Analysis of outcomes of emergency general and gastrointestinal surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Few surgical studies have provided adjusted comparative postoperative outcome data among contemporary patients with and without COVID-19 infection and patients treated before the pandemic. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of performing emergency surgery in patients with concomitant COVID-19 infection.

METHODS

Patients who underwent emergency general and gastrointestinal surgery from March to June 2020, and from March to June 2019 in 25 Spanish hospitals were included in a retrospective study (COVID-CIR). The main outcome was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications and failure to rescue (mortality among patients who developed complications). Propensity score-matched comparisons were performed between patients who were positive and those who were negative for COVID-19; and between COVID-19-negative cohorts before and during the pandemic.

RESULTS

Some 5307 patients were included in the study (183 COVID-19-positive and 2132 COVID-19-negative during pandemic; 2992 treated before pandemic). During the pandemic, patients with COVID-19 infection had greater 30-day mortality than those without (12.6 versus 4.6 per cent), but this difference was not statistically significant after propensity score matching (odds ratio (OR) 1.58, 95 per cent c.i. 0.88 to 2.74). Those positive for COVID-19 had more complications (41.5 versus 23.9 per cent; OR 1.61, 1.11 to 2.33) and a higher likelihood of failure to rescue (30.3 versus 19.3 per cent; OR 1.10, 0.57 to 2.12). Patients who were negative for COVID-19 during the pandemic had similar rates of 30-day mortality (4.6 versus 3.2 per cent; OR 1.35, 0.98 to 1.86) and complications (23.9 versus 25.2 per cent; OR 0.89, 0.77 to 1.02), but a greater likelihood of failure to rescue (19.3 versus 12.9 per cent; OR 1.56, 95 per cent 1.10 to 2.19) than prepandemic controls.

CONCLUSION

Patients with COVID-19 infection undergoing emergency general and gastrointestinal surgery had worse postoperative outcomes than contemporary patients without COVID-19. COVID-19-negative patients operated on during the COVID-19 pandemic had a likelihood of greater failure-to-rescue than prepandemic controls.

Safety of Oral Bisphosphonates in Moderate-to-Severe Chronic Kidney Disease: A Binational Cohort Analysis

Bisphosphonates are the first-line treatment for preventing fractures in osteoporosis patients. However, their use is contraindicated or to be used with caution in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients, primarily because of a lack of information about their safety and effectiveness. We aimed to investigate the safety of oral bisphosphonates in patients with moderate to severe CKD, using primary-care electronic records from two cohorts, CPRD GOLD (1997-2016) and SIDIAP (2007-2015) in the UK and Catalonia, respectively. Both databases were linked to hospital records. SIDIAP was also linked to end-stage renal disease registry data. Patients with CKD stages 3b to 5, based on two or more estimated glomerular filtration rate measurements less than 45 mL/min/1.73 m² , aged 40 years or older were identified. New bisphosphonate users were propensity score-matched with up to five non-users to minimize confounding within this population. Our primary outcome was CKD stage worsening (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] decline or renal replacement therapy). Secondary outcomes were acute kidney injury, gastrointestinal bleeding/ulcers, and severe hypocalcemia. Hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated using Cox regression and Fine and Gray sub-HRs were calculated for competing risks. We matched 2447 bisphosphonate users with 8931 non-users from CPRD and 1399 users with 6547 non-users from SIDIAP. Bisphosphonate use was associated with greater risk of CKD progression in CPRD (sub-HR [95% CI]: 1.14 [1.04, 1.26]) and SIDIAP (sub-HR: 1.15 [1.04, 1.27]). No risk differences were found for acute kidney injury, gastrointestinal bleeding/ulcers, or hypocalcemia. Hence, we can conclude a modest (15%) increased risk of CKD progression was identified in association with bisphosphonate use. No other safety concerns were identified. Our findings should be considered before prescribing bisphosphonates to patients with moderate to severe CKD. © 2020 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

Oral Bisphosphonate Use and All-Cause Mortality in Patients With Moderate-Severe (Grade 3B-5D) Chronic Kidney Disease: A Population-Based Cohort Study

Oral bisphosphonates (oBPs) have been associated with reduced fractures and mortality. However, their risks and benefits are unclear in patients with moderate-severe CKD. This study examined the association between oBPs and all-cause mortality in G3B-5D CKD. This is a population-based cohort study including all subjects with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <45/mL/min/1.73 m² (G3B: eGFR <45/mL/min/1.73 m² G4: eGFR 15-29/mL/min/1.73 m² G5: eGFR <15/mL/min/1.73 m² G5D: hemodialysis) aged 40+ years from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) and the Catalan Information System for Research in Primary Care (SIDIAP). Previous and current users of other anti-osteoporosis drugs were excluded. oBP use was modeled as a time-varying exposure to avoid immortal time bias. Treatment episodes in oBP users were created by concatenating prescriptions until patients switched or stopped therapy or were censored or died. A washout period of 180 days was added to (date of last prescription +180 days). Propensity scores (PSs) were calculated using prespecified predictors of mortality including age, gender, baseline eGFR, socioeconomic status, comorbidities, previous fracture, co-medications, and number of hospital admissions in the previous year. Cox models were used for PS adjustment before and after PS trimming (the first and last quintiles). In the CPRD, of 19,351 oBP users and 210,954 non-oBP users, 5234 (27%) and 85,105 (40%) deaths were recorded over 45,690 and 915,867 person-years of follow-up, respectively. oBP users had 8% lower mortality risk compared to non-oBP users (hazard ratio [HR] 0.92; 95% CI, 0.89 to 0.95). Following PS trimming, this became nonsignificant (HR 0.98; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.04). In the SIDIAP, of 4146 oBP users and 86,127 non-oBP users, 1330 (32%) and 36,513 (42%) died, respectively. oBPs were not associated with mortality in PS adjustment and trimming (HR 1.04; 95% CI, 0.99 to 1.1 and HR 0.95; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.01). In this observational, patient-based cohort study, oBPs were not associated with increased mortality among patients with moderate-severe CKD. However, further studies are needed on other effects of oBPs in CKD patients. © 2020 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

LB3. Daptomycin Plus Fosfomycin vs. Daptomycin Monotherapy for Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia: A Multicenter, Randomized, Clinical Trial

Background

Daptomycin plus fosfomycin combination has demonstrated synergistic and bactericidal effect in animal models of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia (MRSAB), but there is lack of data in humans.

Method

A randomized (1:1), open-label, clinical trial involving adults with MRSAB was conducted at 18 medical centers in Spain. Patients were assigned to receive daptomycin, 10 mg/kg IV daily plus fosfomycin, 2 g IV/6 hour (combination therapy) or to receive daptomycin 10 mg/kg/24 h IV (monotherapy) during 10 up to 14 days for uncomplicated bacteremia and 28 up to 42 days for complicated bacteremia. The primary efficacy endpoints were: (a) treatment success at Test-of-Cure visit (ToC: 6 weeks after end of therapy) and (b) treatment success at 7 days (defined as alive at day 7 and clearance of bacteremia without relapse from 8 to 90 days after randomization), according with the proposed primary endpoints for use in clinical trials in bloodstream infections in adults.

Result

Between December 2013 and November 2017, 674 patients with MRSAB were evaluated and 155 patients were randomized: 74 received combination therapy and 81 monotherapy. In intention-to-treat analysis, (a) at ToC visit successful outcome was achieved in 40 of 74 patients (54,1%) who received combination therapy as compared with 34 of 81 patients (42%) who were given monotherapy (54.1% vs. 42.0%; absolute difference, 12.1%; 95% confidence interval, 0%-27.0%); (b) at 7 days after starting the therapy: a successful outcome was achieved in 69 of 74 patients who received combination therapy as compared with 62 out of 81 patients who received monotherapy (93.2% vs. 76.5%; absolute difference, 16.7%; 95% confidence interval, 5.4%–27.7%). Combination therapy was associated with lower rates of microbiologic failure than monotherapy at ToC visit (0 vs. 9 patients, P = 0.009). Combination therapy, as compared with daptomycin monotherapy, was associated with a nonsignificantly higher rate of adverse events due to study medication leading to treatment failure and discontinuation of therapy: 6/74 (8.1%) vs. 3/81 (3.7%) (P = 0.31).

Conclusion

The combination of daptomycin plus fosfomycin was more effective than daptomycin alone for treating MRSAB (NCT01898338).

Disclosures

All authors: No reported disclosures.