Reproducibility and predictive value of three grading systems for intraoperative adverse events in a cohort of abdominal surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Intraoperative adverse events (iAEs) are increasingly recognized for their impact on patient outcomes. The Kaafarani classification and Surgical Apgar Score (SAS) were developed to assess the intraoperative course; however, both have their drawbacks. ClassIntra was validated for iAEs of any origin. This study compares the Kaafarani and SAS to ClassIntra considering predictive value and interrater reliability in a cohort of abdominal surgery to support implementation of a classification in clinical practice. METHODS: The authors made use of the LAParotomy or LAParoscopy and ADhesiolysis (LAPAD) study database of elective abdominal surgery. Detailed descriptions on iAEs were collected in real-time by a researcher. For the current research aim, all iAEs were graded according ClassIntra, Kaafarani, and SAS (score ≤4). The predictive value was assessed using univariable and multivariable linear regression and the area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC). Two teams graded ClassIntra and Kaafarani to assess the interrater reliability using Cohen's Kappa. RESULTS: A total of 755 surgeries were included, in which 335 (44%) iAEs were graded according to ClassIntra, 228 (30%) to Kaafarani, and 130 (20%) to SAS. All classifications were significantly correlated to postoperative complications, with an AUROC of 0.67 (95% CI: 0.62-0.72), 0.64 (0.59-0.70), and 0.71 (0.56-0.76), respectively. For the secondary endpoint, the interrater reliability of ClassIntra with κ 0.87 (95% CI: 0.84-0.90) and Kaafarani 0.90 (95% CI: 0.87-0.93) was both strong. CONCLUSION: ClassIntra, Kaafarani, and SAS can be used for reporting of iAEs in abdominal surgery with good predictive value for postoperative complications, with strong reliability. ClassIntra, compared with Kaafarani and SAS, included the most iAEs and has the most comprehensive definition suitable for uniform reporting of iAEs in clinical practice and research.

Inter-Rater Agreement of the Classification of Intraoperative Adverse Events (ClassIntra) in Abdominal Surgery.

OBJECTIVE AND SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Adverse events in surgical patients can occur preoperatively, intraoperatively, and postoperatively. Universally accepted classification systems are not yet available for intraoperative adverse events (iAEs). ClassIntra has recently been developed and validated as a tool for grading iAEs that occur between skin incision and skin closure irrespective of the origin, that is, surgery, anesthesia, or organizational. The aim of this study is to assess the inter-rater agreement of ClassIntra and assess its predictive value for postoperative complications in elective abdominal surgery. METHODS: This study is a secondary use of data from the LAParotomy or LAParoscopy and ADhesiolysis (LAPAD) study, with detailed data on incidence and management of intra-operative and post-operative complications. Data were collected in a cohort of elective abdominal surgeries. Two teams graded all recorded events in the LAPAD study according to ClassIntra. Cohen Kappa coefficient was calculated to determine inter-rater agreement. Uni- and multivariable linear regression was used to assess the predictive value of the ClassIntra grades for postoperative complications. RESULTS: IAEs were rated in 333 of 755 (44%) surgeries by team 1, and in 324 of 755 (43%) surgeries by team 2. Cohen kappa coefficient for ClassIntra grades was 0.87 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84-0.90]. Discrepancies in grading were most frequent for intraoperative bleeding and adhesions' associated injuries. At least 1 postoperative complication was observed in 278 (37%) patients. The risk of a postoperative complications increased with every increase in severity grade of ClassIntra. Intraoperative hypotension [mean difference (MD) 23.41, 95% CI 12.93-33.90] and other organ injuries (MD 18.90, 95% CI -4.22 - 42.02) were the strongest predictors for postoperative complications. CONCLUSIONS: ClassIntra has an almost perfect inter-rater agreement for the classification of iAEs. An increasing grade of ClassIntra was associated with a higher incidence of postoperative complications. Discrepancies in grading related to common complications in abdominal procedures mostly consisted of intraoperative bleeding and adhesion-related injuries. Grading of interoperative events in abdominal surgery might further improve by consensus regarding the definitions of a number of frequent events.

Analgesia in patients with adhesion-related chronic abdominal and pelvic pain after surgery: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Adhesions are the most common cause of chronic abdominal pain after surgery. Surgical adhesiolysis can relieve symptoms in selected patients, but many require other treatments. The aim of this study is to evaluate analgesic treatments other than abdominal surgery in chronic pain related to adhesions. DATABASE AND DATA TREATMENT: A search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and Central. Studies with patients suffering from chronic postoperative pain related to adhesions and undergoing all types' analgesic treatment were included. The primary outcome was the number of patients who improved in pain at long-term follow-up (at least 1 year). Secondary outcomes included improvement in pain at 3 months follow-up, quality of life, and physical functioning. RESULTS: Searches identified 3022 citations. Four studies were included, one trial, one cohort study, and two case reports. The primary outcome was not reported. In a small trial (n = 18) pregabalin tended to have a benefit over placebo improving pain at 3 months. In the cohort study, 17 patients with chronic pelvic pain underwent a trial of sacral nerve stimulation. Eight patients who responded positively received an implanted device for continuous modulation, reporting sustainable improvement during follow-up (range: 6-36 months). One case report described improved pain at 6 months with trans-abdominis plane stimulation. The second report described improvement of physical function with manual therapy at long-term follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Low level of evidence is available regarding analgesic treatments of chronic abdominal and pelvic pain related to adhesions. The benefit of pregabalin is doubtful; nerve modulation is promising in a selected group.HighlightsAdhesions are a frequent cause of chronic abdominal and pelvic pain after surgery.Many patients are not good candidates for surgery (Adhesiolysis) or have relapses of pain.There is an important knowledge gap regarding non-surgical analgesic treatment.Analgesia in adhesion-related chronic abdominal pain after surgery.

Establishing core outcome sets for gastrointestinal recovery in studies of postoperative ileus and small bowel obstruction: protocol for a nested methodological study.

INTRODUCTION: Gastrointestinal recovery describes the restoration of normal bowel function in patients with bowel disease. This may be prolonged in two common clinical settings: postoperative ileus and small bowel obstruction. Improving gastrointestinal recovery is a research priority but researchers are limited by variation in outcome reporting across clinical studies. This protocol describes the development of core outcome sets for gastrointestinal recovery in the contexts of postoperative ileus and small bowel obstruction. METHOD: An international Steering Group consisting of patient and clinician representatives has been established. As overlap between clinical contexts is anticipated, both outcome sets will be co-developed and may be combined to form a common output with disease-specific domains. The development process will comprise three phases, including definition of outcomes relevant to postoperative ileus and small bowel obstruction from systematic literature reviews and nominal-group stakeholder discussions; online-facilitated Delphi surveys via international networks; and a consensus meeting to ratify the final output. A nested study will explore if the development of overlapping outcome sets can be rationalized. DISSEMINATION AND IMPLEMENTATION: The final output will be registered with the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials initiative. A multi-faceted, quality improvement campaign for the reporting of gastrointestinal recovery in clinical studies will be launched, targeting international professional and patient groups, charitable organizations and editorial committees. Success will be explored via an updated systematic review of outcomes 5 years after registration of the core outcome set.

Preoperative nomogram to predict risk of bowel injury during adhesiolysis.

BACKGROUND: Inadvertent bowel injury during adhesiolysis is a major cause of increased morbidity and mortality following abdominal surgery. Identification of risk factors predicting this complication would guide preoperative counselling and surgical decision-making. The aim of this study was to identify predictive preoperative factors for inadvertent bowel injury occurring during adhesiolysis. METHODS: All patients undergoing elective abdominal surgery between June 2008 and June 2010 were evaluated prospectively as part of the LAPAD study. Data on adhesiolysis and inadvertent organ injury were gathered by direct observation during operation. Univariable logistic regression was used to investigate factors that increased the risk of inadvertent bowel injury. Independent predictors of bowel injury were identified using multivariable logistic regression and used to create a clinical nomogram. RESULTS: Of 715 patients eligible for analysis, 48 (6.7 per cent) had inadvertent bowel injuries. In 42 patients the defect was detected during operation and in nine at a later time (3 patients had both). Bowel resection was required for almost two-thirds of the enterotomies. The number of previous laparotomies, anatomical site of the operation, presence of bowel fistula and laparotomy via a pre-existing median scar were independent predictors of bowel injury. A clinical scoring system was constructed using a nomogram incorporating these risk factors; this had a predictive discrimination, measured as the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, of 0.85. CONCLUSION: A nomogram based on four independent factors predicted the risk of inadvertent bowel injury. REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01236625 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Massive haemorrhage following minimally displaced pubic ramus fractures.

BACKGROUND: Fractures of the pubic rami are the most frequent osteoporotic pelvic fracture. Although generally innocuous, epidemiologic research demonstrated a decreased survival in patients with pubic rami fractures compared to healthy controls. Sporadic cases of potentially lethal bleedings have been reported. The aim of this study was to report a consecutive series and review of the literature of patients with severe bleeding following minimally displaced pubic ramus fractures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We report on four cases who presented at our emergency department in 2012 and 2013. A systematic review was performed to find other cases of pubic ramus fracture with severe bleeding from the literature. RESULTS: Four elderly patients presented with severe bleeding following os pubis fracture after trivial falls from ground level. Successful arterial embolisation was performed in two cases. These patients were discharged in good clinical condition. Two other patients were refrained from further treatment due to a pre-existing poor prognosis. Twenty-two additional cases were found in the literature. Successful arterial embolisation was performed in 20 cases, of whom 17 survived. CONCLUSIONS: Severe bleeding, mostly secondary to corona mortis avulsions, is a rare but potentially lethal complication of pubic ramus fractures. Physicians should be aware of this complication and actively look for symptoms of bleeding. Super-selective arterial embolisation seems safe and highly effective to control bleeding secondary to pubis rami fractures in elderly patients.

Different surgical techniques to reduce post-operative adhesion formation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION Adhesion formation is the most common complication following peritoneal surgery and the leading cause of small bowel obstruction, acquired infertility and inadvertent organ injury at reoperation. Using a 'good surgical technique' is advocated as a first step in preventing adhesions. However, the evidence for different surgical techniques to reduce adhesion formation needs confirmation. METHODS Pubmed, Embase and CENTRAL were searched to identify randomized controlled trials that investigated the effect of various aspects of surgical technique on adhesion-related outcomes. Clinical outcomes and incidence of adhesions were the primary endpoints. Identification of papers and data extraction were performed by two independent researchers. RESULTS There were 28 papers with 27 studies included for a systematic review. Of these, 17 studies were eligible for meta-analysis and 11 for qualitative assessment only. None of the techniques that were compared significantly reduced the incidence of adhesive small bowel obstruction. In a small low-quality trial, the pregnancy rate increased after subserous fixation of suture knots. However, the incidence of adhesions was lower after laparoscopic compared with open surgery [relative risk (RR) 0.14; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.03-0.61] and when the peritoneum was not closed (RR 0.36; 95% CI: 0.21-0.63). CONCLUSIONS None of the specific techniques that were compared reduced the two main adhesion-related clinical outcomes, small bowel obstruction and infertility. The meta-analysis provides little evidence for the surgical principle that using less invasive techniques, introducing less foreign bodies or causing less ischaemia reduces the extent and severity of adhesions.

Comparison of operative notes with real-time observation of adhesiolysis-related complications during surgery.

BACKGROUND: The operative report contains critical information for patient care, serves an educational purpose and is an important source for surgical research. Recent studies demonstrate that operative reports are unstructured and lack vital components. The accuracy of the operative notes has never been assessed. The aim of this study was to analyse the accuracy of operative reports by comparing notes with intraoperative observer-derived findings regarding adhesions and adhesiolysis-related complications. METHODS: The incidence of adhesions and adhesiolysis-induced injury were scored from the reports by a researcher blinded to operative findings obtained prospectively by direct observation. In addition, factors influencing correct reporting were analysed, including sex, surgical experience, delay in dictation, and the gradual introduction of a new report template with a focus on describing operative findings rather than actions taken. RESULTS: A total of 755 consecutive operative reports were analysed. Sensitivity and specificity for the incidence of adhesions was 85·1 and 72·4 per cent respectively. Six of 43 inadvertent enterotomies, and 17 of 48 other organ injuries, had not been reported. All missed bowel injuries were found in reports written in the old template. A median delay in dictating of 3 (range 1-226) working days was found for 56 reports (7·4 per cent). Documentation of inadvertent enterotomies was missing more often in delayed reports (2 of 3 versus 4 of 40 reports dictated with no delay; P = 0·022). CONCLUSION: The sensitivity and specificity of operative reports noting adhesions and adhesiolysis were low. One in seven enterotomies was not reported. Effort should be put into teaching timely, meaningful, structured and accurate reporting of surgical procedures.

Efficacy of polyethylene glycol adhesion barrier after gynecological laparoscopic surgery: Results of a randomized controlled pilot study.

Postoperative adhesions are the most frequent complication of peritoneal surgery, causing small bowel obstruction, female infertility and chronic pain. This pilot study assessed the efficacy of a sprayable polyethylene glycol (PEG) barrier in the prevention of de novo adhesions. 16 patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecological surgery were randomly assigned by shuffled sealed envelopes to receive either the adhesion barrier or no adhesion prevention. Incidence and severity of adhesions were scored at eight sites in the pelvis and reassessed by second look laparoscopy. Adhesion prevention was considered successful if no de novo adhesion were found at second look laparoscopy. One patient was excluded before randomization. Nine patients were randomized to treatment and six patients to control group. De novo adhesions were found in 0/9 patients who received the PEG barrier compared to 4/6 without adhesion prevention (0% vs. 67%, P = 0.01). Reduction in adhesion score was significantly greater in patients receiving PEG barrier (-2.6 vs. -0.06, P = 0.03). Meta-analysis of three randomized trials demonstrated that PEG barrier reduces the incidence of adhesions (odds ratio [OR] = 0.27; 95% CI 0.11-0.67). From this study, PEG barrier seems effective in reducing postoperative formation of de novo adhesions.

Laparoscopic reintervention in colorectal surgery.

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery has developed in the 1990's and beginning of 2000. The favourable results and great progress in the development of laparoscopic techniques have expanded the indications of laparoscopic colorectal surgery. More and more complicated colorectal cases are treated laparoscopically, including those having had previous laparotomies. Surgical reinterventions after colorectal procedures are common. Reinterventions are either intended to treat complications of colorectal surgery or to treat colorectal disease after previous abdominal or pelvic surgery. Laparoscopic reinterventions face surgeons with specific challenges related to morphological changes in the abdomen. Adhesions are primarily responsible for these changes and evoke various complications such as trocar injury, bleeding, enterotomy and conversion to laparotomy. Trocars and Veress needle are responsible for up to half of all bowel injuries in laparoscopic surgery and adhesion formation is the most important risk factor for bowel injury. The risks of adhesions are often underestimated. The first clinical results on laparoscopic reinterventions are promising. Routine use of anti-adhesion agents and diagnostics is advocated to prevent adhesion formation and make reintervention more safe reducing serious complications as inadvertent enterotomy, bleeding and trocar injuries. More research is needed to develop better tools for mapping adhesions, as none of the trocar placing techniques can rule out bowel injury. Improved diagnostic tools for mapping adhesions will also facilitate patient selection for laparoscopic treatment of SBO.