Efficacy and safety of gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis in critically ill patients: an updated systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials

PURPOSE

Motivated by a new randomized trial (the PEPTIC trial) that raised the issue of an increase in mortality with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) relative to histamine-2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs), we updated our prior systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) addressing the impact of pharmacological gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis in critically ill patients.

METHODS

We searched for randomized controlled trials that examined the efficacy and safety of gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis with PPIs, H2RAs, or sucralfate versus one another or placebo or no prophylaxis in adult critically ill patients. We performed Bayesian random-effects NMA and conducted analyses using all PEPTIC data as well as a restricted analysis using only PEPTIC data from high compliance centers. We used the GRADE approach to quantify absolute effects and assess the certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

Seventy-four trials enrolling 39 569 patients proved eligible. Both PPIs (risk ratio (RR) 1.03, 95% credible interval 0.93 to 1.14, moderate certainty) and H2RAs (RR 0.98, 0.89 to 1.08, moderate certainty) probably have little or no impact on mortality compared with no prophylaxis. There may be no important difference between PPIs and H2RAs on mortality (RR 1.05, 0.97 to 1.14, low certainty), the 95% credible interval of the complete analysis has not excluded an important increase in mortality with PPIs. Both PPIs (RR 0.46, 0.29 to 0.66) and H2RAs (RR 0.67, 0.48 to 0.94) probably reduce clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding; the magnitude of reduction is probably greater in PPIs than H2RAs (RR 0.69, 0.45 to 0.93), and the difference may be important in higher, but not lower bleeding risk patients. PPIs (RR 1.08, 0.88 to 1.45, low certainty) and H2RAs (RR 1.07, 0.85 to 1.37, low certainty) may have no important impact on pneumonia compared with no prophylaxis.

CONCLUSION

This updated NMA confirmed that PPIs and H2RAs are most likely to have a similar effect on mortality compared to each other and compared to no prophylaxis; however, the possibility that PPIs may slightly increase mortality cannot be excluded (low certainty evidence). PPIs and H2RAs probably achieve important reductions in clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding; for higher bleeding risk patients, the greater benefit of PPIs over H2RAs may be important. PPIs or H2RAs may not result in important increases in pneumonia but the certainty of evidence is low.

Managing ICU surge during the COVID-19 crisis: rapid guidelines

Given the rapidly changing nature of COVID-19, clinicians and policy makers require urgent review and summary of the literature, and synthesis of evidence-based guidelines to inform practice. The WHO advocates for rapid reviews in these circumstances. The purpose of this rapid guideline is to provide recommendations on the organizational management of intensive care units caring for patients with COVID-19 including: planning a crisis surge response; crisis surge response strategies; triage, supporting families, and staff.

Spontaneous versus controlled mechanical ventilation in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome - Protocol for a scoping review

BACKGROUND

In caring for mechanically ventilated adults with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), clinicians are faced with an uncertain choice between controlled or spontaneous breathing modes. Observational data indicate considerable practice variation which may be driven by differences in sedation and mobilisation practices. The benefits and harms of either strategy are largely unknown.

METHODS

A scoping review will be prepared according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension for scoping reviews. We will review the clinical literature on controlled vs spontaneous breathing in mechanically ventilated patients with ARDS of any severity. Studies reporting on qualitative and/or quantitative data from any world region will be considered. For inclusion, studies must include data on mechanically ventilated patients with ARDS who are allowed spontaneous (triggered ventilation). Searches will be conducted in four electronic databases without any limitation on publication date and language. We will assess the quality of evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology, where appropriate.

CONCLUSION

We will perform a scoping review of the clinical literature on controlled vs spontaneously breathing in mechanically ventilated patients who fulfil ARDS criteria (including acute lung injury). This is to elucidate if a pragmatic clinical trial comparing controlled and spontaneous mechanical ventilation is warranted and will allow us to formulate relevant research questions.

Prophylactic use of acid suppressants in adult acutely ill hospitalised patients: A systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND

Acutely ill patients are at risk of stress-related gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding and prophylactic acid suppressants are frequently used. In this systematic review, we assessed the effects of stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) or histamine-2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs) versus placebo or no prophylaxis in acutely ill hospitalised patients.

METHODS

We conducted the review according to the PRISMA statement, the Cochrane Handbook and GRADE, using conventional meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA). The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, clinically important GI bleeding and serious adverse events (SAEs). The primary analyses included overall low risk of bias trials.

RESULTS

We included 65 comparisons from 62 trials (n = 9713); 43 comparisons were from intensive care units. Only three trials (n = 3596) had overall low risk of bias. We did not find an effect on all-cause mortality (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.14; TSA-adjusted CI 0.90 to 1.18; high certainty). The rate of clinically important GI bleeding was lower with SUP (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.89; TSA-adjusted CI 0.14 to 2.81; moderate certainty). We did not find a difference in pneumonia rates (moderate certainty). Effects on SAEs, Clostridium difficile enteritis, myocardial ischaemia and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were inconclusive due to sparse data. Analyses of all trials regardless of risk of bias were consistent with the primary analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

We did not observe a difference in all-cause mortality or pneumonia with SUP. The incidence of clinically important GI bleeding was reduced with SUP, whereas any effects on SAEs, myocardial ischaemia, Clostridium difficile enteritis and HRQoL were inconclusive.

STUDY REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration number CRD42017055676; published study protocol: Marker, et al 2017 in Systematic Reviews.

APACHE II score validation in emergency abdominal surgery. A post hoc analysis of the InCare trial

BACKGROUND

Patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery are at high risk of morbidity and mortality. Accurate identification of high-risk patients is important. The Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score needs to be validated in a larger heterogeneous population before implementation. We aimed to assess the predictive value of the APACHE II score in emergency abdominal surgical patients. Furthermore, we compared the APACHE II score with the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status score and the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI).

METHODS

We included adult patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery screened for enrolment in the InCare trial from October 2010 to November 2012. The APACHE II score was evaluated with area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROC) statistics. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included 90-day mortality and admission to the intensive care unit.

RESULTS

We included a total of 885 patients. All-cause 30-day mortality was 5.0%, 90-day mortality was 8.9%, and a total of 7.9% of the patients were admitted to the intensive care unit. The AUROC (95% confidence interval) of the APACHE II score was 0.72 (0.65-0.80) for 30-day mortality, 0.70 (0.64-0.76) for 90-day mortality and 0.65 (0.59-0.71) for admission to the intensive care unit. The CCI performed better in prediction of 90-day mortality (P = .04). All other results for the ASA score and CCI were comparable with the APACHE II score.

CONCLUSION

The APACHE II score predicted mortality moderately and admission to intensive care unit poorly in emergency abdominal surgical patients.

Efficacy and safety of gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis in critically ill patients: systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine, in critically ill patients, the relative impact of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), histamine-2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs), sucralfate, or no gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis (or stress ulcer prophylaxis) on outcomes important to patients.

DESIGN

Systematic review and network meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, trial registers, and grey literature up to March 2019.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES AND METHODS

We included randomised controlled trials that compared gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis with PPIs, H2RAs, or sucralfate versus one another or placebo or no prophylaxis in adult critically ill patients. Two reviewers independently screened studies for eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. A parallel guideline committee (BMJ Rapid Recommendation) provided critical oversight of the systematic review, including identifying outcomes important to patients. We performed random-effects pairwise and network meta-analyses and used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence for each outcome. When results differed between low risk and high risk of bias studies, we used the former as best estimates.

RESULTS

Seventy two trials including 12 660 patients proved eligible. For patients at highest risk (>8%) or high risk (4-8%) of bleeding, both PPIs and H2RAs probably reduce clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding compared with placebo or no prophylaxis (odds ratio for PPIs 0.61 (95% confidence interval 0.42 to 0.89), 3.3% fewer for highest risk and 2.3% fewer for high risk patients, moderate certainty; odds ratio for H2RAs 0.46 (0.27 to 0.79), 4.6% fewer for highest risk and 3.1% fewer for high risk patients, moderate certainty). Both may increase the risk of pneumonia compared with no prophylaxis (odds ratio for PPIs 1.39 (0.98 to 2.10), 5.0% more, low certainty; odds ratio for H2RAs 1.26 (0.89 to 1.85), 3.4% more, low certainty). It is likely that neither affect mortality (PPIs 1.06 (0.90 to 1.28), 1.3% more, moderate certainty; H2RAs 0.96 (0.79 to 1.19), 0.9% fewer, moderate certainty). Otherwise, results provided no support for any affect on mortality, Clostridium difficile infection, length of intensive care stay, length of hospital stay, or duration of mechanical ventilation (varying certainty of evidence).

CONCLUSIONS

For higher risk critically ill patients, PPIs and H2RAs likely result in important reductions in gastrointestinal bleeding compared with no prophylaxis; for patients at low risk, the reduction in bleeding may be unimportant. Both PPIs and H2RAs may result in important increases in pneumonia. Variable quality evidence suggested no important effects of interventions on mortality or other in-hospital morbidity outcomes.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42019126656.

Heterogeneity of treatment effect of stress ulcer prophylaxis in ICU patients: A secondary analysis protocol

BACKGROUND

In the Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis in the Intensive Care Unit (SUP-ICU) trial, 3291 adult ICU patients at risk for gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding were randomly allocated to intravenous pantoprazole 40 mg or placebo once daily in the ICU. No difference was observed between the groups in the primary outcome 90-day mortality or the secondary outcomes, except for clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding. However, heterogeneity of treatment effect (HTE) not detected by conventional subgroup analyses could be present.

METHODS

This is a protocol and statistical analysis plan for a secondary, post hoc, exploratory analysis of the SUP-ICU trial. We will explore HTE in one set of subgroups based on severity of illness (using the Simplified Acute Physiology Score [SAPS] II) and another set of subgroups based on the total number of risk factors for GI bleeding in each patient using Bayesian hierarchical models. We will summarise posterior probability distributions using medians and 95% credible intervals and present probabilities for different levels of benefit and harm of the intervention in each subgroup. Finally, we will assess if the treatment effect interacts with SAPS II and the number of risk factors separately on the continuous scale using marginal effects plots.

CONCLUSIONS

The outlined post hoc analysis will explore whether HTE was present in the SUP-ICU trial and may help answer some of the remaining questions regarding the balance between benefits and harms of pantoprazole in ICU patients at risk of GI bleeding. CLINICALTRIALS.

GOV REGISTRATION

NCT02467621.

Routine vs on-demand blood sampling in critically ill patients-Protocol for a scoping review

BACKGROUND

In intensive care units, blood sampling is done commonly as part of daily routine. It remains unknown whether this practice is associated with harms or benefits, as not all routine blood tests may be clinically indicated, and blood sampling done without specific indications may be problematic. Accordingly, we aim to assess the body of evidence regarding the usage of routine vs on-demand blood sampling in critically ill patients in a scoping review.

METHODS

We will conduct a scoping review in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement as well as the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Using a PICO-based search strategy, we will systematically search the Cochrane Library, Embase and Medline for relevant studies regardless of design. Two authors will independently screen studies for inclusion and extract data. We will provide a descriptive analysis of the data and asses the quality of evidence in accordance with the Grading of Recommended Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.

DISCUSSION

The outlined scoping review will provide an important overview on the current body of evidence regarding the use of daily routine vs on-demand blood sampling in critical care settings. The findings of this scoping review will guide further research.

Prevention of rhabdomyolysis-induced acute kidney injury - A DASAIM/DSIT clinical practice guideline

BACKGROUND

Rhabdomyolysis-induced acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common and serious condition. We aimed to summarise the available evidence on this topic and provide recommendations according to current standards for trustworthy guidelines.

METHODS

This guideline was developed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). The following preventive interventions were assessed: (a) fluids, (b) diuretics, (c) alkalinisation, (d) antioxidants, and (e) renal replacement therapy. Exclusively patient-important outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

We suggest using early rather than late fluid resuscitation (weak recommendation, very low quality of evidence). We suggest using crystalloids rather than colloids (weak recommendation, low quality of evidence). We suggest against routine use of loop diuretics as compared to none (weak recommendation, very low quality of evidence). We suggest against use of mannitol as compared to none (weak recommendation, very low quality of evidence). We suggest against routine use of any diuretic as compared to none (weak recommendation, very low quality of evidence). We suggest against routine use of alkalinisation with sodium bicarbonate as compared to none (weak recommendation, low quality of evidence). We suggest against the routine use of any alkalinisation as compared to none (weak recommendation, low quality of evidence). We suggest against routine use of renal replacement therapy as compared to none (weak recommendation, low quality of evidence). For the remaining PICO questions, no recommendations were issued.

CONCLUSION

The quantity and quality of evidence supporting preventive interventions for rhabdomyolysis-induced AKI is low/very low. We were able to issue eight weak recommendations and no strong recommendations.

Use of hydroxyethyl starch in sepsis research: Protocol for a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Hydroxyethyl starch (HES) 130/0.38-0.45 is a synthetic colloid, which has been on the market since 1999. In recent years, concern about the use of HES has been raised because of serious adverse events, including acute kidney injury, bleeding and even increased mortality with its use. In the outlined systematic review, we aim to assess if the adverse effects of HES 130/0.38-0.45 in patients with sepsis could have been discovered earlier.

METHODS

We will conduct a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials in animals and patients and observational studies in patients comparing HES 130/0.38-0.45 vs any crystalloid in sepsis. The primary outcome will be all-cause mortality at longest follow-up. We will systematically search EMBASE, MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library for relevant literature. We will follow the recommendations by the Cochrane Handbook, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statements and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

DISCUSSION

With the outlined systematic review, we aim to assess whether the adverse effects of HES 130/0.38-0.45 could have been discovered earlier by comparing summary effect estimates of harm from observational studies in patients and randomised trials in animals and patients. The results may have implications for future drug development and approval processes.

Pantoprazole in Patients at Risk for Gastrointestinal Bleeding in the ICU

BACKGROUND

Prophylaxis for gastrointestinal stress ulceration is frequently given to patients in the intensive care unit (ICU), but its risks and benefits are unclear.

METHODS

In this European, multicenter, parallel-group, blinded trial, we randomly assigned adults who had been admitted to the ICU for an acute condition (i.e., an unplanned admission) and who were at risk for gastrointestinal bleeding to receive 40 mg of intravenous pantoprazole (a proton-pump inhibitor) or placebo daily during the ICU stay. The primary outcome was death by 90 days after randomization.

RESULTS

A total of 3298 patients were enrolled; 1645 were randomly assigned to the pantoprazole group and 1653 to the placebo group. Data on the primary outcome were available for 3282 patients (99.5%). At 90 days, 510 patients (31.1%) in the pantoprazole group and 499 (30.4%) in the placebo group had died (relative risk, 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.91 to 1.13; P=0.76). During the ICU stay, at least one clinically important event (a composite of clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding, pneumonia, Clostridium difficile infection, or myocardial ischemia) had occurred in 21.9% of patients assigned to pantoprazole and 22.6% of those assigned to placebo (relative risk, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.11). In the pantoprazole group, 2.5% of patients had clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding, as compared with 4.2% in the placebo group. The number of patients with infections or serious adverse reactions and the percentage of days alive without life support within 90 days were similar in the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Among adult patients in the ICU who were at risk for gastrointestinal bleeding, mortality at 90 days and the number of clinically important events were similar in those assigned to pantoprazole and those assigned to placebo. (Funded by Innovation Fund Denmark and others; SUP-ICU ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02467621 .).

Timing of onset of gastrointestinal bleeding in the ICU: Protocol for a preplanned observational study

BACKGROUND

Critically ill patients are at risk of gastrointestinal bleeding, but clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding is rare. The majority of intensive care unit (ICU) patients receive stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP), despite uncertainty concerning the balance between benefit and harm. For approximately half of ICU patients with gastrointestinal bleeding, onset is early, ie within the first two days of the ICU stay. The aetiology of gastrointestinal bleeding and consequently the balance between benefit and harm of SUP may differ between patients with early vs late gastrointestinal bleeding.

METHODS

This is a protocol and statistical analysis plan for a preplanned exploratory substudy of the Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis in the Intensive Care Unit (SUP-ICU) randomized clinical trial, comparing intravenous pantoprazole (40 mg once daily) with placebo in 3350 acutely ill adult ICU patients. We will describe baseline characteristics and assess the time to onset of the first clinically important episode of GI bleeding accounting for survival status and allocation to SUP or placebo. In addition, we will describe differences in therapeutic and diagnostic procedures used in patients with clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding according to early vs late bleeding and 90-day vital status.

CONCLUSIONS

The study outlined in this protocol will provide detailed information on patient characteristics and the timing of onset of gastrointestinal bleeding in the patients enrolled in the SUP-ICU trial. This may provide additional knowledge and incentives for future studies on which patients benefit from SUP.

Common Sense Approach to Managing Sepsis

Sepsis results in many deaths, prolonged suffering among survivors and relatives, and high use of resources both in developed and developing countries. The updated Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines should aid clinicians in improving the identification and management of these patients, but many uncertainties remain because most of the guidance is based on low-quality evidence. This article discusses how to use some of the specific items of the guidelines together with a common-sense approach to aid clinical management of patients with sepsis while trying to balance the potential benefit and harm of the items.

Risk factors for reintervention after surgery for perforated gastroduodenal ulcer

Background

Perforated gastroduodenal ulcer carries a high mortality rate. Need for reintervention after surgical repair is associated with worse outcome, but knowledge on risk factors for reintervention is limited. The aim was to identify prognostic risk factors for reintervention after perforated gastroduodenal ulcer in a nationwide cohort.

Methods

All patients treated surgically for perforated gastroduodenal ulcer in Denmark between 2003 and 2014 were included using data from the Danish Clinical Register of Emergency Surgery. Potential risk factors for reintervention were assessed, and their crude and adjusted associations calculated by the competing risks subdistribution hazards approach.

Results

A total of 4086 patients underwent surgery for perforated gastroduodenal ulcer during the study interval. Median age was 71·1 (i.q.r. 59·6–81·0) years and the overall 90-day mortality rate was 30·8 per cent (1258 of 4086). Independent risk factors for reintervention were: male sex (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1·46, 95 per cent c.i. 1·20 to 1·78), in-hospital perforation (adjusted HR 1·36, 1·11 to 1·68), high BMI (adjusted HR 1·49, 1·10 to 2·01), high ASA physical status grade (adjusted HR 1·54, 1·23 to 1·94), shock on admission (adjusted HR 1·40, 1·13 to 1·74), surgical delay (adjusted HR 1·07, 1·02 to 1·14) and other co-morbidity (adjusted HR 1·24, 1·02 to 1·51). Preadmission use of steroids (adjusted HR 0·59, 0·41 to 0·84) and age above 70 years (adjusted HR 0·72, 0·59 to 0·89) were associated with a reduced risk of reoperation.

Conclusion

Obese men with coexisting diseases and high disease severity who have surgery for gastroduodenal perforation are at increased risk of reoperation.

Perforated peptic ulcer

Perforated peptic ulcer is a common emergency condition worldwide, with associated mortality rates of up to 30%. A scarcity of high-quality studies about the condition limits the knowledge base for clinical decision making, but a few published randomised trials are available. Although Helicobacter pylori and use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are common causes, demographic differences in age, sex, perforation location, and underlying causes exist between countries, and mortality rates also vary. Clinical prediction rules are used, but accuracy varies with study population. Early surgery, either by laparoscopic or open repair, and proper sepsis management are essential for good outcome. Selected patients can be managed non-operatively or with novel endoscopic approaches, but validation of such methods in trials is needed. Quality of care, sepsis care bundles, and postoperative monitoring need further assessment. Adequate trials with low risk of bias are urgently needed to provide better evidence. We summarise the evidence for perforated peptic ulcer management and identify directions for future clinical research.

Randomized multicentre feasibility trial of intermediate care versus standard ward care after emergency abdominal surgery (InCare trial)

Background

Emergency abdominal surgery carries a considerable risk of death and postoperative complications. Early detection and timely management of complications may reduce mortality. The aim was to evaluate the effect and feasibility of intermediate care compared with standard ward care in patients who had emergency abdominal surgery.

Methods

This was a randomized clinical trial carried out in seven Danish hospitals. Eligible for inclusion were patients with an Acute Physiology And Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score of at least 10 who were ready to be transferred to the surgical ward within 24 h of emergency abdominal surgery. Participants were randomized to either intermediate care or standard surgical ward care after surgery. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality.

Results

In total, 286 patients were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. The trial was terminated after the interim analysis owing to slow recruitment and a lower than expected mortality rate. Eleven (7·6 per cent) of 144 patients assigned to intermediate care and 12 (8·5 per cent) of 142 patients assigned to ward care died within 30 days of surgery (odds ratio 0·91, 95 per cent c.i. 0·38 to 2·16; P = 0·828). Thirty (20·8 per cent) of 144 patients assigned to intermediate care and 37 (26·1 per cent) of 142 assigned to ward care died within the total observation period (hazard ratio 0·78, 95 per cent c.i. 0·48 to 1·26; P = 0·310).

Conclusion

Postoperative intermediate care had no statistically significant effect on 30-day mortality after emergency abdominal surgery, nor any effect on secondary outcomes. The trial was stopped prematurely owing to slow recruitment and a much lower than expected mortality rate among the enrolled patients. Registration number: NCT01209663 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Surgical complications after open and laparoscopic surgery for perforated peptic ulcer in a nationwide cohort

BACKGROUND

Surgery for perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) is associated with a risk of complications. The frequency and severity of reoperative surgery is poorly described. The aims of the present study were to characterize the frequency, procedure-associated risk and mortality associated with reoperation after surgery for PPU.

METHODS

All patients treated surgically for PPU in Denmark between 2011 and 2013 were included. Baseline and clinical data, including 90-day mortality and detailed information on reoperative surgery, were collected from the Danish Clinical Register of Emergency Surgery. Distribution frequencies of reoperation stratified by type of surgical approach (laparoscopy or open) were reported. The crude and adjusted risk associations between surgical approach and reoperation were assessed by regression analysis and reported as odds ratio (OR) with 95 per cent c.i. Sensitivity analyses were carried out.

RESULTS

A total of 726 patients were included, of whom 238 (32·8 per cent) were treated laparoscopically and 178 (24·5 per cent) had a laparoscopic procedure converted to laparotomy. Overall, 124 (17·1 per cent) of 726 patients underwent reoperation. A persistent leak was the most frequent cause (43 patients, 5·9 per cent), followed by wound dehiscence (34, 4·7 per cent). The crude risk of reoperative surgery was higher in patients who underwent laparotomy and those with procedures converted to open surgery than in patients who had laparoscopic repair: OR 1·98 (95 per cent c.i. 1·19 to 3·27) and 2·36 (1·37 to 4·08) respectively. The difference was confirmed when adjusted for age, surgical delay, co-morbidity and American Society of Anesthesiologists fitness grade. However, the intention-to-treat sensitivity analysis (laparoscopy including conversions) demonstrated no significant difference in risk. The risk of death within 90 days was greater in patients who had reoperation: crude and adjusted OR 1·53 (1·00 to 2·34) and 1·06 (0·65 to 1·72) respectively.

CONCLUSION

Reoperation was necessary in almost one in every five patients operated on for PPU. Laparoscopy was associated with lower risk of reoperation than laparotomy or a converted procedure. However, there was a risk of bias, including confounding by indication.

Lower versus higher hemoglobin threshold for transfusion in septic shock

BACKGROUND

Blood transfusions are frequently given to patients with septic shock. However, the benefits and harms of different hemoglobin thresholds for transfusion have not been established.

METHODS

In this multicenter, parallel-group trial, we randomly assigned patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) who had septic shock and a hemoglobin concentration of 9 g per deciliter or less to receive 1 unit of leukoreduced red cells when the hemoglobin level was 7 g per deciliter or less (lower threshold) or when the level was 9 g per deciliter or less (higher threshold) during the ICU stay. The primary outcome measure was death by 90 days after randomization.

RESULTS

We analyzed data from 998 of 1005 patients (99.3%) who underwent randomization. The two intervention groups had similar baseline characteristics. In the ICU, the lower-threshold group received a median of 1 unit of blood (interquartile range, 0 to 3) and the higher-threshold group received a median of 4 units (interquartile range, 2 to 7). At 90 days after randomization, 216 of 502 patients (43.0%) assigned to the lower-threshold group, as compared with 223 of 496 (45.0%) assigned to the higher-threshold group, had died (relative risk, 0.94; 95% confidence interval, 0.78 to 1.09; P=0.44). The results were similar in analyses adjusted for risk factors at baseline and in analyses of the per-protocol populations. The numbers of patients who had ischemic events, who had severe adverse reactions, and who required life support were similar in the two intervention groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with septic shock, mortality at 90 days and rates of ischemic events and use of life support were similar among those assigned to blood transfusion at a higher hemoglobin threshold and those assigned to blood transfusion at a lower threshold; the latter group received fewer transfusions. (Funded by the Danish Strategic Research Council and others; TRISS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01485315.).

Influence of body mass index on mortality after surgery for perforated peptic ulcer

BACKGROUND

Body mass index (BMI) is a strong predictor of mortality in the general population. In spite of the medical hazards of obesity, a protective effect on mortality has been suggested in surgical patients: the obesity paradox. The aim of the present nationwide cohort study was to examine the association between BMI and mortality in patients treated surgically for perforated peptic ulcer (PPU).

METHODS

This was a national prospective cohort study of all Danish patients treated surgically for PPU between 1 February 2003 and 31 August 2009, for whom BMI was registered. Non-surgically treated patients and those with malignant ulcers were excluded. The primary outcome measure was 90-day mortality. The association between BMI and mortality was calculated as crude and adjusted relative risks (RRs) with 95 per cent confidence intervals (c.i.).

RESULTS

Of 2668 patients who underwent surgical treatment for PPU, 1699 (63.7 per cent) had BMI recorded. Median age was 69.4 (range 17.6-100.9) years and 53.7 per cent of the patients were women. Some 1126 patients (66.3 per cent) had at least one of six co-morbid diseases; 728 (42.8 per cent) had an American Society of Anesthesiologists grade of III or more. A total of 471 patients (27.7 per cent) died within 90 days of surgery. Being underweight was associated with a more than twofold increased risk of death following surgery for PPU (adjusted RR 2.26, 95 per cent c.i. 1.37 to 3.71). No statistically significant association was found between obesity and mortality.

CONCLUSION

Being underweight was associated with increased mortality in patients with PPU, whereas being overweight or obese was neither protective nor an adverse prognostic factor.

Mortality and postoperative care pathways after emergency gastrointestinal surgery in 2904 patients: a population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

Emergency major gastrointestinal (GI) surgery carries a considerable risk of mortality and postoperative complications. Effective management of complications and appropriate organization of postoperative care may improve outcome. The importance of the latter is poorly described in emergency GI surgical patients. We aimed to present mortality data and evaluate the postoperative care pathways used after emergency GI surgery.

METHODS

A population-based cohort study with prospectively collected data from six Capital Region hospitals in Denmark. We included 2904 patients undergoing major GI laparotomy or laparoscopy surgery between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2010. The primary outcome measure was 30 day mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 538 patients [18.5%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 17.1-19.9] died within 30 days of surgery. In all, 84.2% of the patients were treated after operation in the standard ward, with a 30 day mortality of 14.3%, and 4.8% were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) after a median stay of 2 days (inter-quartile range: 1-6). When compared with 'admission to standard ward', 'admission to standard ward before ICU admission' and 'ICU admission after surgery' were independently associated with 30 day mortality; odds ratio 5.45 (95% CI: 3.48-8.56) and 3.27 (95% CI: 2.45-4.36), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Mortality in emergency major GI surgical patients remains high. Failure to allocate patients to the appropriate level of care immediately after surgery may contribute to the high postoperative mortality. Future research should focus on improving risk stratification and evaluating the effect of different postoperative care pathways in emergency GI surgery.