent general or gastrointestinal surgery. Likewise, hospital collapse during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic increased 30-day-mortality for any cause. Hence, the main objective of this study is to estimate the cumulative incidence of mortality at 30-days-after-surgery. Secondary objectives are: to estimate the cumulative incidence of postoperative complications and to develop a specific postoperative risk propensity model for COVID-19-infected patients.A multicenter, observational retrospective cohort study (COVID-CIR-study) will be carried out in consecutive patients operated on for urgent digestive pathology. Two cohorts will be defined: the "pandemic" cohort, which will include all patients (classified as COVID-19-positive or -negative) operated on for emergency digestive pathology during the months of March to June 2020; and the "control" cohort, which will include all patients operated on for emergency digestive pathology during the months of March to June 2019. Information will be gathered on demographic characteristics, clinical and analytical parameters, scores on the usual prognostic scales for quality management in a General Surgery service (POSSUM, P-POSSUM and LUCENTUM scores), prognostic factors applicable to all patients, specific prognostic factors for patients infected with SARS-CoV-2, postoperative morbidity and mortality (at 30 and 90 postoperative days). The main objective is to estimate the cumulative incidence of mortality at 30 days after surgery. As secondary objectives, to estimate the cumulative incidence of postoperative complications and to develop a specific postoperative risk propensity model for SARS-CoV-2 infected patients.The protocol (version1.0, April 20th 2020) was approved by the local Institutional Review Board (Ethic-and-Clinical-Investigation-Committee, code PR169/20, date 05/05/20). The study findings will be submitted to peer-reviewed journals and presented at relevant national and international scientific meetings.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04479150 (July 21, 2020).

Performance of the Emergency Surgery Score (ESS) Across Different Emergency General Surgery Procedures.

BACKGROUND: The Emergency Surgery Score (ESS) has been previously validated as a reliable tool to predict postoperative outcomes in emergency general surgery (EGS). The purpose of this study is to assess the differential performance of the ESS in specific EGS procedures. METHODS: The American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was retrospectively analyzed for patients undergoing EGS between 2007 and 2017. Patients who underwent the following EGS procedures were identified: laparoscopic appendectomy, laparoscopic cholecystectomy, surgery for small bowel obstruction (SBO), colectomy, and incarcerated ventral or inguinal hernia repair. The performance of the ESS in predicting mortality in each procedure was assessed using receiver operating characteristic analyses. RESULTS: A total of 467,803 patients underwent EGS (mean age 50 ± 19.9 y, females 241,330 [51.6%]), of which 191,930 (41%) underwent laparoscopic appendectomy, 40,353 (8.6%) underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy, and 35,152 (7.5%) patients underwent surgery for SBO. The ESS correlated extremely well with mortality for patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy (area under the curve (AUC) 0.91), laparoscopic cholecystectomy (AUC 0.91), lysis of adhesions for SBO (AUC 0.83), colectomy (AUC 0.83), and incarcerated hernia repair (AUC 0.85). CONCLUSIONS: ESS performance accurately predicts mortality across a wide range of EGS procedures, and its use should be encouraged for preoperative patient counseling and for nationally benchmarking the quality of care of EGS.

Differences Between Center-level Outcomes in Emergency and Elective General Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Center-level outcome metrics have long been tracked in elective surgery (ELS). Despite recent interest in measuring emergency general surgery (EGS) quality, centers are often compared based on elective or combined outcomes. Therefore, quality of care for emergency surgery specifically is unknown. METHODS: We extracted data on EGS and ELS patients from the 2016 State Inpatient Databases of Florida, New York, and Kentucky. Centers that performed >100 ELS and EGS operations were included. Risk-adjusted mortality, complication, and failure to rescue (FTR, death after complication) rates were calculated and observed-to-expected ratios were calculated by center for ELS and EGS patients. Centers were determined to be high or low outliers if the 90% CI for the observed: expected ratio excluded 1. We calculated the frequency with which centers demonstrated a different performance status between EGS and ELS. Kendall's tau values were calculated to assess for correlation between EGS and ELS status. RESULTS: A total of 204 centers with 45,500 EGS cases and 49,380 ELS cases met inclusion criteria. Overall mortality, complication, and FTR rates were 1.7%, 8.0%, and 14.5% respectively. There was no significant correlation between mortality performance in EGS and ELS, with 36 centers in a different performance category (high outlier, low outlier, as expected) in EGS than in ELS. The correlation for complication rates was 0.20, with 60 centers in different categories for EGS and ELS. For FTR rates, there was no correlation, with 16 centers changing category. CONCLUSIONS: There was minimal correlation between outcomes for ELS and EGS. High performers in one category were rarely high performers in the other. There may be important differences between the processes of care that are important for EGS and ELS outcomes that may yield meaningful opportunities for quality improvement.

Urgent-start peritoneal dialysis versus haemodialysis for people with chronic kidney disease.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) who require urgent initiation of dialysis but without having a permanent dialysis access have traditionally commenced haemodialysis (HD) using a central venous catheter (CVC). However, several studies have reported that urgent initiation of peritoneal dialysis (PD) is a viable alternative option for such patients. OBJECTIVES: This review aimed to examine the benefits and harms of urgent-start PD compared to HD initiated using a CVC in adults and children with CKD requiring long-term kidney replacement therapy. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 25 May 2020 for randomised controlled trials through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov. For non-randomised controlled trials, MEDLINE (OVID) (1946 to 11 February 2020) and EMBASE (OVID) (1980 to 11 February 2020) were searched. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs and non-RCTs comparing urgent-start PD to HD initiated using a CVC. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors extracted data and assessed the quality of studies independently. Additional information was obtained from the primary investigators. The estimates of effect were analysed using random-effects model and results were presented as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The GRADE framework was used to make judgments regarding certainty of the evidence for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: Overall, seven observational studies (991 participants) were included: three prospective cohort studies and four retrospective cohort studies. All the outcomes except one (bacteraemia) were graded as very low certainty of evidence given that all included studies were observational studies and few events resulting in imprecision, and inconsistent findings. Urgent-start PD may reduce the incidence of catheter-related bacteraemia compared with HD initiated with a CVC (2 studies, 301 participants: RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.41; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence), which translated into 131 fewer bacteraemia episodes per 1000 (95% CI 89 to 145 fewer). Urgent-start PD has uncertain effects on peritonitis risk (2 studies, 301 participants: RR 1.78, 95% CI 0.23 to 13.62; I2 = 0%; very low certainty evidence), exit-site/tunnel infection (1 study, 419 participants: RR 3.99, 95% CI 1.2 to 12.05; very low certainty evidence), exit-site bleeding (1 study, 178 participants: RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.33; very low certainty evidence), catheter malfunction (2 studies; 597 participants: RR 0.26, 95% CI: 0.07 to 0.91; I2 = 66%; very low certainty evidence), catheter re-adjustment (2 studies, 225 participants: RR: 0.13; 95% CI 0.00 to 18.61; I2 = 92%; very low certainty evidence), technique survival (1 study, 123 participants: RR: 1.18, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.61; very low certainty evidence), or patient survival (5 studies, 820 participants; RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.07; I2 = 0%; very low certainty evidence) compared with HD initiated using a CVC. Two studies using different methods of measurements for hospitalisation reported that hospitalisation was similar although one study reported higher hospitalisation rates in HD initiated using a catheter compared with urgent-start PD. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Compared with HD initiated using a CVC, urgent-start PD may reduce the risk of bacteraemia and had uncertain effects on other complications of dialysis and technique and patient survival. In summary, there are very few studies directly comparing the outcomes of urgent-start PD and HD initiated using a CVC for patients with CKD who need to commence dialysis urgently. This evidence gap needs to be addressed in future studies.

The preoperative risk tool SURPAS accurately predicts outcomes in emergency surgery.

BACKGROUND: The Surgical Risk Preoperative Assessment System (SURPAS) uses eight variables to accurately predict postoperative complications but has not been sufficiently studied in emergency surgery. We evaluated SURPAS in emergency surgery, comparing it to the Emergency Surgery Score (ESS). METHODS: SURPAS and ESS estimates of 30-day mortality and overall morbidity were calculated for emergency operations in the 2009-2018 ACS-NSQIP database and compared using observed-to-expected plots and rates, c-indices, and Brier scores. Cases with incomplete data were excluded. RESULTS: In 205,318 emergency patients, SURPAS underestimated (8.1%; 35.9%) while ESS overestimated (10.1%; 43.8%) observed mortality and morbidity (8.9%; 38.8%). Each showed good calibration on observed-to-expected plots. SURPAS had better c-indices (0.855 vs 0.848 mortality; 0.802 vs 0.755 morbidity), while the Brier score was better for ESS for mortality (0.0666 vs. 0.0684) and for SURPAS for morbidity (0.1772 vs. 0.1950). CONCLUSIONS: SURPAS accurately predicted mortality and morbidity in emergency surgery using eight predictor variables.

The Emergency surgery score (ESS) accurately predicts outcomes of emergency surgical admissions at a Saudi academic health center.

BACKGROUND: The emergency surgery score (ESS) has emerged as a tool to predict outcomes in emergency surgery (EGS) patients. Our study examines the ability of ESS to predict outcomes in EGS admissions. METHODS: All EGS admissions to King Saud University Medical City (KSUMC) from January 2017 to October 2019 were included. ESS was calculated for each patient. Correlations between ESS and 30-day mortality and complications were evaluated. RESULTS: 1607 patients were included. 30-day mortality rate was 2.2% while complication rate was 18.7%. Mortality increased as ESS increased, from 0.3% for ESS≤2, to 30.1% for ESS >10, with a c-statistic of 0.88. Complication rates were 2.2%, 40%, and 100% at ESS of 0, 6, and 15, respectively, with a c-statistic of 0.82. CONCLUSIONS: ESS accurately predicted outcomes at our tertiary center. ESS could be useful in identifying high risk EGS admissions and in benchmarking quality of care across Saudi institutions.

Meta-analysis of mortality risk in octogenarians undergoing emergency general surgery operations.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to quantify the risk of perioperative mortality in octogenarians undergoing emergency general surgical operations and to compare such risk between octogenarians and nonoctogenarians. METHODS: A systematic review was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses standards to identify studies reporting the mortality risk in patients aged over 80 years undergoing emergency general surgery operations. The primary outcome measure was 30-day mortality, which was stratified based on American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) status and procedure type. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system. Random-effects models were applied to calculate pooled outcome data. RESULTS: Analysis of 66,701 octogenarians from 22 studies showed that the risk of 30-day mortality was 26% (95% confidence interval 18%-34%) for all operations: 29% (95% confidence interval 25%-33%) for emergency laparotomy; 9% (95% confidence interval 1%-23%) for nonlaparotomy emergency operations; 21% (95% confidence interval 13%-30%) for colon resection; 17% (95% confidence interval 11%-25%) for small bowel resection; 9% (95% confidence interval 7%-11%) for adhesiolysis; 6% (95% confidence interval 5.9%-6.8%) for perforated ulcer repair; 3% (95% confidence interval 2.6%-4%) for appendicectomy; 3% (95% confidence interval 2.8%-3.3%) for cholecystectomy; and 5% (95% confidence interval 0.2%-14%) for hernia repair. When stratified based on the patient's ASA status, the risk was 11% (95% confidence interval 4%-20%) for ASA 2 status, 22% (95% confidence interval 10%-36%) for ASA 3 status, 39% (95% confidence interval 29%-48%) for ASA 4 status, and 94% (95% confidence interval 77%-100%) for ASA 5 status. The risk was higher in octogenarians compared with nonoctogenarians (odds ratio: 4.07, 95% confidence interval 2.40-6.89), patients aged 70 to 79 (odds ratio: 1.21, 95% confidence interval 1.13-1.31), and patients aged 50 to 79 (odds ratio: 2.03, 95% confidence interval 1.68-2.45). CONCLUSION: The risk of perioperative mortality in octogenarians undergoing emergency general surgical operations is high. The risk of perioperative death in this group is higher than in younger patients. Laparotomy, bowel resection, and ASA status above 3 carry the highest risk.

Efficient evaluation of center-level emergency surgery performance using a high-yield procedure set: A step towards an EGS registry.

BACKGROUND: Emergency general surgery (EGS) lacks mechanisms to compare performance between institutions. Focusing on higher-risk procedures may efficiently identify outliers. METHODS: EGS patients were identified from the 2016 State Inpatient Databases of Florida, New York, and Kentucky. Risk-adjusted mortality was calculated as an O:E ratio, generating expected mortality from a model including demographic and procedural factors. Outliers were centers whose 90% confidence intervals excluded 1. This was repeated in several subsets, to determine if these yielded outliers similar to the overall dataset. RESULTS: We identified 45,430 EGS patients. Overall, 3 high performing centers and 5 low performing centers were identified. Exclusion of appendectomies and cholecystectomies resulted in a remaining data set of 13,569 patients (29.9% of the overall data set), with 2 high performers and 5 low performers. One low performer in the limited data set was not identified in the overall set. CONCLUSION: Evaluation of 5 procedures, making up less than a third of EGS, identifies most outliers. A streamlined monitoring procedure may facilitate maintenance of an EGS registry.

Evaluation of malnutrition via modified GLIM criteria for in patients undergoing emergent gastrointestinal surgery.

BACKGROUND: Malnutrition remains a critical public health issue in the US, particularly in surgery where perioperative malnutrition is commonly underdiagnosed and undertreated. In 2016, the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) proposed a set of consensus criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition. Our project aims to assess the post-operative outcomes of patients meeting a modified GLIM-defined (mGLIM) malnutrition criteria undergoing emergent gastrointestinal surgery (EGS) in the NSQIP database. Current GLIM-criteria were modified with addition of admission albumin (a NSQIP-defined malnutrition variable). METHODS: Adapting NSQIP data, mGLIM criteria are (1) BMI of ≤20 for age ≤ 70 and BMI ≤22 for age ≥ 71, (2) weight loss > 10% within the past 6 months, (3) admission albumin ≤ 3.5, and (4) emergent bowel surgery as etiologic criteria of acute disease/injury. All patients undergoing emergent small bowel, colon, and rectal procedures were extracted from the NSQIP database and included in the study. Multivariate linear and logistic regression models controlling for relevant covariates were developed to evaluate mGLIM criteria on length of stay (LOS), mortality, and overall complication rates. RESULTS: We included 31,029 patients who underwent emergent bowel surgeries from years 2011-2016. Demographically, 53.6% (n = 16,622) were female, 13.0% (n = 4023) were African American, and 78.3% (n = 24,292) were Caucasian. Case composition included 71.5% colon operations, 28.0% small bowel, and 0.5% rectal cases. Overall, 1.7% (n = 517) had data necessary to qualify as malnourished as per mGLIM. Controlling for covariates, multivariate linear and logistic regression analyses show that these patients have significantly higher mortality for both colon (p < 0.001, CI 1.55 | 2.61) and small bowel (p = 0.022, CI 1.08 | 2.67) procedures, longer LOS for colon (p < 0.001, CI 1.93 | 4.33) operations, and higher post-operative complications for both colon (p < 0.001, CI 1.61 | 2.62) and small bowel (p < 0.001, CI 1.57 | 3.37) cases. CONCLUSION: This analysis shows that mGLIM criteria malnutrition is associated with poor clinical outcomes following EGS affecting LOS and mortality. Our data indicates the new mGLIM criteria can be a powerful and simple predictive score for malnutrition that can be used to predict malnutrition-related risk of poor outcomes after EGS.

The emergency surgery score (ESS) and outcomes in elderly patients undergoing emergency laparotomy: A post-hoc analysis of an EAST multicenter study.

INTRODUCTION: We sought to evaluate whether the Emergency Surgery Score (ESS) can accurately predict outcomes in elderly patients undergoing emergent laparotomy (EL). METHODS: This is a post-hoc analysis of an EAST multicenter study. Between April 2018 and June 2019, all adult patients undergoing EL in 19 participating hospitals were prospectively enrolled, and ESS was calculated for each patient. Using the c-statistic, the correlation between ESS and mortality, morbidity, and need for ICU admission was assessed in three patient age cohorts (65-74, 75-84, ≥85 years old). RESULTS: 715 patients were included, of which 52% were 65-74, 34% were 75-84, and 14% were ≥85 years old; 51% were female, and 77% were white. ESS strongly correlated with postoperative mortality (c-statistic:0.81). Mortality gradually increased from 0% to 20%-60% at ESS of 2, 10 and 16 points, respectively. ESS predicted mortality, morbidity, and need for ICU best in patients 65-74 years old (c-statistic:0.81, 0.75, 0.83 respectively), but its performance significantly decreased in patients ≥85 years (c-statistic:0.72, 0.64, 0.67 respectively). CONCLUSION: ESS is an accurate predictor of outcome in the elderly EL patient 65-85 years old, but its performance decreases for patients ≥85. Consideration should be given to modify ESS to better predict outcomes in the very elderly patient population.

Survival curve identifies critical period for postoperative mortality in cardiac patients undergoing emergency general surgery.

The number of non-cardiac major surgeries carried out has significantly increased in recent years to around 200 million procedures carried out annually. Approximately 30% of patients submitted to non-cardiac surgery present some form of cardiovascular comorbidity. In emergency situations, with less surgery planning time and greater clinical severity, the risks become even more significant. The aim of this study is to determine the incidence and clinical outcomes in patients with cardiovascular disease submitted to non-cardiac surgical procedures in a single cardiovascular referral center. This is a prospective cohort study of patients with cardiovascular disease submitted to non-cardiovascular surgery. All procedures were carried out by the same surgeon, between January 2006 and January 2018. 240 patients included were elderly, 154 were male (64%), 8 patients presented two diagnoses. Of the resulting 248 procedures carried out, 230 were emergency (92.8%). From the data obtained it was possible to estimate the day from which the occurrence of mortality is less probable in the postoperative phase. Our research evaluated the epidemiological profile of the surgeries and we were able to estimate the survival and delimit the period of greatest risk of mortality in these patients. The high rate of acute mesenteric ischemia was notable, a serious and frequently fatal condition.