Quality of life, functional status and adhesiolysis during elective abdominal surgery

Reproducibility and predictive value of three grading systems for intraoperative adverse events in a cohort of abdominal surgery

INTRODUCTION

Intraoperative adverse events (iAEs) are increasingly recognized for their impact on patient outcomes. The Kaafarani classification and Surgical Apgar Score (SAS) were developed to assess the intraoperative course; however, both have their drawbacks. ClassIntra was validated for iAEs of any origin. This study compares the Kaafarani and SAS to ClassIntra considering predictive value and interrater reliability in a cohort of abdominal surgery to support implementation of a classification in clinical practice.

METHODS

The authors made use of the LAParotomy or LAParoscopy and ADhesiolysis (LAPAD) study database of elective abdominal surgery. Detailed descriptions on iAEs were collected in real-time by a researcher. For the current research aim, all iAEs were graded according ClassIntra, Kaafarani, and SAS (score ≤4). The predictive value was assessed using univariable and multivariable linear regression and the area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC). Two teams graded ClassIntra and Kaafarani to assess the interrater reliability using Cohen's Kappa.

RESULTS

A total of 755 surgeries were included, in which 335 (44%) iAEs were graded according to ClassIntra, 228 (30%) to Kaafarani, and 130 (20%) to SAS. All classifications were significantly correlated to postoperative complications, with an AUROC of 0.67 (95% CI: 0.62-0.72), 0.64 (0.59-0.70), and 0.71 (0.56-0.76), respectively. For the secondary endpoint, the interrater reliability of ClassIntra with κ 0.87 (95% CI: 0.84-0.90) and Kaafarani 0.90 (95% CI: 0.87-0.93) was both strong.

CONCLUSION

ClassIntra, Kaafarani, and SAS can be used for reporting of iAEs in abdominal surgery with good predictive value for postoperative complications, with strong reliability. ClassIntra, compared with Kaafarani and SAS, included the most iAEs and has the most comprehensive definition suitable for uniform reporting of iAEs in clinical practice and research.

Different routes of administering EW-7197 versus EW-7197⋅HBr for preventing peritoneal adhesion in a rat model

BACKGROUND

The relatively low aqueous solubility of EW-7197 that was administered orally may have affected the desired concentration in the systemic circulation for treating peritoneal adhesion. This experimental study aimed to compare the efficacy of different routes of administering EW-7197 (2-fluoro-N-[(5-[6-methylpyridin-2-yl]-4-[(1,2,4)triazolo(1,5-a)pyridin-6-yl]-1H-imidazol-2-yl)methyl]aniline) and EW-7197·hydrobromide (HBr), with improved aqueous solubility, for inhibiting peritoneal adhesion in a rat model.

METHODS

After peritoneal adhesion induction, 30 male Sprague-Dawley rats were randomly divided into 5 groups with 6 rats in each: group A, sham control; group B, orally administered 25 mg/kg of EW-7197·HBr for 7 days; group C, locally administered 25 mg/kg of EW-7197·HBr; group D, orally administered 20 mg/kg of EW-7197 for 7 days; and group E, locally administered 20 mg/kg of EW-7197. Gross examination, histologic staining (hematoxylin and eosin and Masson's trichrome), and immunohistochemical analyses (Ki-67 and α-smooth muscle actin marker [α-SMA]) were performed to evaluate the efficacy of both drugs.

RESULTS

All procedures were technically successful. All treatment groups, except for group C, showed significantly reduced incidence, quality, tenacity, fibrosis, and collagen deposition scores and lowered expressions of Ki-67- and α-SMA-positive cells compared with group A. When comparing between groups, all scores were significantly lower in group B than in group C (all P < .001), whereas no significant difference was noted in any of the scores between groups D and E and groups B and E (all P > .05).

CONCLUSION

Orally administering EW-7197·HBr and both orally and locally administering EW-7197 significantly prevented peritoneal adhesion formation, and orally administering EW-7197·HBr was the most effective overall.

Factors Potential Patients Deem Important for Decision-Making in High-Risk Surgical Scenarios

BACKGROUND

Surgical futility and shared decision-making to proceed with high-risk surgery are challenging for patients and surgeons alike. It is unknown which factors contribute to a patient's decision to undergo high-risk and potentially futile surgery. The clinical perspective, founded in statistical probabilities of survival, could be misaligned with a patient's determination of worthwhile surgery. This study assesses factors most important to patients in pursuing high-risk surgery.

STUDY DESIGN

Via anonymous survey, lay participants recruited through Amazon's Mturk were presented high-risk scenarios necessitating emergency surgery. They rated factors (objective risk and quality-of-life domains) in surgical decision-making (0 = not at all, 4 = extremely) and made the decision to pursue surgery based on clinical scenarios. Repeated observations were accounted for via a generalized mixed-effects model and estimated effects of respondent characteristics, scenario factors, and likelihood to recommend surgery.

RESULTS

Two hundred thirty-six participants completed the survey. Chance of survival to justify surgery averaged 69.3% (SD = 21.3), ranking as the highest determining factor in electing for surgery. Other factors were also considered important in electing for surgery, including the average number of days the patient lived if surgery were and were not completed, functional and pain status after surgery, family member approval, and surgery cost. Postoperative independence was associated with proceeding with surgery (p < 0.001). Recommendations by patient age was moderated by respondent age (p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

Patients highly value likelihood of survival and postoperative independence in shared decision-making for high-risk surgery. It is important to improve the understanding of surgical futility from a patient's perspective.

Safety, efficacy, and operability of a newly developed absorbable adhesion barrier (GM142) in patients with primary rectal cancer scheduled for diverting ileostomy during laparoscopic surgery: Randomized controlled trial

Aim

The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of GM142, a newly developed gelatin film with a concave and convex structure to a commercially available conventional film, hyaluronate‐carboxymethylcellulose.

Methods

Patients with primary rectal cancer who were scheduled for diverting ileostomy during laparoscopic surgery were eligible for this study. Patients were randomized before surgery and an antiadhesion film was applied under the umbilical incision. The primary outcome was the incidence of adhesion under the midline incision confirmed by second‐look surgery for diverting ileostomy closure. The secondary outcomes were the adhesion severity score, the extent of adhesion score, the presence of intestinal obstruction, and the success of all patching.

Results

A total of 146 patients were enrolled. A total of 123 patients were included in the full analysis set. The primary outcome of “no adhesion” was observed in 66.1% in the GM142 group and 55.7% in the conventional film group. The noninferiority of GM142 to conventional film was confirmed (P = .0005). The secondary outcomes were similar between the groups. For the safety evaluation, there were no safety concerns regarding allergic reactions to gelatin or increased gelatin‐specific IgE antibody titers.

Conclusions

The noninferiority of GM142 to conventional film was shown. GM142 showed no major safety issues. The clinical safety profiles of GM142 suggested certain physiological benefits of the gelatin film as an adhesion barrier.

PuraStat RADA16 Self-Assembling Peptide Reduces Postoperative Abdominal Adhesion Formation in a Rabbit Cecal Sidewall Injury Model

Objective: To evaluate the effect of PuraStat (2.5% RADA16) administration on postoperative abdominal adhesion formation in an in vivo model.

Methods: Anesthetized New Zealand white rabbits underwent cecal sidewall abrasion surgery in which the cecal serosa and juxtaposed parietal peritoneum were abraded after access through an abdominal midline incision. Eight animals were randomized to receive PuraStat administration at the interface of the injured tissues before incision closure, and five animals served as untreated controls. Treated animals received 3–12 ml PuraStat solution per lesion. Animals were sacrificed 14 days after surgery and examined for adhesion formation at the wound site.

Results: At study terminus, adhesions were identified in 90% (9/10) of abraded cecum/peritoneal wound sites in untreated controls versus 25% (4/16) of PuraStat-treated sites (p = 0.004). Mean ± SD Total Adhesion Score (average of the values for extent + strength of the adhesion in both defects per animal; maximum score = 14 points) was significantly 76% lower in PuraStat-treated animals (2.0 ± 3.0 points) compared to untreated controls (8.2 ± 1.9 points) (p = 0.029). Mean adhesion coverage area of wound sites was 79% lower in PuraStat-treated animals than controls (p < 0.001), and mean adhesion durability was 72% lower in PuraStat-treated animals versus controls (p = 0.005). Remnant hydrogel was observed at the wound sites of 75% of treated animals at postoperative Day 14.

Conclusion: PuraStat treatment has a positive protective effect in the cecal sidewall injury model, and significantly reduces abdominal adhesion formation at the interface of the injured cecum and overlying peritoneal sidewall defect.

Post-Surgical Peritoneal Scarring and Key Molecular Mechanisms

Post-surgical adhesions are internal scar tissue and a major health and economic burden. Adhesions affect and involve the peritoneal lining of the abdominal cavity, which consists of a continuous mesothelial covering of the cavity wall and majority of internal organs. Our understanding of the full pathophysiology of adhesion formation is limited by the fact that the mechanisms regulating normal serosal repair and regeneration of the mesothelial layer are still being elucidated. Emerging evidence suggests that mesothelial cells do not simply form a passive barrier but perform a wide range of important regulatory functions including maintaining a healthy peritoneal homeostasis as well as orchestrating events leading to normal repair or pathological outcomes following injury. Here, we summarise recent advances in our understanding of serosal repair and adhesion formation with an emphasis on molecular mechanisms and novel gene expression signatures associated with these processes. We discuss changes in mesothelial biomolecular marker expression during peritoneal development, which may help, in part, to explain findings in adults from lineage tracing studies using experimental adhesion models. Lastly, we highlight examples of where local tissue specialisation may determine a particular response of peritoneal cells to injury.

Patient-Reported Quality of Life Following Laparotomy in a Resource-Limited Setting

INTRODUCTION

The burden of surgical diseases is high in sub-Saharan Africa. Despite limitations to surgical care access, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) data following surgical intervention are scarce.

METHODS

We performed a 3-month prospective observational study of adult patients undergoing an abdominal operation. We administered the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS)-25 and Index of Independence in Activities of Daily Living questionnaire preoperatively (to postoperative day [POD] #1), POD#7, and POD#30. PROMIS-25 HRQoL domains were measured and converted to standardized T-scores (median 50, minimal important clinical difference 3).

RESULTS

Of the 117 laparotomy patients who were enrolled, 89 (76.1%) were male with a median age of 39 years (IQR 27-54). Operations were primarily for intestinal volvulus (n = 30, 28.3%) and intestinal perforation (n = 29, 27.4%). We completed a total of 80 (68.4%), 95 (81.2%), and 77 (65.8%) surveys preoperatively, at POD#7, and POD#30, respectively. Preoperatively patients showed high median levels of anxiety (56), depression (60), fatigue (63), and pain interference (62), which all improved postoperatively. Mobility was poor preoperatively (31) and showed improvement during recovery but remained poor [POD#7: 32, POD#30: 39]. Pain intensity was high (10/10) preoperatively and improved to 3/10 by POD#30. Patients with complications compared to those without had clinically significant worse HRQoL in all domains measured by POD#30.

DISCUSSION

Abdominal surgery patients in a resource-limited setting present with poor HRQoL, which improves postoperatively. Mobility remained poor throughout follow-up despite improved pain scores. Our findings highlight the need for improved HRQoL and pain control among surgical patients.

The anti-adhesive effect of anti-VEGF agents in experimental models: A systematic review

Adhesions constitute a major problem in abdominal-pelvic and thoracic surgery with significant impact in the postoperative quality of life and healthcare services utilization. Adhesiogenesis is the result of increased fibrin formation, impaired fibrinolysis, angiogenesis, and fibrosis. Despite the recent advancements, the ideal anti-adhesive agent remains to be determined. To this end, we performed a comprehensive literature search in PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus databases to identify studies investigating the antiadhesive role of anti-VEGF agents in peritoneal, pleural, and pericardial experimental adhesion models. Fifteen studies were eligible for inclusion with a total population of 602 animals (334 rats, 180 rabbits, and 88 mice). The majority of included studies (11/15) used bevacizumab, while three studies used other anti-VEGF antibodies and one study used an anti-VEGFR-antibody. A rat model was used in nine studies, while rabbit (n = 3) or mouse (n = 3) models were used less frequently. Eleven studies used peritoneal models, three studies used pleural models, and one study used a pericardial model. The scales (n = 12) and interval (Range: 1-42 days) used for the evaluation of adhesions varied between the studies. All studies demonstrated a significant decrease in adhesion scores between the anti-VEGF and control groups up to 42 days postprocedure. VEGF blockade resulted in decreased fibrosis in four out of five studies that used peritoneal models, while the effect on pleural models depended on the pleurodesis agent and was significant between 7 and 28 days. The effect of anti-VEGF agents on anastomosis integrity depends on the dose and the model that is used (inconclusive results).Current data support the anti-adhesive role of Anti-VEGF agents in all three serosal surfaces up to 6 weeks postprocedure. Further studies are needed to confirm the anti-adhesive role of anti-VEGF agents in pleural and pericardial adhesion experimental models and investigate any effect on anastomosis integrity in peritoneal models.

Clinical adhesion score (CLAS): development of a novel clinical score for adhesion-related complications in abdominal and pelvic surgery

Background

Adhesions are a major cause of long-term postsurgical complications in abdominal and pelvic surgery. Existing adhesion scores primarily measure morphological characteristics of adhesions that do not necessarily correlate with morbidity. The aim of this study was to develop a clinical adhesion score (CLAS) measuring overall clinical morbidity of adhesion-related complications in abdominal and pelvic surgery.

Methods

An international Delphi study was performed to identify relevant score items for adhesion-related complications, including small bowel obstruction, female infertility, chronic abdominal or pelvic pain, and difficulties at reoperation. The CLAS includes clinical outcomes, related to morbidity of adhesions, and weight factors, to correct the outcome scores for the likelihood that symptoms are truly caused by adhesions. In a pilot study, two independent researchers retrospectively scored the CLAS in 51 patients to evaluate inter-observer reliability, by calculating the Intraclass correlation coefficient. During a feasibility assessment, we evaluated whether the CLAS completely covered different clinical scenarios of adhesion-related morbidity.

Results

Three Delphi rounds were performed. 43 experts agreed to participate, 38(88%) completed the first round, and 32 (74%) the third round. Consensus was reached on 83.4% of items. Inter-observer reliability for the CLAS was 0.95 (95% CI 0.91–0.97). During feasibility assessment, six items were included. As a result, the CLAS includes 22 outcomes and 23 weight factors.

Conclusion

The CLAS represents a promising scoring system to measure and monitor the clinical morbidity of adhesion-related complications. Further studies are needed to confirm its utility in clinical practice.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00464-020-07621-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Severity assessment using three common behavioral or locomotor tests after laparotomy in rats: a pilot study

The aim of this pilot study was to evaluate whether behavioral or locomotor tests (Open Field (OF), rotarod (RR), and CatWalk (CW)) can help assess the severity of laparotomy in rats.The new EU Directive (2010/63/EU) mandates severity assessment in experiments involving animals. However, validated and objective methods are needed to relate trial-specific monitoring results to the degree of distress caused to individual animals. Therefore, we focused on non-invasive or minimally invasive, simple, and convenient severity assessment methods in a surgical model.To evaluate surgical severity in this model, we compared moving velocity among three commonly used behavioral test methods (OF, RR, and CW) after midline laparotomy within postoperative 7 days.In this study, 30 adult male Wistar Han rats (n = 10 per test) were trained in their assigned test method and subsequently subjected to surgery. Severity scoring was performed daily using a modified score sheet developed previously. In addition, blood and fecal samples were collected to analyze surgical and postoperative corticosterone metabolite levels. We found significant differences among the experimental groups in terms of the analyzed parameters. In this context, the OF test was found to be the most suitable method for severity assessment after laparotomy in rats.

Soft tissue mobilization techniques in treating chronic abdominal scar tissue: A quasi-experimental single subject design

INTRODUCTION

Roughly 17 million abdominal surgeries are performed annually in the U.S. Up to 17% of those may be readmitted for adhesion related problems. This study evaluated the effectiveness of soft tissue mobilization (STM) techniques at improving chronic pain, mobility restrictions and functional deficits following complex abdominal surgery.

METHODS

Subjects Two females aged 51 and 65.

DESIGN

Single subject quasi-experimental A-B-A.

INTERVENTION

Four 30-min treatment sessions of abdominal tissue mobilizations. Outcome measures Pain pressure threshold (PPT) and average scar mobility (ASM), Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI).

RESULTS

Subject 1 ASM and PPT of the abdomen improved significantly and exceeded the established standard error of measurement (SEM). PPT of the scar decreased during the second baseline. This decrease exceeded the SEM for PPT but was not statistically significant. The changes in NPRS did not reach the minimal clinically important difference (MCID). Subject 2 abdominal PPT and ASM showed statistically significant improvements that exceeded their SEMs. Scar PPT showed improvement during the repeat baseline, however, this reached neither statistical significance nor the SEM.

CONCLUSIONS

Scar mobility and abdominal PPT improved both statistically and clinically in both subjects after only 4 sessions of STM. Scar pain measured by NPRS and PPT did not show significant improvement. This study demonstrated that STM can be an effective way to treat chronic abdominal scars by increasing scar mobility and reducing abdominal sensitivity to pressure. It is non-invasive, and is a less costly alternative to laparoscopic adhesiolysis.