Subspecialist emergency management of diverticulitis is associated with reduced mortality and fewer stomas

Comparison of major abdominal emergency surgery outcomes across organizational models of emergency surgical care: Analysis of the UK NELA national database

BACKGROUND

Emergency general surgery (EGS) admissions account for a large proportion of surgical care and represent the majority of surgical patients who suffer in-hospital mortality. Health care systems continue to experience growing demand for emergency services: one way in which this is being increasingly addressed is dedicated subspecialty teams for emergency surgical admissions, most commonly termed "emergency general surgery" in the United Kingdom. This study aims to understand the impact of the emergency general surgery model of care on outcomes from emergency laparotomies.

METHODS

Data was obtained from the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit database. Patients were dichotomized into EGS hospital or non-EGS hospital. Emergency general surgery hospital is defined as a hospital where >50% of in-hours emergency laparotomy operating is performed by an emergency general surgeon. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were intensive therapy unit (ITU) length of stay and duration of hospital stay. A propensity score weighting approach was used to reduce confounding and selection bias.

RESULTS

There were 115,509 patients from 175 hospitals included in the final analysis. The EGS hospital care group included 5,789 patients versus 109,720 patients in the non-EGS group. Following propensity score weighting, mean standardized mean difference reduced from 0.055 to <0.001. In-hospital mortality was similar (10.8% vs. 11.1%, p = 0.094), with mean length of stay (16.7 days vs. 16.1 days, p < 0.001) and ITU stay (2.8 days vs. 2.6 days, p < 0.001) persistently longer in patients treated in EGS systems.

CONCLUSION

No significant association between the emergency surgery hospital model of care and in-hospital mortality in emergency laparotomy patients was seen. There is a significant association between the emergency surgery hospital model of care and an increased length of ITU stay and overall hospital stay. Further studies are required to examine the impact of changing models of EGS delivery in the United Kingdom.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level III.

Weekend effect in emergency laparotomy: a propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

The 'weekend effect' is the term given to the observed discrepancy regarding patient care and outcomes on weekends compared to weekdays. This study aimed to determine whether the weekend effect exists within Aotearoa New Zealand (AoNZ) for patients undergoing emergency laparotomy (EL), given recent advances in management of EL patients.

METHODS

A cohort study was conducted across five hospitals, comparing the outcomes of weekend and weekday acute EL. A propensity-score matched analysis was used to remove potential confounding patient characteristics.

RESULTS

Of the 487 patients included, 132 received EL over the weekend. There was no statistically significant difference between patients undergoing EL over the weekend compared to weekdays. Mortality rates were comparable between the weekday and weekend cohorts (P = 0.464).

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that modern perioperative care practice in New Zealand obviates the 'weekend' effect.

Consensus Guidelines for Perioperative Care for Emergency Laparotomy Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society Recommendations Part 2-Emergency Laparotomy: Intra- and Postoperative Care

BACKGROUND

This is Part 2 of the first consensus guidelines for optimal care of patients undergoing emergency laparotomy (EL) using an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) approach. This paper addresses intra- and postoperative aspects of care.

METHODS

Experts in aspects of management of high-risk and emergency general surgical patients were invited to contribute by the International ERAS^® Society. PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Medline database searches were performed for ERAS elements and relevant specific topics. Studies on each item were selected with particular attention to randomized clinical trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and large cohort studies and reviewed and graded using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Recommendations were made on the best level of evidence, or extrapolation from studies on elective patients when appropriate. A modified Delphi method was used to validate final recommendations. Some ERAS^® components covered in other guideline papers are outlined only briefly, with the bulk of the text focusing on key areas pertaining specifically to EL.

RESULTS

Twenty-three components of intraoperative and postoperative care were defined. Consensus was reached after three rounds of a modified Delphi Process.

CONCLUSIONS

These guidelines are based on best available evidence for an ERAS^® approach to patients undergoing EL. These guidelines are not exhaustive but pull together evidence on important components of care for this high-risk patient population. As much of the evidence is extrapolated from elective surgery or emergency general surgery (not specifically laparotomy), many of the components need further evaluation in future studies.

Evaluation of the Introduction of a Colorectal Bundle in Left Sided Colorectal Resections (EvaCol): Study Protocol of a Multicentre, Observational Trial

Purpose:

Overall complication and leak rates in colorectal surgery showed only minor improvements over the last years and remain still high. While the introduction of the WHO Safer Surgery Checklist has shown a reduction of overall operative mortality and morbidity in general surgery, only minor attempts have been made to improve outcomes by standardizing perioperative processes in colorectal surgery. Nevertheless, a number of singular interventions have been found reducing postoperative complications in colorectal surgery. The aim of the present study is to combine nine of these measures to a catalogue called colorectal bundle (CB). This will help to standardize pre-, intra-, and post-operative processes and therefore eventually reduce complication rates after colorectal surgery.

Methods:

The study will be performed among nine contributing hospitals in the extended north-western part of Switzerland. In the 6-month lasting control period the patients will be treated according to the local standard of each contributing hospital. After a short implementation phase all patients will be treated according to the CB for another 6 months. Afterwards complication rates before and after the implementation of the CB will be compared.

Discussion:

The overall complication rate in colorectal surgery is still high. The fact that only little progress has been made in recent years underlines the relevance of the current project. It has been shown for other areas of surgery that standardization is an effective measure of reducing postoperative complication rates. We hypothesize that the combination of effective, individual components into the CB can reduce the complication rate.

Trial registration:

Registered in ClinicalTrials.gov on 11/03/2020; NCT04550156.

Highlights

Purpose:

Methods:

Discussion:

Influence of the introduction of caseload requirements on indication for visceral cancer surgery in Switzerland

BACKGROUND

In 2013 Swiss health authorities implemented annual hospital caseload requirements (CR) for five areas of visceral surgery. We assess the impact of the implementation of CR on indication for surgery in esophageal, pancreatic and rectal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective analysis of national registry data of all inpatient admissions between January 1st^, 2005 and December 31st^, 2015. Primary end-point was the age-adjusted resection rate for esophageal, pancreatic and rectal cancer among patients with at least one cancer-specific hospitalization per year. We calculated age-adjusted rate ratios for period effects before and after implementation of CR and odds ratios (OR) based on a generalized estimation equation. A relative increase of 5% in age-adjusted relative risk was set a priori as relevant from a health policy perspective.

RESULTS

Age-adjusted resection rates before and after the implementation of CR were 0.12 and 0.13 (Relative Risk [RR] 1.08; 95%-Confidence Interval [CI] 0.85-1.36) in esophageal cancer, 0.22 and 0.26 (RR 1.17; 95%-CI 0.85-1.58) in pancreatic cancer and 0.38 and 0.43 (RR 1.14; 95%-CI 0.99-1.30) in rectal cancer. In adjusted models OR for resection after the implementation of CR were 1.40 (95%-CI 1.24-1.58) in esophageal cancer, 1.05 (95%-CI 0.96-1.15) in pancreatic cancer and 0.92 (95%-CI 0.87-0.97) in rectal cancer.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of CR was associated with an increase of resection rates above the a priori set margins in all resections groups. In adjusted models, odds for resection were significantly higher for esophageal cancer, while they remained unchanged for pancreatic and decreased for rectal cancer.

The impact of surgical subspecialization on patient outcomes following emergency colorectal resections in the north of England: a retrospective cohort study

AIM

Emergency colorectal surgery is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Most general surgeons have a subspecialty, which forms the focus of their elective work, allowing development of specialist skill sets. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of consultant subspecialization on patient outcomes following emergency colorectal resections.

METHODS

Data were requested for all emergency admissions under a general surgeon between 1 January 2002 and 31 December 2016 within the north of England. These were acquired from individual Trusts following Caldicott approval. Data included demographics, diagnoses and any procedures undertaken. Patients were assigned to cohorts based on the subspecialist interest of the consultant they were under the care of. The primary outcome of interest was 30-day postoperative mortality. Categorical data were compared with the chi-squared test, and continuous data with the t test or ANOVA. A logistic regression model determined factors associated with 30-day in-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

Overall, 7648 emergency colorectal resections were performed with a 30-day postoperative mortality of 13.8%. This was significantly lower if the responsible consultant was a colorectal surgeon compared with other general surgery subspecialties (11.8% vs. 15.2%, P < 0.001). This was significant on univariate analysis (OR 0.75, P < 0.001); however, following multivariable adjustment, this was not statistically significant (P = 0.380). The colorectal specialists had a higher laparoscopy rate than their colleagues-9.8% versus 6.8% (P < 0.001). Stoma rates were also lower (46.9% vs. 51.0%, P = 0.001) and anastomosis rates higher (55.9% vs. 49.3%, P < 0.001) amongst colorectal surgeons.

CONCLUSION

These findings add to the growing body of evidence that patient outcomes may be improved by involving subspecialists in colorectal emergencies.

Management of perforated diverticulitis with generalized peritonitis. A multidisciplinary review and position paper

Perforated diverticulitis is an emergent clinical condition and its management is challenging and still debated. The aim of this position paper was to critically review the available evidence on the management of perforated diverticulitis and generalized peritonitis in order to provide evidence-based suggestions for a management strategy. Four Italian scientific societies (SICCR, SICUT, SIRM, AIGO), selected experts who identified 5 clinically relevant topics in the management of perforated diverticulitis with generalized peritonitis that would benefit from a multidisciplinary review. The following 5 issues were tackled: 1) Criteria to decide between conservative and surgical treatment in case of perforated diverticulitis with peritonitis; 2) Criteria or scoring system to choose the most appropriate surgical option when diffuse peritonitis is confirmed 3); The appropriate surgical procedure in hemodynamically stable or stabilized patients with diffuse peritonitis; 4) The appropriate surgical procedure for patients with generalized peritonitis and septic shock and 5) Optimal medical therapy in patients with generalized peritonitis from diverticular perforation before and after surgery. In perforated diverticulitis surgery is indicated in case of diffuse peritonitis or failure of conservative management and the decision to operate is not based on the presence of extraluminal air. If diffuse peritonitis is confirmed the choice of surgical technique is based on intraoperative findings and the presence or risk of severe septic shock. Further prognostic factors to consider are physiological derangement, age, comorbidities, and immune status. In hemodynamically stable patients, emergency laparoscopy has benefits over open surgery. Options include resection and anastomosis, Hartmann’s procedure or laparoscopic lavage. In generalized peritonitis with septic shock, an open surgical approach is preferred. Non-restorative resection and/or damage control surgery appear to be the only viable options, depending on the severity of hemodynamic instability. Multidisciplinary medical management should be applied with the main aims of controlling infection, relieving postoperative pain and preventing and/or treating postoperative ileus. In conclusion, the complexity and diversity of patients with diverticular perforation and diffuse peritonitis requires a personalized strategy, involving a thorough classification of physiological derangement, staging of intra-abdominal infection and choice of the most appropriate surgical procedure.

Perioperative factors associated with postoperative morbidity after emergency laparotomy: a retrospective analysis in a university teaching hospital

Emergency Laparotomy (EL) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Variation in practice and patient outcomes for patients undergoing emergency laparotomy has been identified through the UK National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA), with 30-day mortality ranging from 11 to 15%. A correlation between preoperative haemodynamic parameters and increased postoperative mortality has been demonstrated by both NELA and other observational studies. The association between intraoperative haemodynamic parameters and overall postoperative morbidity has not been evaluated in EL patients. The aims of our study were to investigate the association between perioperative haemodynamic and logistic parameters and postoperative morbidity in a tertiary referral university hospital; and to compare our outcomes to that of the NELA data. A retrospective analysis correlating a range of perioperative parameters with Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI) among 86 patients who underwent EL during 2018 was conducted. Mean age was 64 years (SD 16). Median CCI was 27 [9-45], and 30-day mortality was 11.7%. Several intraoperative parameters correlated with CCI on univariate analysis. On multivariate analysis, ASA status (P = 0.005) and unplanned escalation to postoperative intensive care (P = 0.03) were independently associated with CCI. Our study shows a correlation between ASA status and unplanned escalation to ITU with increased postoperative morbidity in patients undergoing emergency laparotomy. We did not demonstrate an independent correlation between intraoperative parameters and postoperative morbidity. These findings warrant confirmation in a larger scale observational study. Outcomes in our institution are comparable to those seen in the NELA.

Prospectively Randomized Controlled Trial on Damage Control Surgery for Perforated Diverticulitis with Generalized Peritonitis

Introduction

Damage control surgery (DCS) with abdominal negative pressure therapy and delayed anastomosis creation in patients with perforated diverticulitis and generalized peritonitis was established at our Institution in 2006 and has been published. The concept was adopted in other hospitals and published as a case series. This is the first prospectively controlled randomized study comparing DCS and conventional treatment (Group C) in this setting.

Methods

All consecutive patients from 2013 to 2018 with indication for surgery were screened and randomized to Group DCS or Group C. The primary outcome was the rate of reconstructed bowel at discharge and at 6 month. Informed consent was obtained. The trial was approved by the local ethics committee and registered at CinicalTrials.gov: NCT04034407.

Results

A total of 56 patients were screened; 41 patients gave informed consent to participate and ultimately 21 patients (9 female) with intraoperatively confirmed Hinchey III (n = 14, 67%) or IV (n = 7, 33%), and a median (range) age of 66 (42–92), Mannheim Peritonitis Index of 25 (12–37) and Charlson Comorbidity Index of 3 (0–10) were intraoperatively randomized and treated as Group DCS (n = 13) or Group C (n = 8). Per protocol analysis: A primary anastomosis without ileostomy (PA) was performed in 92% (11/12) patients in Group DCS at the second-look operation, one patient died before second look, and one underwent a Hartmann procedure (HP). In Group C 63% (5/8) patients received a PA and 38% (3/8) patients a HP. Two patients in Group C, but none in Group DCS experienced anastomotic leakage (AI). ICU and hospital stay was median (range) 2 (1–10) and 17.5 (12–43) in DCS and 2 (1–62) and 22 (13–65) days in group C. In Group DCS 8% (1/12) patients was discharged with a stoma versus 57% (4/7) in Group C (p = 0.038, n.s., α = 0.025); one patient died before discharge. The odds ratio (95% confidence interval) for discharge with a stoma is 0.068 (0.005–0.861). Intent to treat analysis: A PA was performed in 90% (9/10) of patients randomized to DCS, one patient died before the second look, and one patient received a HP. In group C, 70% (7/10) were treated with PA and 30% (3/10) with HP. 29% (2/7) experienced AI treated with protective ileostomy. In group DCS, 9% (1/11) were discharged with a stoma versus 40% (4/10) in group C (p = 0.14, n.s.). The odds ratio for discharge with a stoma is 0.139 (0.012–1.608).

Conclusion

This is the first prospectively randomized controlled study showing that damage control surgery in perforated diverticulitis Hinchey III and IV enhances reconstruction of bowel continuity and can reduce the stoma rate at discharge.

Emergent laparoscopic sigmoid resection for perforated diverticulitis: can it be safely performed by residents?

AIM

Outcomes after resident involvement in emergent colectomies have rarely been studied. The aim of this study was to analyse the outcomes of laparoscopic sigmoidectomy for Hinchey III diverticulitis performed by residents.

METHOD

This study was a retrospective analysis of patients undergoing laparoscopic sigmoidectomy for diverticulitis. The sample was divided into two groups: patients operated on by a supervised resident (SR) or a senior surgeon (SS). Supervising surgeons and SSs could be general surgeons (GSs) or colorectal surgeons (CSs). A SR was considered the first surgeon if he/she completed at least three of five defined steps of the procedure. The primary end-points included length of hospital stay (LOS), morbidity and 30-day mortality. A sub-analysis of patients operated on by a SR assisted by either a CS or GS was performed.

RESULTS

Supervised residents and SSs operated on 59 and 42 patients, respectively. The presence of a CS was more frequent in the SS group (SR 41% vs SS 81%, P < 0.001). LOS (SR 9.4 days vs SS 6.4 days, P = 0.04) was higher in the SR group. Overall morbidity (SR 39% vs SS 43%, P = 0.69) and 30-day mortality (SR 5% vs SS 5%, P = 0.94) were also comparable among the groups. Procedures performed by SRs and supervised by a CS were associated with lower morbidity (GS 48% vs CS 25%, P = 0.06) and mortality (GS 8% vs CS 0%, P = 0.26).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic sigmoidectomy for Hinchey III diverticulitis has comparable outcomes when performed by a supervised SR or a SS. Procedures performed by residents assisted by a CS seem to have better outcomes than those assisted by a GS.

Does declared surgeon specialist interest influence the outcome of emergency laparotomy?

INTRODUCTION

In the UK, general surgeons must demonstrate competency in emergency general surgery before obtaining a certificate of completion of training. Subsequently, many consultants develop focused elective specialist interests which may not mirror the breadth of procedures encountered during emergency practice. Recent National Emergency Laparotomy Audit analysis found that declared surgeon special interest impacted emergency laparotomy outcomes, which has implications for emergency general surgery service configuration. We sought to establish whether local declared surgeon special interest impacts emergency laparotomy outcomes.

METHODS

Adult patients having emergency laparotomy were identified from our prospective National Emergency Laparotomy Audit database from May 2016 to May 2019 and categorised as colorectal or oesophagogastric according to operative procedure. Outcomes included 30-day mortality, return to theatre and length of stay. Binomial logistic regression was used to identify any association between declared consultant specialist interest and outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 600 laparotomies, 358 (58.6%) were classifiable as specialist procedures: 287 (80%) colorectal and 71 (20%) oesophagogastric. Discordance between declared specialty and operation undertaken occurred in 25% of procedures. For colorectal emergency laparotomy, there was an increased risk of 30-day mortality when performed by a non-colorectal consultant (unadjusted odds ratio 2.34; 95% confidence interval 1.10-5.00; p = 0.003); however, when adjusted for confounders within multivariate analysis declared surgeon specialty had no impact on mortality, return to theatre or length of stay.

CONCLUSION

Surgeon-declared specialty does not impact emergency laparotomy outcomes in this cohort of undifferentiated emergency laparotomies. This may reflect the on-call structure at Birmingham Heartlands Hospital, where a colorectal and oesophagogastric consultant are paired on call and provide cross-cover when needed.

Surgical treatment of a colon neoplasm of the splenic flexure: a multicentric study of short-term outcomes

AIM

The optimal surgical treatment of splenic flexure neoplasm is still not well defined. Extended right hemicolectomy (ERH) and left colic resection (LCR) have been proposed but conclusive evidence concerning postoperative morbidity and oncological results is lacking. The aim of this study was to analyse the short-term outcomes after surgery for splenic flexure cancer with regard to surgical procedure and surgeon's specialty.

METHODS

This was a multicentre study on patients who underwent surgery for primary colon cancer of the splenic flexure.

RESULTS

From 2004 to 2015, 324 patients fulfilled the criteria for inclusion into the study; 270 (83.4%) had elective surgery while 54 (16.6%) had emergency resection: 158 (48.8%) underwent ERH and 166 (51.2%) LCR; 176 (54.3%) procedures were performed by colorectal surgeons, 148 (46.7%) by general surgeons. In the ERH group a significantly higher rate of emergency operations was carried out (P = 0.005). After elective surgery, no significant differences between ERH and LCR concerning 30-day mortality (3.3% vs 2.0%) and the need for reoperation (10.6% vs 7.4%) were found. Nodal harvesting was significantly higher in the ERH and colorectal surgeon groups in any clinical scenario. At multivariate analysis, age and smoking habit were predictive of the need for reoperation and major morbidity while the general surgeon group showed a higher risk of anastomotic failure (OR = 1.92; P = 0.168).

CONCLUSION

We analysed the largest series in literature of curative resections for splenic flexure tumours. The optimal procedure still remains debatable as ERH and LCR appear to achieve comparable short-term outcomes. Surgeon's specialty seems to positively affect patient's outcomes.

Perforated diverticulitis in the North of England: trends in patient outcomes, management approach and the influence of subspecialisation

INTRODUCTION

In recent years, several management options have been used in the management of perforated diverticulitis, ranging from conservative treatment to laparotomy. General surgery has also become increasingly specialised over time. This retrospective cohort study investigated changes in patient outcomes following perforated diverticulitis, management approach and the influence of consultant subspecialisation over time.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data was collected on patients admitted with perforated diverticulitis in the North of England between 2002 and 2016. Subspecialisation was categorised as colorectal or other general subspecialties. The primary outcome of interest was overall 30-day mortality; secondary outcomes included surgical approach, stoma and anastomosis rate.

RESULTS

A total of 3394 cases of perforated diverticulitis were analysed (colorectal, n = 1290 and other subspecialists, n = 2104) with a 30-day mortality of 11.6%. There was a significant reduction in mortality over time (2002-2006: 18.6% to 2012-2016: 6.8, P < 0.001).There was a significant reduction in open surgery (60% to 25.3%, P < 0.001) with increased conservative management (37.4% to 63.5%, P < 0.001), laparoscopic resection (0.1% to 4.9%, P < 0.001) and laparoscopic washout (0.1% to 5.7%, P < 0.001).Patients admitted under colorectal surgeons had lower mortality than other subspecialists (9.9% vs 12.4%, P = 0.027), which remained significant following multivariate adjustment (hazard ratio 1.44, P = 0.039). These patients had fewer stomas (13.9% vs. 21.0%, P = 0.001) and higher anastomosis rates (22.1% vs 15.8%, P = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated considerable improvements in the management of perforated diverticulitis alongside the positive impact of subspecialisation on patient outcomes.

Association between surgeon special interest and mortality after emergency laparotomy

Background

Approximately 30 000 emergency laparotomies are performed each year in England and Wales. Patients with pathology of the gastrointestinal tract requiring emergency laparotomy are managed by general surgeons with an elective special interest focused on either the upper or lower gastrointestinal tract. This study investigated the impact of special interest on mortality after emergency laparotomy.

Methods

Adult patients having emergency laparotomy with either colorectal or gastroduodenal pathology were identified from the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit database and grouped according to operative procedure. Outcomes included all-cause 30-day mortality, length of hospital stay and return to theatre. Logistic and Poisson regression were used to analyse the association between consultant special interest and the three outcomes.

Results

A total of 33 819 patients (28 546 colorectal, 5273 upper gastrointestinal (UGI)) were included. Patients who had colorectal procedures performed by a consultant without a special interest in colorectal surgery had an increased adjusted 30-day mortality risk (odds ratio (OR) 1·23, 95 per cent c.i. 1·13 to 1·33). Return to theatre also increased in this group (OR 1·13, 1·05 to 1·20). UGI procedures performed by non-UGI special interest surgeons carried an increased adjusted risk of 30-day mortality (OR 1·24, 1·02 to 1·53). The risk of return to theatre was not increased (OR 0·89, 0·70 to 1·12).

Conclusion

Emergency laparotomy performed by a surgeon whose special interest is not in the area of the pathology carries an increased risk of death at 30 days. This finding potentially has significant implications for emergency service configuration, training and workforce provision, and should stimulate discussion among all stakeholders.

Evaluating the effects of surgical subspecialisation on patient outcomes following emergency laparotomy: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

General surgeons have become increasingly subspecialised in their elective practice. Emergency laparotomies, however, are performed by a range of subspecialists who may or may not have an interest in the affected area of gastrointestinal tract. This retrospective cohort study evaluates the impact of surgical subspecialisation on patient outcomes following emergency laparotomy.

METHODS

Data was collected for patients who underwent an emergency abdominal procedure on the gastrointestinal tract in the North of England from 2001 to 2016. This included demographics, co-morbidities, diagnoses and procedures undertaken. Patients were grouped according to consultants' subspecialist interest. The primary outcome of interest was 30-day postoperative mortality.

RESULTS

24,291 emergency laparotomies were performed with an associated 30-day postoperative mortality of 11.7%. Laparotomies undertaken by upper gastrointestinal (UGI) or colorectal surgeons have significantly lower mortality (10.1%) when compared with other subspecialities (13.5%). More specifically, mortality was decreased for UGI (7.9% vs. 12.9%) and colorectal procedures (10.9% vs. 14.2%) when performed by surgeons with a specialist interest in the relevant area of the gastrointestinal tract (both p < 0.001). The utilisation of laparoscopic surgery is higher, in both UGI (21.8% vs. 9.0%) and colorectal procedures (7.2% vs. 3.5%), when the causative pathology is relevant to the surgeon's subspeciality (both p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Mortality following emergency laparotomy is improved when performed under the care of gastrointestinal surgeons. Both UGI and colorectal emergency procedures have improved outcomes, with lower mortality and higher rates of laparoscopy, when under the care of a surgeon with a subspecialist interest in the affected area of the gastrointestinal tract.

Emergent Colon Resections: Does Surgeon Specialization Influence Outcomes?

BACKGROUND

Relationships between high-volume surgeons and improved postoperative outcomes have been well documented. Colorectal procedures are often performed by general surgeons, particularly in emergent settings, and may form a large component of their practice. The influence of subspecialized training on outcomes after emergent colon surgery, however, is not well described.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to determine whether subspecialty training in colorectal surgery is associated with differences in postoperative outcomes after emergency colectomy.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective cohort study.

SETTINGS

Three tertiary care hospitals participating in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Project were included.

PATIENTS

Patients undergoing emergent colon resections were identified at each institution and stratified by involvement of either a colorectal surgeon or a general or acute care surgeon.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Propensity score matching was used to isolate the effect of surgeon specialty on the primary outcomes, including postoperative morbidity, mortality, length of stay, and the need for unplanned major reoperation, in comparable cohorts of patients.

RESULTS

A total of 889 cases were identified, including 592 by colorectal and 297 by general/acute care surgeons. After propensity score matching, cases performed by colorectal surgeons were associated with significantly lower rates of 30-day mortality (6.7% vs 16.4%; p = 0.001), postoperative morbidity (45.0% vs 56.7%; p = 0.009), and unplanned major reoperation (9.7% vs 16.4%; p = 0.04). In addition, length of stay was ≈4.4 days longer among patients undergoing surgery by general/acute care surgeons (p < 0.001).

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited by its retrospective design, with potential selection bias attributed to referral patterns.

CONCLUSIONS

After controlling for underlying disease states and illness severity, emergent colon resections performed by colorectal surgeons were associated with significantly lower rates of postoperative morbidity and mortality when compared with noncolorectal surgeons. These findings may have implications for referral patterns for institutions. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A767.

Subspecialty approach for the management of acute cholecystitis: an alternative to acute surgical unit model of care

BACKGROUND

Acute cholecystitis is a common condition. Recent studies have shown an association between creation of an acute surgical unit (ASU) and improved outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of a subspecialty based approach to the management of acute cholecystitis as an alternative to the traditional 'generalist' general surgery approach or the ASU model.

METHOD

A 6-year retrospective analysis of outcomes in patients admitted under a dedicated upper gastrointestinal service for acute cholecystitis undergoing emergency laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

RESULTS

Seven hundred emergency laparoscopic cholecystectomies were performed over this time. A total of 486 patients were available for analysis. The median time to operation was 2 days and median length of operation was 80 min. A total of 86.9% were performed during daylight hours. Eight cases were converted to open surgery (1.6%). Intra-operative cholangiography was performed in 408 patients. The major complication rate was 8.2%, including retained common bile duct stones (2.3%), sepsis (0.2%), post-operative bleeding (0.4%), readmission (0.6%), bile leak (2.1%), AMI (0.4%), unscheduled return to theatre (0.6%) and pneumonia (0.8%). There were no mortalities and no common bile duct injuries.

CONCLUSION

Over a time period that encompasses the current publications on the ASU model, a subspecialty model of care has shown consistent results that exceed established benchmarks. Subspecialty management of complex elective pathologies has become the norm in general surgery and this study generates the hypothesis that subspecialty management of patients with complex emergency pathologies should be considered a valid alternative to ASU. Access block to emergency theatres delays treatment and prolongs hospital stay.

Subspecialization within pediatric surgical groups in North America

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to assess the current status of subspecialization in North American pediatric surgical practices and to evaluate factors associated with subspecialization.

METHODS

A survey was sent to each pediatric surgical practice in the United States and Canada. For each of 44 operation types, ranging in complexity and volume, the respondents chose one of the following responses: 1. everyone does the operation; 2. group policy--only some surgeons do the operation; 3. group policy--anyone can do it but mentorship required; 4. only some do it due to referral patterns; 5. no one in the group does it. Association of various factors with degree of subspecialization was analyzed using nonparametric statistics with p<0.05 considered significant.

RESULTS

Response rate was 70%. There was significant variability in subspecialization among groups. Factors found to be significantly associated with increased subspecialization included free-standing children's hospitals, pediatric surgery training programs, higher number of surgeons, higher case volume, and greater volume of tertiary/quaternary cases.

CONCLUSIONS

There is wide variation in the degree of subspecialization among North American pediatric surgery practices. These data will help to inform ongoing debate around strategies that may be useful in optimizing pediatric surgical care and patient outcomes in the future.

Diverticulitis Outcomes are Equivalent between Level 1 Trauma Centers and Community Hospitals in New Jersey

Traditionally, general surgeons provide emergency general surgery (EGS) coverage by assigned call. The acute care surgery (ACS) model is new and remains confined mostly to academic centers. Some argue that in busy trauma centers, on-call trauma surgeons may be unable to also care for EGS patients. In New Jersey, all three Level 1 Trauma Centers (L1TC) have provided ACS services for many years. Analyzing NJ state inpatient data, we sought to determine whether outcomes in one common surgical illness, diverticulitis, have been different between L1TC and nontrauma centers (NTC) over a 10-year period. The NJ Medical Database was queried for patients aged 18 to 90 hospitalized from 2001 to 2010 for acute diverticulitis. Demographics, comorbidities, operative rates, and mortality were compiled and analyzed comparing L1TC to NTC. For additional comparison between L1TC and NTC, 1:1 propensity score matching with replacement was accomplished. χ2, t test, and Cochran-Armitage trend test were used. From 2001 to 2010, 88794 patients were treated in NJ for diverticulitis. 2621 patients (2.95%) were treated at L1TCs. Operative rates were similar between hospital types. Patients treated at L1TCs were more often younger (63.1 ± 0.3 vs 64.7 ± 0.1; P < 0.001), nonwhite (43.1% vs 23.1%; P < 0.0001), and uninsured (11.0% vs 5.5%; P < 0.0001). After propensity matching, neither operative mortality (9.7% vs 7.9% P = 0.45), nor nonoperative mortality (1.2% vs 1.3% P = 0.60) were different between groups. Mortality and operative rates for patients with acute diverticulitis are equivalent between LT1C and NTC in NJ. Trauma centers in NJ more commonly provide care to minority and uninsured patients.

Operative intervention rates for acute diverticulitis: a multicentre state-wide study

BACKGROUND

Acute colonic diverticulitis is placing an increasing strain on our health care resources. Measurement of the problem is difficult at a regional level, yet essential to improve and optimize treatment of this condition. Therefore, we aimed to use Australian state-level administrative data to determine the current practice and outcomes in major metropolitan hospitals.

METHODS

Coding algorithms designed to increase the yield and accuracy of administrative data were used to find emergency admissions from the Victorian Admitted Episodes Dataset. Eight tertiary referral centres with specialist colorectal services from 2009 to 2013 were studied. Key metrics including the operative intervention rate were measured.

RESULTS

There were 2829 emergency admissions for acute diverticulitis across 4 years in eight hospitals, with 724 being complicated. The emergency operative intervention rate was 10.4%, with a third of admissions for complicated diverticulitis having an operation. Hartmann's procedure was the most commonly performed emergency operation, accounting for 72% of resections. Patient characteristics were consistent across the hospitals, including a median length of stay of 3 and 6 days for uncomplicated and complicated diverticulitis, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Hartmann's procedure is currently the most common emergency operation for acute complicated diverticulitis in Victorian metropolitan hospitals. Our practice and outcomes can be measured meaningfully using administrative data.

Effects of diabetes mellitus in patients presenting with diverticulitis: clinical correlations and disease characteristics in more than 1,000 patients

BACKGROUND

The epidemic increase in the incidence of diabetes mellitus (DM) worldwide represents a potential source of surgical morbidity. The impact of DM on the need for surgical management and its effect on surgical outcomes for colonic diverticulitis have not been well defined.

METHODS

We investigated all DM versus non-DM patients admitted with a diagnosis of acute diverticulitis between January 1, 2003, and December 31, 2011, to a large urban safety net hospital. An administrative database search for patients with diverticulitis was divided into two groups: those with and without DM. They were retrospectively analyzed for severity of diverticulitis (Hinchey and Ambrosetti scores), mortality, length of hospital stay, need for operation, postoperative complications, and readmission rates.

RESULTS

There were 1,019 admissions with acute diverticulitis, 164 (16.1%) of which had DM. DM versus non-DM patients presented with a higher Hinchey score of 3 or 4 (12.2% vs. 9.2%, p < 0.001), a more severe computed tomographic Ambrosetti score (43.9% vs. 31.7%, p < 0.001), older age, and significantly more comorbid conditions. There was no significant difference in the failure of nonoperative management (2.2% DM vs. 2.5% non-DM, p = 1.000), readmission, or death rates. Operated DM patients had a higher incidence of in-hospital infectious complications (28.7% vs. 8.2%, p < 0.001) and a higher incidence of acute renal failure (5.5% vs. 0.7%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Although diabetic patients with colonic diverticulitis present at a more advanced level (as measured by Hinchey and Ambrosetti scores), the nonoperative success rate is similar to non-DM patients. Surgical management in DM patients is associated with a higher incidence of infectious complications and acute kidney injury. However, DM did not appear to increase operative mortality in surgically managed patients. These data suggest that greater attention should be placed on steps to reduce the negative impact of DM on both immune response and renal function in patients requiring surgery of colonic diverticulitis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Epidemiologic study, level III.

Current UK practice in emergency laparotomy

INTRODUCTION

Emergency laparotomy is a common procedure, with 30,000-50,000 performed annually in the UK. This large scale study reports the current spectrum of emergency laparotomies, and the influence of the surgical procedure, underlying pathology and subspecialty of the operating surgeon on mortality.

METHODS

Anonymised data on consecutive patients undergoing an emergency laparotomy were submitted for a three-month period. The primary outcome measure was unadjusted 30-day mortality. Appendicectomy and cholecystectomy were among the procedures excluded.

RESULTS

Data from 1,708 patients from 35 National Health Service hospitals were analysed. The overall 30-day mortality rate was 14.8%. 'True' emergency laparotomies (ie those classified by the National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death as immediate or urgent) comprised 86.5% of cases. The mortality rate rose from 8.0% among expedited cases to 14.3% among urgent cases and to 25.7% among laparotomies termed immediate. Among the most common index procedures, small bowel resection exhibited the highest 30-day mortality rate of 21.1%. The presence of abdominal sepsis was associated with raised 30-day mortality (17.5% in the presence of sepsis vs 12.6%, p=0.027). Colorectal procedures comprised 44.3% and within this group, data suggest that mortality from laparotomy may be influenced by surgical subspecialisation.

CONCLUSIONS

This report of a large number of patients undergoing emergency laparotomy in the UK confirms a remarkably high mortality by modern standards across the range. Very few pathologies or procedures can be considered anything other than high risk. The need for routine consultant involvement and critical care is evident, and the case distribution helps define the surgical skill set needed for a modern emergency laparotomy service. Preliminary data relating outcomes from emergency colonic surgery to surgical subspecialty require urgent further study.

Current UK practice in emergency laparotomy

Introduction

Emergency laparotomy is a common procedure, with 30,000–50,000 performed annually in the UK. This large scale study reports the current spectrum of emergency laparotomies, and the influence of the surgical procedure, underlying pathology and subspecialty of the operating surgeon on mortality.

Methods

Anonymised data on consecutive patients undergoing an emergency laparotomy were submitted for a three-month period. The primary outcome measure was unadjusted 30-day mortality. Appendicectomy and cholecystectomy were among the procedures excluded.

Results

Data from 1,708 patients from 35 National Health Service hospitals were analysed. The overall 30-day mortality rate was 14.8%. ‘True’ emergency laparotomies (ie those classified by the National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death as immediate or urgent) comprised 86.5% of cases. The mortality rate rose from 8.0% among expedited cases to 14.3% among urgent cases and to 25.7% among laparotomies termed immediate. Among the most common index procedures, small bowel resection exhibited the highest 30-day mortality rate of 21.1%. The presence of abdominal sepsis was associated with raised 30-day mortality (17.5% in the presence of sepsis vs 12.6%, p=0.027). Colorectal procedures comprised 44.3% and within this group, data suggest that mortality from laparotomy may be influenced by surgical subspecialisation.

Conclusions

This report of a large number of patients undergoing emergency laparotomy in the UK confirms a remarkably high mortality by modern standards across the range. Very few pathologies or procedures can be considered anything other than high risk. The need for routine consultant involvement and critical care is evident, and the case distribution helps define the surgical skill set needed for a modern emergency laparotomy service. Preliminary data relating outcomes from emergency colonic surgery to surgical subspecialty require urgent further study.