Anna Lasek

The efficacy of risk scores for predicting abdominal wound dehiscence: a case-controlled validation study

BackgroundThe medical literature includes two risk scores predicting the occurrence of abdominal wound dehiscence. These risk indices were validated by the authors on the populations studied. However, whether these scoring systems can accurately predict, abdominal wound dehiscence in other populations remains unclear.MethodsA retrospective analysis was performed using the medical records of patients treated at a tertiary-care teaching hospital between 2008 and 2011. Patients that underwent laparotomy procedures complicated by the development of postoperative abdominal wound dehiscence were included into the study. For each of the cases, three controls were selected.ResultsAmong the 1,879 patients undergoing intra-abdominal, 56 patients developed wound dehiscence and 168 patients included in the control group. Calculation of risk scores for all patients, revealed significantly higher scores in the abdominal wound dehiscence group (p < 0.001). The median score was 24 (range: 3–46) and 4.95 (range: 2.2-7.8) vs.10 (range:-3-45) and 3.1 (range:0.4-6.9), for the Veterans Affairs Medical Center (VAMC) and Rotterdam abdominal wound dehiscence risk score in the dehiscence and control groups, respectively. The area under the curve, on the ROC plot, was 0.84 and 0.76; this confirmed a good and moderate predictive value for the risk scores. The fit of the model was good in both cases, as shown by the Hosmer and Lemeshow test.ConclusionsBoth the VAMC and Rotterdam scores can be used for the prediction of abdominal wound dehiscence. However, the VAMC prognostic score had better calibration and discriminative power when applied to the population in this study and taking into consideration our method of control selection.

Risk Factors for Wound Dehiscence after Laparotomy – Clinical Control Trial

UNLABELLED Described in the literature dehiscence rate in the adult population is 0.3-3.5%, and in the elderly group as much as 10%. In about 20-45% evisceration becomes a significant risk factor of death in the perioperative period. The aim of the study was to identify the main risk factors for abdominal wound dehiscence in the adult population. MATERIAL AND METHODS The study included patients treated in the 3rd Department of General Surgery, Jagiellonian University Collegium Medicum in Cracow in the period from January 2008 to December 2011, in which at that time laparotomy was performed and was complicated by wound dehiscence in the postoperative period. For each person in a research group, 3-4 control patient were selected. Selection criteria were corresponding age (± 2-3 years), gender, underlying disease and type of surgery performed. RESULTS In 56 patients (2.9%) dehiscence occurred in the postoperative period with 25% mortality. The group consisted of 37 men and 19 women with the mean age of 66.8 ± 12.6 years. Univariate analysis showed that chronic steroids use, surgical site infection, anastomotic dehiscence/fistula in the postoperative period and damage to the gastrointestinal tract are statistically significant risk factors for dehiscence. Two first of these factors occurred to be independent risk factors in the multivariate analysis. In addition, due to the selection criteria, a group of risk factors should also include male gender, emergency operation, midline laparotomy, colorectal syrgery and elderly age (> 65 years). Logistic regression analysis did not show that a particular surgeon, time of surgery or a particular month (including holiday months) were statistically significant risk factor for dehiscence. CONCLUSIONS Wound dehiscence is a serious complication with relatively small incidence but also high mortality. Preoperative identification of risk factors allows for a more informed consent before patients treatment and to take measures to prevent or minimize the consequences of complication associated with it.

The Use of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Protocol in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Cancer – A Comparative Analysis of Patients Aged above 80 and below 55

UNLABELLED Age is one of the principal risk factors for colorectal adenocarcinoma. To date, older patients were believed to achieve worse treatment results in comparison with younger patients due to reduced vital capacity. However, papers have emerged in recent years which confirm that the combination of laparoscopy and postoperative care based on the ERAS protocol improves treatment results and may be particularly beneficial also for elderly patients. The aim of the study was to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer in combination with the ERAS protocol in patients aged above 80 and below 55. MATERIAL AND METHODS The analysis included patients aged above 80 and below 55 undergoing elective laparoscopic colorectal resection for cancer at the 2nd Department of General Surgery of the Jagiellonian University. They were divided into two groups according to their age: ≥ 80 years of age (group1) and ≤ 55 years of age (group 2). Both groups were compared with regard to the outcome of surgery: length hospital stay, complications, hospital readmissions, degree of compliance with the ERAS protocol, and recovery parameters (tolerance of oral nutrition, mobilisation, need for opioids, restored gastrointestinal function). RESULTS Group 1 comprised 34 patients and group 2, 43 patients. No differences were found between both groups in terms of gender, BMI, tumour progression or surgical parameters. Older patients typically had higher ASA scores. No statistically significant differences were found with regard to the length hospital stay following surgery (5.4 vs 7 days, p=0.446481), the occurrence of complications (23.5% vs 37.2%, p=0.14579) or hospital readmissions (2.9% vs 2.4%). The degree of compliance with the ERAS protocol in group 1 and 2 was 85.2% and 83.0%, respectively (p=0.482558). Additionally, recovery parameters such as tolerance of oral nutrition (82.4% vs 72.1%, p=0.28628) and mobilisation (94.1% vs 83.7%, p=0.14510) within 24 hours of surgery did not differ among the groups. However, a smaller proportion of older patients required opioids in comparison with younger patients (26.5% vs 55.8%, p=0.00891). CONCLUSIONS Similar levels of compliance with the ERAS protocol may be achieved among patients aged ≥ 80 and younger patients. When laparoscopy is combined with the ERAS protocol, age does not seem to be a significant factor that could account for worse outcomes. Therefore, older patients should not be excluded from perioperative care based on ERAS principles.

Laparoscopic approach to splenic aneurysms

Background Splenic artery aneurysm is a rare disease with possibly mortal complications. For years, the main method of treatment was excision of aneurysm with spleen. In recent years, several methods have been developed in order to salvage the spleen such endovascular techniques and aneurysmectomy. Objective The aim of our study was to determine the feasibility of laparoscopic aneurysmectomy with spleen salvage in cases of splenic artery aneurysm. Materials Analysis of prospectively gathered data containing records of patients operated laparoscopically due to diseases of the spleen in 1998–2016 in our department. Inclusion criteria were attempted laparoscopic aneurysmectomy with intent to salvage spleen. Results Out of 11 patients, seven patients underwent aneurysmectomy with spleen preservation, one patient had partial-splenectomy, two patients had intra-operative splenectomies and one patient had a re-operation on post-op day 1 with splenectomy. Re-operation with splenectomy was the only recorded complication. Conclusions Laparoscopic aneurysmectomy of SAA may be considered as a safe treatment method, with good short- and long-term results; however, a complete evaluation requires further research on a larger study group. It allows permanent treatment of SAA with maintaining spleen function.

Effects of bariatric surgery on cardiovascular risk factors among morbidly obese patients

AIM OF THE STUDY The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric by-pass on risk factors of cardiovascular diseases. MATERIAL AND METHODS We analyzed prospectively collected data of patients operated for morbid obesity who were qualified for laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) or laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric by-pass (LRYGB). Risk factors for wyłączecardiovascular diseases were assessed with the SCORE scale and both full and hard Framingham cardiovascular risk scores (FCRs). The data were collected on admission and one year after the procedures. We enrolled 264 patients (119 females, 116 males, 40.2±9.9 years old), of whom 117 underwent LRYGB and 118 LSG, respectively. RESULTS Preoperatively, 12% of patients were in the high-risk category of the SCORE scale, 65% were in the moderate risk category, and 24% were in the low-risk category. The median score of the SCORE scale was 1 (1-2). Lipid-based full FCR was 34.5% (24%-68%) and the hard FCR was 17.5% (10%-52%), while the respective BMI-based FCRs were 59% (31%-84%) and 37% (15%-67%). One year after the procedures, the mean %EBMIL (62.88%±20.02%) and %EWL (53.18%±15.87) were comparable between both procedures. Hypertension treatment was not necessary in 33 patients after LSG and in 55 after LRYGB. Diabetes mellitus remitted in 9 and 29 patients, respectively. Both procedures significantly reduced high and moderate risk prevalence in the SCORE scale in favor of the low risk category. Surgical interventions resulted in significant reductions of FCRs 1 year after surgery ( p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS Both LSG and LRYGB lead to a significant and comparable body mass reduction. Both procedures significantly decrease of the risk of cardiovascular diseases, based on SCORE and Framingham scales.

Gastrointestinal obstruction in patients previously treated for malignancies

UNLABELLED Bowel obstruction is a common condition in acute surgery. Among the patients, those with a history of cancer consist a particular group. Difficulties in preoperative diagnosis - whether obstruction is benign or malignant and limited treatment options in patients with reoccurrence or dissemination of the cancer are typical for this group. The aim of the study was to analyze causes of bowel obstruction in patients with history of radical treatment due to malignancy. MATERIAL AND METHODS Patients with symptoms of bowel obstruction and history of radical treatment for malignancy who were operated in 2nd and 3rd Department of General Surgery JUCM between 2000 and 2014 were included into the study. The patients were divided into 2 groups based on type of mechanical bowel obstruction (group 1 - adhesions, group 2 - malignant process). RESULTS 128 patients were included into the study - group 1: 67 (52.3%) and group 2: 61 (47.7%). In the second group bowel obstruction was caused by reoccurrence in 25 patients (40.98%) and dissemination in 36 (59.02%). The mean time between onset of the symptoms of bowel obstruction and the end of treatment for the cancer was 3.7 and 4.4 years, respectively in group 1 and 2 (p>0.05). Median time between onset of the symptoms and admission to Emergency Department was significantly longer in patients with malignant bowel obstruction compared to those with adhesions (11.6 ±17.8 days vs 5.1 ± 6.9 days, p=0.01). Considering type of surgery due to bowel obstruction, in first group in most patients (69.2%) bowel resection was not necessary and in the second group creation of jejuno-, ileo- or colostomy was the most common procedure. Morbidity was significantly higher in second group (45.9% vs 28.26%, p<0.05) but there was no difference in mortality (26% vs 24%, p>0.05). In both groups the most common localization of primary malignancy was colon. CONCLUSIONS In analyzed group of patients frequency of bowel obstruction caused by adhesions and malignancy was similar. However, in patients with bowel obstruction caused by malignancy morbidity was significantly higher and duration of symptoms was longer. There was no diagnostic procedure which would allow to differentiate the cause of bowel obstruction preoperatively and the diagnosis was made during the operation.

Quest for the optimal technique of laparoscopic splenectomy – vessels first or hilar transection?

Introduction Throughout our 20 years of experience, we have used several different techniques for laparoscopic splenectomy (LS). However, two methods have been used most frequently: “vessels first” and “hilar transection”. Aim To evaluate the outcomes of LS performed with these two different approaches. Material and methods It was an observational study based on retrospective analysis of consecutive patients undergoing LS in a tertiary referral surgical center in the period 1998–2017. We excluded patients with splenic trauma, initially submitted to open surgery, stapled transection of splenic hilum, partial resections of the spleen and other spleen-preserving procedures. Patients were divided into two groups: group 1 (“vessels first”) with 188 patients, and group 2 (“hilar transection”) with 287 patients. Results Mean operative time was shorter (p < 0.001) and blood loss was lower (p < 0.001) in group 2. The need for blood transfusions and the conversion rate were higher in group 1 (p = 0.044 and p = 0.003 respectively). There was no difference in intraoperative adverse events (p = 0.179). Overall postoperative morbidity did not differ between groups (p = 0.081) and we noted mortality of 0.21% (1 patient of group 2). The morbidity rate associated with accidental injury of the pancreatic parenchyma was significantly higher in group 1 (p = 0.028). Median length of hospital stay was 4 days (range: 1–99) and did not differ between groups (p = 0.175). Conclusions The “vessels first” technique is associated with longer operative time, higher blood loss and increased risk of conversion. “Hilar transection” is associated with lower incidence of local complications related most likely to accidental injury of the pancreatic tail. In the case of a large caliber of splenic vessels the “vessels first” approach remains the technique of choice.

Laparoscopic splenectomy for immune thrombocytopenia in patients with a very low platelet count

Introduction Laparoscopic splenectomy (LS) is the gold standard in treating immune thrombocytopenia (ITP). However, there are still some problems in decision-making when considering LS in patients with a very low platelet count (PLT). Aim To evaluate safety outcomes of LS in patients with severe ITP and very low PLT in comparison to those with higher PLT. Material and methods We retrospectively analyzed consecutive patients who underwent LS in a single institution between April 1998 and December 2017. Perioperative care was based on an algorithm developed at our department which takes into consideration the patient’s PLT level. Patients were divided into 2 groups depending on the PLT level (cut-off point 50,000/mm3). Results The mean operative time in the low PLT group and high PLT group was 90 ±42.1 min and 95 ±45 min, respectively (p = 0.59). Intraoperative blood loss was 144 ±226.1 ml in the low PLT group and 83 ±161.24 ml in the high PLT group (p = 0.23). Complications occurred in 5 (9.09%) patients in the low PLT group and 16 (11.51%) in the high PLT group (p = 0.67). There were no conversions in the group with lower PLT, while 2 patients in the group with higher PLT had to be converted to open surgery (p = 0.38). Patients with low PLT preoperatively more often required perioperative platelet transfusions (13 vs. 1, p < 0.001). Conclusions Laparoscopic splenectomy is safe and feasible treatment in patients with ITP regardless of the PLT level. Still, patients with critical ITP and marginally low PLT require special awareness.

Pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic head tumors in the elderly – Systematic review and meta-analysis

The age at which patients are undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy is increasing worldwide. The data on the outcome of this surgical procedure in the elderly is constantly expanding. This meta-analysis aims to assess the safety of pancreatoduodenectomy in elderly population, primarily focusing on morbidity and mortality. We searched the Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases to identify eligible studies. The most recent search was performed on 10th April 2017. Inclusion criteria were: (1) comparison of the characteristics and perioperative outcomes of older patients versus younger patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy; (2) objective evaluation of mortality or overall morbidity; and (3), publication in English. Exclusion criteria were: (1) a lack of comparative data; (2) a lack of primary outcomes or insufficient data to analyze; (3) a focus on procedures other than pancreatoduodenectomy; or (4), the impossibility of extraction of data specifically concerning pancreatoduodenectomy. Primary outcomes were overall morbidity and mortality. Secondary outcomes analyzed postoperative complications, R0 rate and length of hospital stay. 45 eligible studies were chosen, with a combined total of 21,295 patients. Older patients compared to younger patients had a higher risk of death (2.26% vs. 4.54%; RR: 2.23; 95% CI 1.74-2.87) and a higher complication rate (47.23% vs. 39.35%; RR: 1.17; 95% CI 1.12-1.24). There were no differences in pancreatic fistula occurrence (p = 0.27), bile leakage (p = 0.81), postoperative hemorrhage (p = 0.08), or R0 rate (p = 0.92). Our review confirms, that in the case of pancreatoduodenectomy, advanced age is a risk factor for increased non-surgical morbidity and, by extension, higher mortality.

The Safety of Selective Use of Splenic Flexure Mobilization in Sigmoid and Rectal Resections—Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: According to traditional textbooks on surgery, splenic flexure mobilization is suggested as a mandatory part of open rectal resection. However, its use in minimally invasive access seems to be limited. This stage of the procedure is considered difficult in the laparoscopic approach. The aim of this study was to systematically review literature on flexure mobilization and perform meta-analysis. Methods: A systematic review of the literature was performed using the Medline, Embase and Scopus databases to identify all eligible studies that compared patients undergoing rectal or sigmoid resection with or without splenic flexure mobilization. Inclusion criteria: (1) comparison of groups of patients with and without mobilization and (2) reports on overall morbidity, anastomotic leakage, operative time, length of specimen, number of harvested lymph nodes, or length of hospital stay. The outcomes of interest were: operative time, conversion rate, number of lymph nodes harvested, overall morbidity, mortality, leakage rate, reoperation rate, and length of stay. Results: Initial search yielded 2282 studies. In the end, we included 10 studies in the meta-analysis. Splenic flexure is associated with longer operative time (95% confidence interval (CI) 23.61–41.25; p < 0.001) and higher rate of anastomotic leakage (risk ratios (RR): 1.02; 95% CI 1.10–3.35; p = 0.02), however the length of hospital stay is shorter by 0.42 days. There were no differences in remaining outcomes. Conclusions: Not mobilizing the splenic flexure results in a significantly shorter operative time and a longer length of stay. Further research is required to establish whether flexure mobilization is required in minimally invasive surgery.