Oral vs Intravenous Antibiotics for Patients With Klebsiella pneumoniae Liver Abscess: A Randomized, Controlled Noninferiority Study.

BACKGROUND: Klebsiella pneumoniae liver abscess (KLA) is emerging worldwide due to hypermucoviscous strains with a propensity for metastatic infection. Treatment includes drainage and prolonged intravenous antibiotics. We aimed to determine whether oral antibiotics were noninferior to continued intravenous antibiotics for KLA. METHODS: This noninferiority, parallel group, randomized, clinical trial recruited hospitalized adults with liver abscess and K. pneumoniae isolated from blood or abscess fluid who had received ≤7 days of effective antibiotics at 3 sites in Singapore. Patients were randomized 1:1 to oral (ciprofloxacin) or intravenous (ceftriaxone) antibiotics for 28 days. If day 28 clinical response criteria were not met, further oral antibiotics were prescribed until clinical response was met. The primary endpoint was clinical cure assessed at week 12 and included a composite of absence of fever in the preceding week, C-reactive protein <20 mg/L, and reduction in abscess size. A noninferiority margin of 12% was used. RESULTS: Between November 2013 and October 2017, 152 patients (mean age, 58.7 years; 25.7% women) were recruited, following a median 5 days of effective intravenous antibiotics. A total of 106 (69.7%) underwent abscess drainage; 71/74 (95.9%) randomized to oral antibiotics met the primary endpoint compared with 72/78 (92.3%) randomized to intravenous antibiotics (risk difference, 3.6%; 2-sided 95% confidence interval, -4.9% to 12.8%). Effects were consistent in the per-protocol population. Nonfatal serious adverse events occurred in 12/72 (16.7%) in the oral group and 13/77 (16.9%) in the intravenous group. CONCLUSIONS: Oral antibiotics were noninferior to intravenous antibiotics for the early treatment of KLA. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT01723150.

Patient reported outcomes in elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

BACKGROUNDS/AIMS: Traditional outcome measures (e.g., length of hospital stay, morbidity, and mortality) are used to determine the quality of care, but these may not be most important to patients. It is unclear which outcomes matter to patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ELC). We aim to identify patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) which patients undergoing ELC valued most. METHODS: A 45-item questionnaire with Four-point Likert-type questions developed from prior literature review, prospectively administered to patients treated with ELC at a tertiary institution in Singapore. RESULTS: Seventy-five patients participated. Most essential factors were technical skill and experience level of a surgeon, long-term quality of life (QoL), patient involvement in decision-making, communication skill of a surgeon, cleanliness of the ward environment, and standards of nursing care. Least important factors were hospitalization leave duration, length of hospital stay, a family's opinion of the hospital, and scar cosmesis. Employed patients were more likely to find hospitalization leave duration (p<0.001) and procedure duration (p=0.042) important. Younger patients (p=0.048) and female gender (p=0.003) were more likely to perceive scar cosmesis as important. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing ELC value long-term QoL, surgeon technical skill and experience level, patient involvement in decision-making, surgeon communication skill, cleanliness of the ward environment, and nursing care standards. Day-case surgery, medical leave, family opinion of hospital, and scar cosmesis were least important. Understanding what patients value will help guide patient-centric healthcare delivery.

Predicting morbidity of liver resection.

PURPOSE: Multiple models have attempted to predict morbidity of liver resection (LR). This study aims to determine the efficacy of American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) surgical risk calculator and the Physiological and Operative Severity Score in the enUmeration of Mortality and Morbidity (POSSUM) in predicting post-operative morbidity in patients who underwent LR. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients who underwent elective LR. Morbidity risk was calculated with the ACS-NSQIP surgical risk calculator and POSSUM equation. Two models were then constructed for both ACS-NSQIP and POSSUM-(1) the original risk probabilities from each scoring system and (2) a model derived from logistic regression of variables. Discrimination, calibration, and overall performance for ACS-NSQIP and POSSUM were compared. Sub-group analysis was performed for both primary and secondary liver malignancies. RESULTS: Two hundred forty-five patients underwent LR. Two hundred twenty-three (91%) had malignant liver pathologies. The post-operative morbidity, 90-day mortality, and 30-day mortality rate were 38.3%, 3.7%, and 2.4% respectively. ACS-NSQIP showed superior discriminative ability, calibration, and performance to POSSUM (p = 0.03). Hosmer-Lemeshow plot demonstrated better fit of the ACS-NSQIP model than POSSUM in predicting morbidity. CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing LR, the ACS-NSQIP surgical risk calculator was superior to POSSUM in predicting morbidity risk.

Validity of the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer and Hong Kong Liver Cancer staging systems for hepatocellular carcinoma in Singapore.

BACKGROUND: Staging is vital in guiding therapeutic approach in patients diagnosed with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Our study's goal is to compare paradigms in the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) and Hong Kong Liver Cancer (HKLC) systems, and evaluate the use of both in a local context, comparing their prognostic ability and therapeutic efficacy in the management of HCC. METHODS: Seven hundred and sixty-six patients diagnosed between 2010 and 2015 were identified and staged according to BCLC and HKLC. Both system's performances were compared using Akaike information criterion (AIC), bootstrap concordance-index (c-index), and through Kaplan-Meier survival curves of patients who came under HKLC stages 1, 2, and 3 and the individual BCLC stages. Independent prognostic factors of survival were identified using univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: According to AIC and c-index, HKLC (AIC = 5,711, c-index = 0.74) has equivalent prognosticating value as BCLC (AIC = 5,764, c-index = 0.72). Through Kaplan-Meier curves, we determined that more aggressive treatments resulted in better outcomes. Particularly for patients under BCLC stage C, patients who followed the HKLC system's recommended treatments performed markedly better. CONCLUSIONS: In our patient population, the HKLC system is comparable to the BCLC system in prognosticating patients, but is suggested to have better performance in guiding treatment.

Does diabetes mellitus affect presentation, stage and survival in operable pancreatic cancer?

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study is to investigate differences in clinical presentation, disease stage and survival of operable pancreatic cancer patients with new onset DM compared to long standing diabetes mellitus (DM) and non diabetics. METHODS: A prospectively maintained pancreatic cancer surgery database of a tertiary care teaching hospital from January 2006 to August 2012 was reviewed. Only patients with a histological diagnosis of pancreatic carcinoma (PC) were included in final analysis. DM was defined as HbA1c >6.5% or any patient on anti-diabetic treatment regardless of HbA1c value. New onset DM was defined when diagnosed within two preceding years of surgery. Patients were stratified into two groups: DM and non DM. Among the DM patients, patients with new onset DM were further stratified and studied separately. Staging of PC was performed according to the 6(th) edition of AJCC. Survival of patients with PC was determined by reviewing medical records. Patients and their families were contacted if there was no existing follow-up. RESULTS: Eighty-six patients (n=55, 63.9% male) with a mean age of 62 years (range, 29-85 years) underwent pancreatic cancer surgery during the study period. Of the 86 patients, 30 (34%) had DM of which eight patients (9% overall) had new onset DM. DM patients tended to be older compared to non DM patients (67.8 vs. 58.5 years, P=0.0005). The majority of non DM patients were symptomatic (98.2%), and there was a tendency for DM group patients to be asymptomatic at presentation (13.3% vs. 1.8%, P=0.05). Abdominal pain was less common in DM patients compared to non DM patients (30% vs. 53.6%, P=0.04). The median duration of new onset DM prior to diagnosis of PC was 2 months (range, 1-23 months). There was a tendency for DM patients to present at an early stage (stage I and stage II) (P=0.08). There was no difference in survival (P=0.17) for new onset DM compared to long standing DM and non DM patients. CONCLUSIONS: DM patients tend to be older and are less likely to present with abdominal pain. Asymptomatic presentation and early stage disease tends to occur in DM patients. A larger sample size is required to determine if survival of new onset DM patients differs from long standing and non DM patients.

Analysis of actual healthcare costs of early versus interval cholecystectomy in acute cholecystitis.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare cost modeling have favored early (ELC) over interval laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ILC) for acute cholecystitis (AC). However, actual costs of treatment have never been studied. The aim of the present study was to compare actual hospital costs involved in ELC and ILC in patients with AC. METHODS: Retrospective study of patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy for AC was conducted. Demographic, clinical, operative data and costs were extracted and analyzed. RESULTS: Between 2011 and 2013, 201 had laparoscopic surgery for AC at Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore. One hundred and thirty-four (67%) patients underwent ELC (≤7 days of presentation, within index admission). Median total length of stay (LOS) was 4.6 and 6.8 days for ELC and ILC groups, respectively (P = 0.006). Patients who had ELC also had significantly lesser total number of admissions (P < 0.001). The median (IQR) total inpatient costs were €4.4 × 10(3) (3.6-5.6) and €5.5 × 10(3) (4.0-7.5) for ELC and ILC patients, respectively (P < 0.007). Costs associated with investigations were significantly higher in the ILC group (P = 0.039), of which serological costs made most difference (P < 0.005). The ward costs were also significantly higher in the ILC group. CONCLUSION: The cost differences reflect the significantly increased total LOS, and repeat presentations associated with ILC. Therefore, ELC should be the preferred management strategy for AC.