Operative and non-operative management for intestinal emergencies: findings from a single-centre retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with an intestinal emergency who do not have surgery are poorly characterised. This study used electronic healthcare records to provide a rapid insight into the number of patients admitted with an intestinal emergency and compare short-term outcomes for non-operative and operative management. METHODS: A single-centre retrospective cohort study was conducted at a tertiary NHS hospital (from 1 December 2013 to 31 January 2020). Patients were identified using diagnosis codes for intestinal emergencies, based on the inclusion criteria for the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit. Relevant data were extracted from electronic healthcare records (n=3,997). RESULTS: Nearly half of patients admitted with an intestinal emergency received nonoperative management (43.7%). Of those who underwent surgery, 63.7% were started laparoscopically. The non-operative group had a shorter hospital stay (median: 5.4 days vs 8.2 days [started laparoscopically] or 16.8 days [started open]) and fewer unintended intensive care admissions than the surgical group (2.4% vs 8.7% [started laparoscopically] 21.1% [started open]). However, 30-day mortality for non-operative treatment was double that for surgery (22.4% vs 10.1%). The 30-day mortality rate was found to be even higher for non-operative management (50.3%) compared with surgery (19.5%) in a sub-analysis of patients with admission National Early Warning Score ≥4 (n=683). CONCLUSION: The proportion of patients with intestinal emergencies who do not have surgery is greater than expected, and it appears that many respond well to non-operative treatment. However, 30-day mortality for non-operative management was high, and the low number of admissions to intensive care suggests that major invasive treatment was not appropriate for most in this group.

Routine ultrasound for suspected appendicitis in children: a single-centre retrospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Appendicitis continues to be a common surgical emergency in children, but its diagnosis remains challenging. Use of diagnostic imaging to confirm appendicitis has gained popularity in some countries because it is associated with lower negative appendicectomy rates. This study reports our centre's experience of adopting routine ultrasound for the investigation of suspected appendicitis in children. METHODS: A single-centre retrospective cohort study was performed investigating all children aged 5-16 years admitted under surgeons with suspected appendicitis, in January-December 2019. Primary outcomes were the rate of ultrasound use, its accuracy in diagnosing/excluding appendicitis and negative appendicectomy rate. Other outcomes were treatment received, length of stay and complications. RESULTS: The majority of the 193 children with suspected appendicitis underwent a diagnostic ultrasound (87.5%). Ultrasound was highly sensitive (0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81-0.96) and specific (1.0, 95% CI 0.96-1.0) for appendicitis in this study. Negative appendicectomy rate was extremely low (1.4%). Laparoscopic appendicectomy was the preferred management (75/86), with one case started open and no conversions to open. A minority of cases of simple appendicitis (10/86) were treated primarily with antibiotics. Rates of complex appendicitis and postoperative complications were similar to other studies. CONCLUSION: Ultrasound can be highly sensitive and specific for appendicitis. Its routine use to confirm appendicitis prior to surgery is associated with a low negative appendicectomy rate. This is a major change in practice for a general surgical unit in the United Kingdom.

Performance of ultrasound in the diagnosis of cholecystitis: not so (ultra)sound?

INTRODUCTION: Ultrasound has long been the radiological investigation of choice for right upper quadrant pain in the detection of gallstones and cholecystitis. However, previously reported sensitivity, specificity and other diagnostic metrics have varied widely and the underlying patient numbers have been small. We present robust and exhaustive diagnostic metrics based on a large series of 795 patients. METHODS: All laparoscopic cholecystectomies at Portsmouth Hospitals University were prospectively logged between 2017 and 2020. Ultrasound findings, Nassar operative difficulty and histopathological findings were all collected in addition to patient biometrics. RESULTS: In our large patient series, the sensitivity of ultrasound for cholecystitis was lower than previously reported at 75.7% for acute cholecystitis, 34.6% for chronic cholecystitis and 42.7% overall. Moreover, we show that sensitivity degrades with the time between ultrasound and cholecystectomy, falling below 50% at 140 days. Finally, we show that ultrasound strongly predicts the Nassar difficulty grade of cholecystectomy and that its ability to do so is greatest when the interval between ultrasound and cholecystectomy is less than 27 days. CONCLUSIONS: We present robust diagnostic metrics for ultrasound in the diagnosis of cholecystitis. These should caution the clinician that ultrasound may miss a quarter of cases of acute cholecystitis and over half of all cases of cholecystitis. Conversely, the finding of a thickened gallbladder wall on ultrasound can predict a 'difficult cholecystectomy' and highlight the need for appropriate expertise and resources. Both this prediction and the diagnostic sensitivity are best if the ultrasound is done less than 27 days before cholecystectomy.

The impact of laparoscopy on emergency surgery for adhesional small bowel obstruction: prospective single centre cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic adhesiolysis is increasingly being used to treat adhesional small bowel obstruction (ASBO) as it has been associated with reduced postoperative length of stay (LOS) and faster recovery. However, concerns regarding limited working space, iatrogenic bowel injury and failure to relieve the obstruction have limited its uptake. This study reports our centre's experience of adopting laparoscopy as the standard operative approach. METHODS: A single-centre prospective cohort study was performed incorporating local data from the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit Database; January 2015 to December 2019. All patients undergoing surgery for ASBO were included. Patient demographic, operative and inhospital outcomes data were compared between different surgical approaches. Linear regression analysis was performed for LOS. RESULTS: A total of 299 cases were identified. Overall, 76.3% of cases were started laparoscopically and 52.2% were completed successfully. Patients treated laparoscopically had lower Portsmouth - Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the enuMeration of Mortality and morbidity (P-POSSUM) predicted mortality (median 2.1 (interquartile range (IQR) 1.3-5.0) vs 5.7 (IQR 2.0-12.4), p=<0.001) and shorter postoperative LOS compared with open (median 4.2 days (IQR 2.5-8.2) vs 11.3 days (IQR 7.3-16.6), p=0.000). Inhospital mortality was lower in the laparoscopic group (2 vs 7 deaths, p=<0.001). In regression analysis, laparoscopic surgery was found to have the strongest association with postoperative LOS (ß -8.51 (-13.87 to -3.16) p=0.002) compared with open surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopy is a safe and feasible approach for adhesiolysis in the majority of patients with ASBO. It is associated with reduced LOS with no impact on complications or mortality.

Impact of laparoscopic approach in emergency major abdominal surgery: single-centre analysis of 748 consecutive cases.

Background Acute abdominal pathology requiring emergency laparotomy is a common surgical presentation. Despite its widespread implementation in other surgical procedures, laparoscopy, rather than laparotomy, is sparingly used in major emergency surgery. This study reports outcomes and impact of rising use of laparoscopy for a single high-volume district general hospital. Methods Data were retrieved from the prospective National Emergency Laparotomy Audit database for a 30-month period. Patient, procedural, and in-hospital outcome data were collated. Temporal trends were assessed and regression analysis conducted for clinical outcomes. Results A total of 748 consecutive cases were recorded. There was an increasing use of laparoscopy over the study period, with 49% of cases attempted laparoscopically in the final six-month interval. Patients treated laparoscopically were at reduced risk of mortality (odds ratio 0.114, 95% confidence interval 0.024 to 0.550) and experienced reduced length of intensive care stay (regression coefficient ­1.571, 95% confidence interval ­2.625 to ­0.517) in multivariate adjusted analysis. Conclusions Laparoscopy is safe and feasible in a large proportion of cases. It is associated with improved outcomes versus laparotomy.