Early postoperative mortality in the elderly: a pilot study

Propensity Score-Matching Sleeve Gastrectomy (SG) vs. Gastric Bypass (RYGB) in Patients ≥ 60 Years

BACKGROUND

Since 1 January 2005, the practice of bariatric surgery has been examined with the help of the German Bariatric Surgery Registry (GBSR) in Germany. The focus of the study was to evaluate if sleeve gastrectomy (SG) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) has the best benefit in terms of perioperative risk in patients over 60 years of age.

METHODS

Data collection includes patients over the age of 60 years who underwent SG or RYGB between 2005 and 2017. The bougie is limited to 33-40 French for SG. Furthermore, the RYGB is determined to be 120-180 cm alimentary and 40-60 cm biliopancreatic length. Outcome criteria are perioperative morbidity, postoperative complications, 30-day mortality, and postoperative length of stay.

RESULTS

The study analyzes data from 3561 patients beyond the age of 60 years who underwent SG (1970 patients) and RYGB (1591 patients). Mean age of the patients was 63.4 ± 3.2 in the RYGB group and 63.8 ± 3.5 in the SG group. Mean BMI was 46.4 ± 6.8 in the RYGB group and 49.1 ± 8.0 in the SG group. The average number of comorbidities was 4.5 ± 2.4 for RYGB and 4.5 ± 2.3 for SG. For the 30-day mortality, identical results were found SG vs. RYGB (0.31 vs. 0.38, p = 1.000).

CONCLUSION

Based on the results of this study, it can be concluded that both SG and RYGB in patients ≥ 60 years can be considered safe surgical procedures.

Bariatric surgery in older adults: Should there be an age limit?

Obesity has become one of the most significant health problems worldwide, affecting more than one-third of the global population. The elderly population is not immune to this proportional increase in obesity. To date, there is no cure for obesity, but surgery is the most effective treatment available today.We analyzed the results of bariatric surgery in elderly patients for a period of 3 years. Patients 65 years old and older were included in the study, 451 older adults were included. The mean age of the study group was 67.92 years old (min. 65, max. 84). The mean body mass index (BMI) was 40.32 Kg/m (min. 34 and max. 59). Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) was the most common procedures, and were conducted in 346 (76.72%) patients, gastric bypasses (GBPs) in 53 (11.75%) of which 33 were roux en y GBP (7.32%) and 20 mini GBPs (4.43%), gastric banding in 48 (10.64%), and duodenal switching in 4 (0.89%) cases.There were 40 (8.86%) patients with perioperative complications, 6 (1.33%) required re-operations, 12 (2.66) patients with operative complications were treated conservatively, 8 (1.77%) re-admission 5 of them with intrabdominal abscess, and 14 (3.10%) with co-morbidities complications. More than 76% of the patients had co-morbidities, 1 year after surgery the average remission of diseases was 34.74%, the improvement was49.67% and no changes in the co-morbidities was 15.59%. There were no deaths reported in this cohort.The mean excess body weight (EBW) loss among the patients was 70.76% (from 32% to 92%). No failure of weight loss (less than 25% of EBW loss) was observed after the first postoperative year.Bariatric surgery offers obese elderly patients an acceptable result, and it can be offered to improve the quality of life of these patients. A new consensus conference panel is needed to set appropriate recommendations regarding criteria that limit bariatric surgery in older adults.

Addition of biomarker panel improves prediction performance of American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) calculator for cardiac risk assessment of elderly patients preparing for major non-cardiac surgery: a pilot study

BACKGROUND

Number of elderly patients subjected to extensive surgical procedures in the presence of cardiovascular morbidities is increasing every year. Therefore, there is a need to make preoperative diagnostics more accurate.

AIMS

To evaluate the usefulness of American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) calculator as a predictive tool in preoperative assessment of cardiovascular risk in elderly patients.

METHODS

This prospective pilot study included 78 patients who were being prepared for extensive non-cardiac surgeries under general anaesthesia. Their data have been processed on the interactive ACS NSQIP calculator. Blood sampling has been performed 7 days prior to surgery, and serum has been separated. Clinical, novel, and experimental biomarkers [hsCRP, H-FABP, and Survivin (BIRC5)] have been measured in specialized laboratories.

RESULTS

Mean age of included patients was 71.35 ± 6.89 years. In the case of heart complications and mortality prediction, hsCRP and ACS NSQIP showed the highest specificity and sensitivity with AUC, respectively, 0.869 and 0.813 for heart complications and 0.883 and 0.813 for mortality. When combined with individual biomarkers AUC of ACS NSQIP raised, but if we combined all three biomarkers with ACS NSQIP, AUC reached as much as 0.920 for heart complications and 0.939 for mortality.

DISCUSSION

ACS NSQIP proved to reduce inaccuracy in preoperative assessment, but it cannot be used independently, which has already been proved by other authors.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that ACS NSQIP represents an accurate tool for preoperative assessment of elderly patients, especially if combined with cardiac biomarkers.

Co-morbidities, complications and causes of death among people with femoral neck fracture - a three-year follow-up study

Background

The poor outcome after a hip fracture is not fully understood.

The aim of the study was to describe the prevalence of co-morbidities, complications and causes of death and to investigate factors that are able to predict mortality in old people with femoral neck fracture.

Methods

Data was obtained from a randomized, controlled trial with a 3-year follow-up at Umeå University Hospital, Sweden, which included 199 consecutive patients with femoral neck fracture, aged ≥70 years. The participants were assessed during hospitalization and in their homes 4, 12 and 36 months after surgery. Medical records and death certificates were analysed.

Results

Multivariate analysis revealed that cancer, dependence in P-ADL (Personal Activities of Daily Living), cardiovascular disease, dementia at baseline or pulmonary emboli or cardiac failure during hospitalization were all independent predictors of 3-year mortality. Seventy-nine out of 199 participants (40 %) died within 3 years. Cardiovascular events (24 %), dementia (23 %), hip-fracture (19 %) and cancer (13 %) were the most common primary causes of death. In total, 136 participants suffered at least one urinary tract infection; 114 suffered 542 falls and 37 sustained 56 new fractures, including 13 hip fractures, during follow-up.

Conclusion

Old people with femoral neck fracture have multiple co-morbidities and suffer numerous complications. Thus randomized intervention studies should focus on prevention of complications that might be avoidable such as infections, heart diseases, falls and fractures.

An ICU Preanesthesia Evaluation Form Reduces Missing Preoperative Key Information

BACKGROUND

A comprehensive preoperative evaluation is critical for providing anesthetic care for patients from the intensive care unit (ICU). There has been no preoperative evaluation form specific for ICU patients that allows for a rapid and focused evaluation by anesthesia providers, including junior residents. In this study, a specific preoperative form was designed for ICU patients and evaluated to allow residents to perform the most relevant and important preoperative evaluations efficiently.

METHODS

The following steps were utilized for developing the preoperative evaluation form: 1) designed a new preoperative form specific for ICU patients; 2) had the form reviewed by attending physicians and residents, followed by multiple revisions; 3) conducted test releases and revisions; 4) released the final version and conducted a survey; 5) compared data collection from new ICU form with that from a previously used generic form. Each piece of information on the forms was assigned a score, and the score for the total missing information was determined. The score for each form was presented as mean ± standard deviation (SD), and compared by unpaired t test. A P value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Of 52 anesthesiologists (19 attending physicians, 33 residents) responding to the survey, 90% preferred the final new form; and 56% thought the new form would reduce perioperative risk for ICU patients. Forty percent were unsure whether the form would reduce perioperative risk. Over a three month period, we randomly collected 32 generic forms and 25 new forms. The average score for missing data was 23 ± 10 for the generic form and 8 ± 4 for the new form (P = 2.58E-11).

CONCLUSIONS

A preoperative evaluation form designed specifically for ICU patients is well accepted by anesthesia providers and helped to reduce missing key preoperative information. Such an approach is important for perioperative patient safety.