Inadvertent Splenectomy During Resection for Colorectal Cancer Does Not Increase Long-term Mortality in a Propensity Score Model: A Nationwide Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies suggest that long-term mortality is increased in patients who undergo splenectomy during surgery for colorectal cancer. The reason for this association remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the association between inadvertent splenectomy attributed to iatrogenic lesion to the spleen during colorectal cancer resections and long-term mortality in a national cohort of unselected patients. DESIGN: This was a retrospective, nationwide cohort study. SETTINGS: Data were collected from the database of the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group and merged with data from the National Patient Registry and the National Pathology Databank. PATIENTS: Danish patients with colorectal cancer undergoing curatively intended resection between 2001 and 2011 were included in the study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was long-term mortality for patients surviving 30 days after surgery. Secondary outcomes were 30-day mortality and risk factors for inadvertent splenectomy. Multivariable and propensity-score matched Cox regression analyses were used to adjust for potential confounding. RESULTS: In total, 23,727 patients were included, of which 277 (1.2%) underwent inadvertent splenectomy. There was no association between inadvertent splenectomy and long-term mortality (adjusted HR = 1.15 (95% CI, 0.95-1.40); p = 0.16) in the propensity score-matched model, whereas 30-day mortality was significantly increased (adjusted HR = 2.31 (95% CI, 1.71-3.11); p < 0.001). Inadvertent splenectomy was most often seen during left hemicolectomy (left hemicolectomy vs right hemicolectomy: OR = 24.76 (95% CI, 15.30-40.06); p < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its retrospective study design and lack of detailed information on postoperative complications. CONCLUSIONS: Inadvertent splenectomy during resection for colorectal cancer does not seem to increase long-term mortality. The previously reported reduced overall survival after inadvertent splenectomy may be explained by excess mortality in the immediate postoperative period.

Anaesthesia care for emergency endoscopy for peptic ulcer bleeding. A nationwide population-based cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Currently, no standard approach exists to the level of monitoring or presence of staff with anaesthetic expertise required during emergency esophago-gastro-duodenoscopy (EGD) for peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB). We assess the association between anaesthesia care and mortality. We further describe the prevalence and inter-hospital variation of anaesthesia care in Denmark and identify clinical predictors for choosing anaesthesia care. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This population-based cohort study included all emergency EGDs for PUB in adults during 2012-2013. About 90-day all-cause mortality after EGD was estimated by crude and adjusted logistic regression. Clinical predictors of anaesthesia care were identified in another logistic regression model. RESULTS: Some 3.056 EGDs performed at 21 hospitals were included; 2074 (68%) received anaesthesia care and 982 (32%) were managed under supervison of the endoscopist. Some 16.7% of the patients undergoing EGD with anaesthesia care died within 90 days after the procedure, compared to 9.8% of the patients who had no anaesthesia care, adjusted OR = 1.51 (95% CI = 1.25-1.83). Comparing the two hospitals with the most frequent (98.6% of al EGDs) and least frequent (6.9%) use of anaesthesia care, mortality was 13.7% and 11.7%, respectively, adjusted OR = 1.22 (95% CI = 0.55-2.71). The prevalence of anaesthesia care varied between the hospitals, median = 78.9% (range 6.9-98.6%). Predictors of choosing anaesthesia care were shock at admission, high ASA score, and no pre-existing comorbidity. CONCLUSIONS: Use of anaesthesia care for emergency EGD was associated with increased mortality, most likely because of confounding by indication. The use of anaesthesia care varied greatly between hospitals, but was unrelated to mortality at hospital level.

Improving quality of care in peptic ulcer bleeding: nationwide cohort study of 13,498 consecutive patients in the Danish Clinical Register of Emergency Surgery.

OBJECTIVES: The treatment of peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB) is complex, and mortality remains high. We present results from a nationwide initiative to monitor and improve the quality of care (QOC) in PUB. METHODS: All Danish hospitals treating PUB patients between 2004 and 2011 prospectively registered demographic, clinical, and prognostic data. QOC was evaluated using eight process and outcome indicators, including time to initial endoscopy, hemostasis obtainment, proportion undergoing surgery, rebleeding risks, and 30-day mortality. RESULTS: A total of 13,498 PUB patients (median age 74 years) were included, of which one-quarter were in-hospital bleeders. Preadmission use of anticoagulants, multiple coexisting diseases, and the American Society of Anesthesiologists scores increased between 2004 and 2011. Considerable improvements were observed for most QOC indicators over time. Endoscopic treatment was successful with primary hemostasis achieved in more patients (94% in 2010-2011 vs. 89% in 2004-2006, relative risk (RR) 1.06 (95% confidence intervals 1.04-1.08)), endoscopy delay for hemodynamically unstable patients decreased during this period (43% vs. 34% had endoscopy within 6 h, RR 1.33 (1.10-1.61)), and fewer patients underwent open surgery (4% vs. 6%, RR 0.72 (0.59-0.87)). After controlling for time changes in prognostic factors, rebleeding rates improved (13% vs. 18%, adjusted RR 0.77 (0.66-0.91)). Crude 30-day mortality was unchanged (11% vs. 11%), whereas adjusted mortality decreased nonsignificantly over time (adjusted RR 0.89 (0.78-1.00)). CONCLUSIONS: QOC in PUB has improved substantially in Denmark, but the 30-day mortality remains high. Future initiatives to improve outcomes may include earlier endoscopy, having fully trained endoscopists on call, and increased focus on managing coexisting disease.