The laparoscopy in emergency general surgery (LEGS) study: a questionnaire survey of UK practice.

INTRODUCTION: Recent consensus guidelines suggest that the laparoscopic approach may be a useful, safe and feasible approach in emergency general surgery. Despite this, the UK National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA) suggests the rate of laparoscopy is low (9% fully laparoscopic) and slow to increase over time. A European survey found uptake to be variable. This UK survey was therefore undertaken to establish current UK practice and to determine factors affecting implementation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A questionnaire survey of currently practising UK consultant general surgeons was carried out by the North West Surgical Research Collaborative, using a secure web-based database maintained by the North West Surgical Trials Centre. RESULTS: A total of 151 completed questionnaires were returned from 22 UK centres; 18% of respondents were unaware that laparoscopic cases should be reported to NELA. Appendicectomy (97%) and cholecystectomy (87%) were routinely performed laparoscopically. Laparoscopy was infrequently used in perforation, ischaemia or obstructed hernias. There appears to be equipoise regarding laparoscopic compared with open surgery in small-bowel obstruction among all subspecialty emergency general surgeons, in perforated peptic ulcer among upper gastrointestinal surgeons and in Hinchey III diverticulitis among colorectal surgeons. CONCLUSION: Uptake of laparoscopy in UK emergency general surgery is influenced by surgeon preference, subspecialty, patient and operative factors. Further research into outcomes may help to identify areas of greatest potential benefit. The rate of laparoscopy reported by NELA may be an underestimate due to the 18% of surgeons unaware that laparoscopic cases should be reported, which may affect the validity of analyses performed from this dataset.

Association between preadmission frailty and care level at discharge in older adults undergoing emergency laparotomy.

BACKGROUND: Older adults undergoing emergency abdominal surgery have significantly poorer outcomes than younger adults. For those who survive, the level of care required on discharge from hospital is unknown and such information could guide decision-making. The ELF (Emergency Laparotomy and Frailty) study aimed to determine whether preoperative frailty in older adults was associated with increased dependence at the time of discharge. METHODS: The ELF study was a UK-wide multicentre prospective cohort study of older patients (65 years or more) undergoing emergency laparotomy during March and June 2017. The objective was to establish whether preoperative frailty was associated with increased care level at discharge compared with preoperative care level. The analysis used a multilevel logistic regression adjusted for preadmission frailty, patient age, sex and care level. RESULTS: A total of 934 patients were included from 49 hospitals. Mean(s.d.) age was 76·2(6·8) years, with 57·6 per cent women; 20·2 per cent were frail. Some 37·4 per cent of older adults had an increased care level at discharge. Increasing frailty was associated with increased discharge care level, with greater predictive power than age. The adjusted odds ratio for an increase in care level was 4·48 (95 per cent c.i. 2·03 to 9·91) for apparently vulnerable patients (Clinical Frailty Score (CFS) 4), 5·94 (2·54 to 13·90) for those mildly frail (CFS 5) and 7·88 (2·97 to 20·79) for those moderately or severely frail (CFS 6 or 7), compared with patients who were fit. CONCLUSION: Over 37 per cent of older adults undergoing emergency laparotomy required increased care at discharge. Frailty scoring was a significant predictor, and should be integrated into all acute surgical units to aid shared decision-making and discharge planning.

ANTECEDENTES: Los adultos mayores sometidos a cirugía abdominal de urgencia tienen resultados significativamente peores que los adultos jóvenes. Para aquellos pacientes que sobreviven, el nivel de atención que requieren tras el alta hospitalaria se desconoce y esta información podría servir de guía en la toma de decisiones. El estudio ELF (Emergency Laparotomy and Frailty) tenía como objetivo determinar si la fragilidad preoperatoria en adultos mayores se asociaba con un aumento de la dependencia en el momento del alta. MÉTODOS: El estudio ELF era un estudio multicéntrico extenso efectuado en el Reino Unido (n = 49) que incluyó una cohorte prospectiva de 934 pacientes mayores (> 65 años) sometidos a laparotomía de urgencia durante marzo-junio de 2017. El objetivo fue establecer si la fragilidad preoperatoria aumentaba el nivel de asistencia en el momento del alta en comparación con el nivel de asistencia preoperatorio. Para el análisis se utilizó una regresión logística multinivel ajustada a características previas al ingreso: fragilidad, edad del paciente, género, y nivel de asistencia. RESULTADOS: La edad media de los pacientes fue 76,2 años (DE = 6,83), con un 57% de mujeres, un 20,2% de pacientes frágiles y un 37,4% de adultos mayores que presentaron un aumento en el nivel de asistencia en el momento del alta. Un aumento de la fragilidad se asoció con un incremento en el nivel de asistencia en el momento del alta (y mayor poder predictivo que la edad). La razón de oportunidades (odds ratio, OR) ajustada por el aumento del nivel de asistencia fue 4,48 (i.c. del 95% 2,03-9,91) para pacientes aparentemente vulnerables (Clinical Frailty Scale, CFS 4); 5,94 (i.c. del 95% 2,54-13,90) para aquellos ligeramente frágiles (CFS 5); y 7,88 (i.c. del 95% 2,97-20,79) para aquellos con fragilidad moderada o grave (CFS 6 and 7) en comparación con pacientes en buenas condiciones. CONCLUSIÓN: Este es el primer estudio que documenta que más del 37% de adultos mayores sometidos a laparotomía de urgencia precisaron un aumento en el nivel de asistencia en el momento del alta. La evaluación de la fragilidad debería integrarse en todas las unidades quirúrgicas de agudos para ayudar a compartir la toma de decisiones y los planes de tratamiento.

A prospective audit of early stoma complications in colorectal cancer treatment throughout the Greater Manchester and Cheshire colorectal cancer network.

AIM: The study aimed to identify the incidence of early stoma problems after surgery for colorectal cancer to identify predisposing factors and to assess the effect on discharge from hospital and the greater need for community stoma care. METHOD: A prospective study of 192 patients was carried out over a six-month period in the 13 units of the Greater Manchester and Cheshire Cancer Network. Stoma problems were categorized into fistula, leakage, pancaking, necrosis, retraction, separation, stenosis, skin problems, parastomal hernia, suboptimal stoma site and need for resiting or refashioning. Differences in incidence between units (anonymized) were analysed, and the effect of stoma complications on length of hospital stay and the need for additional community stoma care was determined. RESULTS: One hundred and ninety-two patients with stomas were included, of which 52 (27.1%) were identified as being problematic (range 0-66.7% between units). Significant risk factors included stoma type (colostomy) (P < 0.05), short stoma length (P = 0.006), higher BMI (P = 0.043), emergency surgery (P = 0.002) and lack of preoperative site marking (P < 0.001). Problematic stomas were associated with longer hospital stay (P < 0.001) and increased community care (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Stoma type, stoma length, body mass index, emergency surgery and lack of preoperative marking were significant risk factors. Overall complication rates compare favourably with other studies.