One-year outcomes following operative or non-operative management of adhesional small bowel obstruction.

BACKGROUND: A trial of initial non-operative management is recommended in stable patients with adhesional small bowel obstruction. However, recent retrospective studies have suggested that early operative management may be of benefit in reducing subsequent recurrences. This study aimed to compare recurrence rates and survival in patients with adhesional small bowel obstruction treated operatively or non-operatively. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study conducted at six acute hospitals in Denmark, including consecutive patients admitted with adhesional small bowel obstruction over a 4-month interval. Patients were stratified into two groups according to their treatment (operative versus non-operative) and followed up for 1 year after their index admission. Primary outcomes were recurrence of small bowel obstruction and overall survival within 1 year of index admission. RESULTS: A total of 201 patients were included, 118 (58.7 per cent) of whom were treated operatively during their index admission. Patients undergoing operative treatment had significantly better 1-year recurrence-free survival compared with patients managed non-operatively (operative 92.5 per cent versus non-operative 66.6 per cent, P <0.001). However, when the length of index admission was taken into account, patients treated non-operatively spent significantly less time admitted to hospital in the first year (median 3 days non-operative versus 6 days operative, P <0.001). On multivariable analysis, operative treatment was associated with decreased risks of recurrence (HR 0.22 (95 per cent c.i. 0.10-0.48), P <0.001) but an increased all-cause mortality rate (HR 2.48 (95 per cent c.i. 1.13-5.46), P = 0.024). CONCLUSION: Operative treatment of adhesional small bowel obstruction is associated with reduced risks of recurrence but increased risk of death in the first year after admission. REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04750811 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).prior (registration date: 11 February 2021).

Inter-hospital variation in management of patients with small bowel obstruction in Denmark.

INTRODUCTION: Inter-hospital variation in the management of small bowel obstruction (SBO) has been described in other countries, but the extent to which similar variations exist in Denmark remains unknown. This study aimed to compare the management of SBO between hospitals in Denmark and identify potential areas for improvement METHODS. This was a multicentre prospective study performed at six emergency hospitals. Patients aged ≥ 18 years with a diagnosis of SBO were eligible for inclusion. The primary study endpoints were the proportion of patients undergoing operative versus non-operative management, laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery and the success rate of non-operative management. RESULTS: A total of 316 patients were included. No differences were noted in diagnostic pathways or operative versus non-operative management. However, variations were noted in compliance with peri-operative care bundles, ranging from 63.2% to 95.8%. The surgical approach also varied, with the use of laparoscopic surgery ranging from 20.7% to 71.0% (p less-than 0.001). Variations were also noted in duration of surgery (63-124 minutes, p less-than 0.001), time to re-introduction of normal diet and length of hospital stay (3-8.5 days, p less-than 0.001). No differences were observed in 30-day or 90-day mortality rates. CONCLUSION: The management of SBO in Denmark is relatively standardised. Future efforts should focus on improving adherence to multidisciplinary peri-operative protocols, optimising patient selection for laparoscopic surgery and standardising nutritional therapy. FUNDING: None. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04750811.

[Ventricular ischaemia and perforation in the gastric wall caused by a bariatric intragastric balloon].

This is a case report about a 37-year-old woman, who was admitted to hospital with a bariatric intragastric balloon (IGB)-related gastric perforation, probably due to ischaemia in the gastric wall. IGB is a less invasive treatment than gastric bypass and gastric sleeve procedures, however, treatment is not without risks. Currently, there are no national guidelines on treatment with IGB. We recommend, that the future treatment with IGB is relocated to bariatric centres with the needed expertise in order to optimise treatment and follow-up for bariatric patients with IGB.