ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: In 2011, the Royal College of Surgeons published Emergency Surgery: Standards for Unscheduled Care in response to variable clinical outcomes for emergency surgery. The purpose of this study was to examine whether different treatment modalities would alter survival. METHODS: All patients who underwent emergency laparotomy between April 2011 and December 2012 at Warwick Hospital (Warwick, UK) were included retrospectively. Information relating to their demographics; preoperative score; primary pathology; timing of surgery; intraoperative details; and postoperative outcome, including 30-day mortality, were collated for statistical analysis. RESULTS: In total, 91 patients underwent 97 operations. The median age was 64 years (range 50-90, male:female 1:2). Sixty-five percent of cases were obstruction and perforation, and 66% of all operations were performed during office hours. The unadjusted 30-day mortality was 15.4%. Compared with nonsurvivors, survivors had a significantly higher Portsmouth-Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the enUmeration of Mortality and Morbidity score (P < 0.001), prolonged duration of hypotension and use of inotropes (P = 0.013), higher volume of colloid use (P = 0.04), and lower core body temperature (P < 0.05). Grades of surgeons did not influence mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The 30-day mortality rate is comparable to the national standard. Further studies are warranted to determine whether trauma management modalities may be adopted to target high-risk patients who exhibit the lethal triad of hypotension, coagulopathy, and hypothermia.
Subject(s)
Emergencies , Intestinal Obstruction/surgery , Intestinal Perforation/surgery , Laparotomy , Mortality , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Body Temperature , Cardiotonic Agents/therapeutic use , Colectomy , Colloids/therapeutic use , Female , Fluid Therapy/statistics & numerical data , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/surgery , Humans , Hypotension/epidemiology , Intestinal Obstruction/epidemiology , Intestinal Perforation/epidemiology , Intestine, Small/surgery , Male , Middle Aged , Postoperative Care , Preoperative Care , Resuscitation , Retrospective Studies , Severity of Illness Index , Tissue Adhesions/surgery , United KingdomABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Conscious sedation during colonoscopy minimizes discomfort, improves polyp detection rates, and reduces technical failure, but carries medication-related risks and requires dedicated and costly recovery services. Sedation-free procedures may offer a safer alternative. We aimed to compare this group with those receiving sedation to determine differences in patient characteristics, cecal intubation rates, polyp detection rates, discomfort levels and safety in patients for whom anesthesia is high risk. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Prospectively collected data from all colonoscopies performed over a 1-year period at three district general hospitals were analyzed. Conscious sedation was offered to all patients and outcomes in those who refused were compared with outcomes in those who received sedation. RESULTS: One hundred ninety-four of 1694 (11â%) colonoscopies were performed without sedation (61â% male, Pâ<â0.001) but rates varied between hospitals. Of these, 55â% were American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade 3 or more and 5â% experienced moderate discomfort, compared to 40â% (Pâ<â0.0001) and 10â% (Pâ=â0.023) respectively of those receiving sedation. They were more likely to have indications of rectal bleeding or frequency of stool and less likely to have anaemia or macroscopic inflammation at colonoscopy. Complications, completion. and polyp detection rates were similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Colonoscopy without sedation can be completed successfully in select patients without compromising comfort or polyp detection rates and is safe in those for whom anesthesia is high risk. It is therefore a safe alternative for clinicians concerned about sedation, but the findings suggest that hospital, rather than patient factors, may prevent its uptake.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Pregnancy was traditionally considered a contraindication to cholecystectomy but is now becoming the favoured option for gallstone-related disease (GRD) during pregnancy. METHODS: To assess if cholecystectomy during pregnancy increases the risk of preterm labour, fetal mortality and maternal mortality. PubMed and MEDLINE databases for the period from January 1966 through December 2013. Studies were both conservative and surgical intervention was utilised in the management of GRD were included. The results of the included studies were pooled using meta-analysis techniques. RESULTS: Surgical intervention for GRD in pregnancy does not increase the risk of preterm labour, fetal mortality or maternal mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Cholecystectomy during pregnancy for GRD is associated with low complications for the fetus and mother and should be considered in all suitable patients.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Circulating endothelial cells (CECs), endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs), Willebrand factor (vWf), soluble E-selectin, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and angiogenin are of interest in cancer vascular biology. However, few studies have looked at more than one in combination. We set out to determine which would be best in predicting the Dukes' and American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) scores in colorectal cancer patients. METHODS: We recruited 154 patients with colorectal cancer, 29 healthy controls and 26 patients with benign bowel disease. CD34(+) /CD45(-) /CD146(+) CECs and CD34(+) /CD45(-) /CD309[KDR](+) EPCs were measured by flow cytometry, plasma markers by ELISA. RESULTS: All research indices were raised in colorectal cancer (P < 0·05) compared to control groups. Although CECs (P < 0·05), EPCs (P < 0·01) and angiogenin (P < 0·01) increased stepwise across the four Dukes' stages and four AJCC stages, only angiogenin remained significant in multiple regression analysis (P = 0·003 for Dukes, P = 0·01 for AJCC). Angiogenin levels were higher in Dukes' stages C and D compared to stage A, and AJCC stages 4-6 and 7-10 compared to stage 1 (all P < 0·05). Adding a second research marker to angiogenin did not markedly improve this relationship. CONCLUSION: Although we found disturbances in endotheliod cells and plasma markers of the endothelium and growth factors, only angiogenin levels were independently associated with progression of the Dukes' stage and AJCC stage, with the association with Duke's stage being stronger. We suggest that angiogenin is a potential biomarker in risk stratification for colorectal cancer, and may aid clinical decision making.