Part Two: Against the Motion. An Endovascular First Strategy is not the Optimal Approach for Treating Acute Mesenteric Ischemia

Cesena guidelines: WSES consensus statement on laparoscopic-first approach to general surgery emergencies and abdominal trauma

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy is widely adopted across nearly all surgical subspecialties in the elective setting. Initially finding indication in minor abdominal emergencies, it has gradually become the standard approach in the majority of elective general surgery procedures. Despite many technological advances and increasing acceptance, the laparoscopic approach remains underutilized in emergency general surgery and in abdominal trauma. Emergency laparotomy continues to carry a high morbidity and mortality. In recent years, there has been a growing interest from emergency and trauma surgeons in adopting minimally invasive surgery approaches in the acute surgical setting. The present position paper, supported by the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), aims to provide a review of the literature to reach a consensus on the indications and benefits of a laparoscopic-first approach in patients requiring emergency abdominal surgery for general surgery emergencies or abdominal trauma.

METHODS

This position paper was developed according to the WSES methodology. A steering committee performed the literature review and drafted the position paper. An international panel of 54 experts then critically revised the manuscript and discussed it in detail, to develop a consensus on a position statement.

RESULTS

A total of 323 studies (systematic review and meta-analysis, randomized clinical trial, retrospective comparative cohort studies, case series) have been selected from an initial pool of 7409 studies. Evidence demonstrates several benefits of the laparoscopic approach in stable patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery for general surgical emergencies or abdominal trauma. The selection of a stable patient seems to be of paramount importance for a safe adoption of a laparoscopic approach. In hemodynamically stable patients, the laparoscopic approach was found to be safe, feasible and effective as a therapeutic tool or helpful to identify further management steps and needs, resulting in improved outcomes, regardless of conversion. Appropriate patient selection, surgeon experience and rigorous minimally invasive surgical training, remain crucial factors to increase the adoption of laparoscopy in emergency general surgery and abdominal trauma.

CONCLUSIONS

The WSES expert panel suggests laparoscopy as the first approach for stable patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery for general surgery emergencies and abdominal trauma.

Treatment of acute mesenteric ischemia between 2010 and 2020 - a German nation-wide study

BACKGROUND

Aim of this study was to analyze long-term trends of hospitalizations, treatment regimen and in-hospital mortality of in-patients with acute mesenteric ischemia (AMI) over the past decade and effects of the SARS-CoV2-pandemic.

METHODS

We analyzed fully anonymized data from the German Federal Statistical Office of patients with AMI between 2010 and 2020. Besides descriptive analyses of age, gender, in-hospital mortality, comorbidity burden and treatment regimen, multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to identify independent variables associated with in-hospital mortality and different treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 278,121 hospitalizations (120,667 male [43.4%], mean age 72.1 years) with AMI were included in this study. The total number of hospitalizations increased from 2010 (n = 24,172) to 2019 (n = 26,684) (relative increase 10.4%). In-hospital mortality decreased over the past decade from 36.6% to 2010 to 31.1% in 2019 (rel. decrease 15.2%). Independent risk factors for in-hospital mortality were older age (OR = 1.03 per year), higher comorbidity burden (OR = 1.06 per point in van Walraven score [vWs]), male gender (OR = 1.07), AMI as a secondary diagnosis (OR = 1.44), and the need for surgical (visceral surgery: OR = 1.38, vascular surgery: OR = 3.33) and endovascular treatment (OR = 1.21). We report a decline in hospitalizations during the first wave of infection in spring 2020 (rel. decrease 9.7%).

CONCLUSION

In-hospital mortality rate has declined over the past decade, but remains high at above 30%. Older age, increased comorbidity and male gender are independent factors for in-hospital mortality. Hospitalizations requiring vascular surgery are associated with high in-hospital mortality, followed by visceral surgery and endovascular approaches. The first wave of the SARS-CoV2-pandemic in spring 2020 implied a decrease in hospital admissions.

Acute mesenteric ischemia: updated guidelines of the World Society of Emergency Surgery

Acute mesenteric ischemia (AMI) is a group of diseases characterized by an interruption of the blood supply to varying portions of the intestine, leading to ischemia and secondary inflammatory changes. If untreated, this process may progress to life-threatening intestinal necrosis. The incidence is low, estimated at 0.09-0.2% of all acute surgical admissions, but increases with age. Although the entity is an uncommon cause of abdominal pain, diligence is required because if untreated, mortality remains in the range of 50%. Early diagnosis and timely surgical intervention are the cornerstones of modern treatment to reduce the high mortality associated with this entity. The advent of endovascular approaches in parallel with modern imaging techniques is evolving and provides new treatment options. Lastly, a focused multidisciplinary approach based on early diagnosis and individualized treatment is essential. Thus, we believe that updated guidelines from World Society of Emergency Surgery are warranted, in order to provide the most recent and practical recommendations for diagnosis and treatment of AMI.

[CT angiography and endovascular treatment in acute mesenteric ischemia]

OBJECTIVE

To optimize the treatment strategy for acute mesenteric ischemia (AMI).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study included 43 patients aged 76.4±10.3 years. CT angiography and endovascular repair of mesenteric vessels underlie the new treatment approach.

RESULTS

CT angiography according to the established criteria was performed in 31 patients with suspected AMI throughout 1 year. Sensitivity was 90.0%, specificity - 100%, accuracy - 95%. Endovascular interventions were applied in 13 patients (successful in 8 cases and unsuccessful in 5 patients). Mortality rate was 37.5%. Fifteen patients with clinical signs of peritonitis or after previous unsuccessful interventional revascularization underwent open surgery. Mortality rate was 86.7%.

CONCLUSION

CT angiography is valuable to diagnose AMI at the stage of reversible changes in bowel wall in some cases. Endovascular revascularization as the first-line treatment has certain prospects.

A Shifting Trend Towards Endovascular Intervention in the Treatment of Acute Mesenteric Ischemia

Background

Acute mesenteric ischemia (AMI) is a vascular emergency with a quite low incidence, but it is associated with disproportionately more severe morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study was to assess the current trend in the treatment of AMI and to see if endovascular intervention is an effective treatment modality in the selected group of patients.

Methods

A retrospective review of patients admitted with AMI between 2007 and 2018 was performed. Outcome measures were length of stay (LOS) at hospital and intensive care unit (ICU), and post-treatment mortality.

Results

A total of 98 patients with AMI were admitted during the study period. Patients undergoing endovascular treatment compared with surgery were younger (62.9 ± 13.7 years vs. 69.5 ± 12.8 years; p = 0.01). Shorter LOS in hospital and ICU was observed for those treated with endovascular approach (6.8 ± 3.4 and 3.25 ± 0.5 days) compared to the surgical group (25 ± 8.6 and 12.8 ± 26.8 days; p < 0.001). Out of 39 patients requiring ICU admission, 48.7% were surgically treated and 10.2% underwent endovascular intervention (p < 0.001). Mortality associated with surgery was 30.6% compared to only 6.6% with endovascular intervention (p < 0.001). Between 2007 and 2012, only one patient underwent endovascular intervention and 20 underwent surgery compared to 14 patients treated with endovascular approach and 16 with surgery between 2013 and 2018.

Conclusion

In this non-randomized, retrospective case series, patients with endovascular treatment fared clinically better and the intervention was found to be safe and feasible in the selected group of patients. We suggest a preference for this modality where possible. At our hospital, a trend favoring this approach is apparent during the last six years.

The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland consensus guidelines in emergency colorectal surgery

AIM

There is a requirement for an expansive and up to date review of the management of emergency colorectal conditions seen in adults. The primary objective is to provide detailed evidence-based guidelines for the target audience of general and colorectal surgeons who are responsible for an adult population and who practise in Great Britain and Ireland.

METHODS

Surgeons who are elected members of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland Emergency Surgery Subcommittee were invited to contribute various sections to the guidelines. They were directed to produce a pathology-based document using literature searches that were systematic, comprehensible, transparent and reproducible. Levels of evidence were graded. Each author was asked to provide a set of recommendations which were evidence-based and unambiguous. These recommendations were submitted to the whole guideline group and scored. They were then refined and submitted to a second vote. Only those that achieved >80% consensus at level 5 (strongly agree) or level 4 (agree) after two votes were included in the guidelines.

RESULTS

All aspects of care (excluding abdominal trauma) for emergency colorectal conditions have been included along with 122 recommendations for management.

CONCLUSION

These guidelines provide an up to date and evidence-based summary of the current surgical knowledge in the management of emergency colorectal conditions and should serve as practical text for clinicians managing colorectal conditions in the emergency setting.

[Is acute mesenteric ischemia incurable situation? The current state of the problem]

Mortality rates in acute mesenteric ischemia remain at an extremely high level for many decades. Early diagnosis and selection of the optimal method of revascularization are among the ways to optimize tactics. The diagnostic study of choice is CT angiography. Its active and systemic use can help to detect ischemia at the reversible stage. The article examines in detail the indications for the application of this diagnostic study. The question of preference for the revascularization method remains debatable. The arguments of proponents of open and endovascular interventions on mesenteric vessels are presented. Other, still unresolved tactical issues are also considered, such as indications for re-operations and application of the principles of damage control tactics.

Contemporary Management of Acute Mesenteric Ischemia in the Endovascular Era

Objective:

Acute mesenteric ischemia is a rare disease entity associated with high morbidity and mortality. Disparate etiologies and nonspecific symptoms make the diagnosis challenging and often result in delayed diagnosis and intervention. Open laparotomy with mesenteric revascularization and resection of necrotic bowel has been considered the gold standard of care. With recent advances in percutaneous catheter-directed techniques, multiple retrospective studies have demonstrated the outcomes of endovascular therapy. Herein, we review the etiology, presentation, and diagnosis of acute mesenteric ischemia with contemporary outcomes associated with both open and endovascular treatments.

Methods:

The PubMed electronic database was queried in the English language using the search words mesenteric, acute ischemia, embolism, thromboembolism, thrombosis, revascularization, and endovascular in various combinations. Abstracts of the relevant titles were examined to confirm their relevance and the full articles then extracted. References from extracted articles were checked for any additional relevant articles. This systematic review encompassed literature for the past 5 years (between 2011 and 2016).

Results:

Early diagnosis and intervention improves acute mesenteric ischemia outcomes. Early restoration of mesenteric flow minimizes morbidity and mortality. In comparison to open laparotomy with mesenteric revascularization and resection of necrotic bowel, several retrospective studies using administrative data and single-center chart reviews demonstrate noninferior outcomes of an endovascular first approach in acute arterial mesenteric occlusion.

Conclusions:

For acute mesenteric arterial occlusive disease, both endovascular and open revascularization techniques are viable options. Although there is lack of level 1 evidence, single-center retrospective studies and administrative database studies demonstrated that an endovascular first approach may have improved outcomes in the immediate postoperative period. However, selection and other bias in these studies necessitate the need for definitive randomized prospective studies between endovascular and open mesenteric intervention. In contrast, mesenteric venous thrombosis may be treated with systemic anticoagulation without surgical revascularization. Catheter-directed thrombectomy and thrombolysis can be considered at the discretion of the clinician.

Open Abdomen Improves Survival in Patients With Peritonitis Secondary to Acute Superior Mesenteric Artery Occlusion

BACKGROUND

Damage control surgery and open abdomen (OA) have been extensively used in the severe traumatic patients. However, there was little information when extended to a nontrauma setting. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether the liberal use of OA as a damage control surgery adjunct improved the clinical outcome in acute superior mesenteric artery occlusion patients.

STUDY DESIGN

A single-center, retrospective cohort review was performed in a national tertiary surgical referral center.

RESULTS

Forty-four patients received OA (OA group) and 65 patients had a primary fascial closure (non-OA group) after diagnosed as peritonitis secondary to acute superior mesenteric artery occlusion from January, 2005 to June, 2016. Revascularization was achieved through endovascular aspiration embolectomy, open embolectomy, or percutaneous stent. No difference of bowel resection length was found between groups in the first emergency surgery. However, more non-OA patients (35.4%) required a second-look enterectomy to remove the residual bowel ischemia than OA patients (13.6%, P<0.05). OA was closed within a median of 7 days (4 to 15 d). There was a mean of 134 cm residual alive bowel in OA, whereas 96 cm in non-OA. More non-OA patients suffered from intra-abdominal sepsis (23.1% vs. 6.8%, P<0.01), intra-abdominal hypertension (31% vs. 0, P<0.01), and acute renal failure (53.8% vs. 31.8%, P<0.05) than OA group after surgery. Short-bowel syndrome occurred infrequently in OA than non-OA patients (9.1% vs. 36.9%, P<0.01). OA significantly decreased the 30-day (27.3% vs. 52.3%, P<0.01) and 1-year mortality rate (31.8 % vs. 61.5%, P<0.01) compared with non-OA group.

CONCLUSIONS

Liberal use of OA, as a damage control adjunct avoided the development of intra-abdominal hypertension, reduced sepsis-related complication, and improved the clinical outcomes in peritonitis secondary to acute SMA occlusion.

Acute mesenteric ischemia: guidelines of the World Society of Emergency Surgery

Acute mesenteric ischemia (AMI) is typically defined as a group of diseases characterized by an interruption of the blood supply to varying portions of the small intestine, leading to ischemia and secondary inflammatory changes. If untreated, this process will eventuate in life threatening intestinal necrosis. The incidence is low, estimated at 0.09–0.2% of all acute surgical admissions. Therefore, although the entity is an uncommon cause of abdominal pain, diligence is always required because if untreated, mortality has consistently been reported in the range of 50%. Early diagnosis and timely surgical intervention are the cornerstones of modern treatment and are essential to reduce the high mortality associated with this entity. The advent of endovascular approaches in parallel with modern imaging techniques may provide new options. Thus, we believe that a current position paper from World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) is warranted, in order to put forth the most recent and practical recommendations for diagnosis and treatment of AMI. This review will address the concepts of AMI with the aim of focusing on specific areas where early diagnosis and management hold the strongest potential for improving outcomes in this disease process.

Some of the key points include the prompt use of CT angiography to establish the diagnosis, evaluation of the potential for revascularization to re-establish blood flow to ischemic bowel, resection of necrotic intestine, and use of damage control techniques when appropriate to allow for re-assessment of bowel viability prior to definitive anastomosis and abdominal closure.