ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Acute renal failure after cardiac surgery is known to be associated with significant short-term morbidity and mortality. There have as yet been no major reports on long-term quality of life (QOL). This study assessed the impact of acute kidney injury (AKI) and renal replacement therapy (RRT) on long-term survival and QOL after cardiac surgery. The need for long-term RRT is also assessed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients who underwent cardiac surgery between 2005 and 2011 (n = 6087) and developed AKI (RIFLE criteria, n = 570) were included. They were propensity-matched 1:1 to patients without renal impairment (control). Data were prospectively collected, and health-related QOL questionnaire was sent to patients who were alive at least 1-year postoperatively at the time of the study. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the preoperative characteristics between the two groups (age, gender, left ventricular ejection fraction, procedure, urgency, logistic Euroscore), respectively. Median follow-up was 52 months. Survival data were available in all patients. Questionnaires were returned in 64% of eligible patients. Long-term survival was significantly lower, and QOL, in particular the physical aspect, was significantly worse for the AKI group as compared to non-AKI group (38.8 vs. 44.2, P = 0.002), especially so in patients who required RRT. In alive respondents, despite an 18% (66/359) incidence of ongoing renal follow-up, the need for late RRT was only in 1.1% (4/359). CONCLUSION: AKI and especially the need for RRT following cardiac surgery are associated with increased long-term mortality as well as worse quality of life in a propensity-matched control group.
Subject(s)
Acute Kidney Injury/psychology , Cardiac Surgical Procedures/adverse effects , Quality of Life , Acute Kidney Injury/mortality , Acute Kidney Injury/therapy , Aged , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Renal Replacement Therapy , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Guidelines have been issued for the management of lung cancer patients in the United Kingdom. However, compliance with these national guidelines varies in different thoracic units in the country. We set out to evaluate our thoracic surgery practice and compliance with the national guidelines. METHODS: An initial audit in 2011 showed deficiencies in practice, thus another audit was conducted to check for improvements in guideline compliance. A retrospective study was carried out over a 12-month period from January 2013 to January 2014 and included all patients who underwent radical surgical resection for lung cancer. Data were collected from computerized records. RESULTS: Sixty-eight patients had radical surgery for lung cancer between January 2013 and January 2014. Four patients were excluded from the analysis due to incomplete records. Our results showed improvements in our practice compared to our initial audit. More patients underwent surgery within 4 weeks of computed tomography and positron-emission tomography scanning. An improvement was noticed in carbon monoxide transfer factor measurements. Areas for improvement include measurement of carbon monoxide transfer factor in all patients, a cardiology referral in patients at risk of cardiac complications, and the use of a global risk stratification model such as Thoracoscore. CONCLUSION: Guideline-directed service delivery provision for lung cancer patients leads to improved outcomes. Our results show improvement in our practice compared to our initial audit. We aim to liaise with other thoracic surgery units to get feedback about their practice and any audits regarding adherence to the British Thoracic Society and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines.
