Critical care usage after major gastrointestinal and liver surgery: a prospective, multicentre observational study

Critical care unit bed availability and postoperative outcomes: a multinational cohort study

BACKGROUND

Critical care beds are a limited resource, yet research indicates that recommendations for postoperative critical care admission based on patient-level risk stratification are not followed. It is unclear how prioritisation decisions are made in real-world settings and the effect of this prioritisation on outcomes.

METHODS

This was a prespecified analysis of an observational cohort study of adult patients undergoing inpatient surgery, conducted in 274 hospitals across the UK and Australasia during 2017. The primary outcome was postoperative morbidity at day 7. Logistic regression models were used to evaluate the relationship between critical care admission and patient and health system factors. The causal effect of critical care admission on outcome was estimated using variation in critical care occupancy as a natural experiment in an instrumental variable analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 19,491 patients from 248 hospitals were eligible for analysis, of whom 2107 were directly admitted to critical care postoperatively. Postoperative morbidity occurred in 2829/19,491 (15%) patients. Increasing surgical risk was associated with critical care admission, as was increased availability of critical care beds (odds ratio (95%CI) 1.04 (1.01-1.06), p = 0.002) per available bed; however, the probability of admission varied significantly between hospitals (median odds ratio 3.05). There was no evidence of a difference in postoperative morbidity with critical care admission (odds ratio (95%CI) 0.91 (0.57-1.45), p = 0.710).

DISCUSSION

Postoperative critical care admission is variable and related to bed availability. Statistical methods that adjust for unobserved confounding lowered the estimates of harm previously reported to have been associated with postoperative critical care admission. Our findings provide a rationale for a clinical trial which would evaluate any potential benefits for postoperative critical care admission for patients in whom there is no absolute indication for admission.

Major liver resections, perioperative issues and posthepatectomy liver failure: A comprehensive update for the anesthesiologist

Significant advances in surgical techniques and relevant medium- and long-term outcomes over the past two decades have led to a substantial expansion in the indications for major liver resections. To support these outstanding results and to reduce perioperative complications, anesthesiologists must address and master key perioperative issues (preoperative assessment, proactive intraoperative anesthesia strategies, and implementation of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery approach). Intensive care unit monitoring immediately following liver surgery remains a subject of active and often unresolved debate. Among postoperative complications, posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) occurs in different grades of severity (A-C) and frequency (9%-30%), and it is the main cause of 90-d postoperative mortality. PHLF, recently redefined with pragmatic clinical criteria and perioperative scores, can be predicted, prevented, or anticipated. This review highlights: (1) The systemic consequences of surgical manipulations anesthesiologists must respond to or prevent, to positively impact PHLF (a proactive approach); and (2) the maximal intensive treatment of PHLF, including artificial options, mainly based, so far, on Acute Liver Failure treatment(s), to buy time waiting for the recovery of the native liver or, when appropriate and in very selected cases, toward liver transplant. Such a clinical context requires a strong commitment to surgeons, anesthesiologists, and intensivists to work together, for a fruitful collaboration in a mandatory clinical continuum.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society Consensus Guidelines for Emergency Laparotomy Part 3: Organizational Aspects and General Considerations for Management of the Emergency Laparotomy Patient

BACKGROUND

This is Part 3 of the first consensus guidelines for optimal care of patients undergoing emergency laparotomy using an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) approach. This paper addresses organizational aspects of care.

METHODS

Experts in management of the high-risk and emergency general surgical patient were invited to contribute by the International ERAS® Society. PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and MEDLINE database searches were performed for ERAS elements and relevant specific topics. Studies were selected with particular attention to randomized clinical trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses and large cohort studies, and reviewed and graded using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. Recommendations were made on the best level of evidence, or extrapolation from studies on elective patients when appropriate. A modified Delphi method was used to validate final recommendations.

RESULTS

Components of organizational aspects of care were considered. Consensus was reached after three rounds of a modified Delphi process.

CONCLUSIONS

These guidelines are based on best current available evidence for organizational aspects of an ERAS® approach to patients undergoing emergency laparotomy and include discussion of less common aspects of care for the surgical patient, including end-of-life issues. These guidelines are not exhaustive but pull together evidence on important components of care for this high-risk patient population. As much of the evidence is extrapolated from elective surgery or emergency general surgery (not specifically laparotomy), many of the components need further evaluation in future studies.

Triggers for medical emergency team activation after non-cardiac surgery

Deterioration after major surgery is common, with many patients experiencing a medical emergency team (MET) activation. Understanding the triggers for MET calls may help design interventions to prevent deterioration. We aimed to identify triggers for MET activation in non-cardiac surgical patients. A retrospective cohort study of adult patients who experienced a postoperative MET call at a single tertiary hospital was undertaken. The trigger and timing of each MET call and patient characteristics were collected.Four hundred and one MET calls occurred after 23,258 surgical procedures, a rate of 1.7% of all non-cardiac surgical procedures, accounting for 11.7% of all MET calls over the study period. Hypotension (41.4%) was the most common trigger, followed by tachycardia (18.5%), altered conscious state (11.0%), hypoxia (10.0%), tachypnoea (5.7%), 'other' (5.7%), clinical concern (4.0%), increased work of breathing (1.5%) and bradypnoea (0.7%). Cardiac and/or respiratory arrest triggered 1.2% of MET activations. Eighty-six percent of patients had a single MET call, 10.2% had two, 1.8% had three and one patient (0.3%) had four. The median interval between post-anaesthetic care unit (PACU) discharge and MET call was 14.7 h (95% confidence interval 4.2 to 28.9 h). MET calls resulted in intensive care unit (ICU) admission in 40 patients (10%), while 82% remained on the ward, 4% had a MET call shortly after ICU discharge and returned there, 2% returned to theatre, and 2% went to a high dependency unit.Hypotension was the most common trigger for MET calls after non-cardiac surgery. Deterioration frequently occurred within 24 h of PACU discharge. Future research should focus on prevention of hypotension and tachycardia after surgery.

The risk of postoperative deterioration of non-cardiac surgery patients with ICU referral status who are admitted to the regular ward: a retrospective observational cohort study

Background

Higher-risk surgical patients may not be admitted to the intensive care unit due to stable immediate post-operative status on review. The outcomes of this cohort are not well described. Our aim was to examine the subsequent inpatient course of intensive care unit -referred but not admitted surgical patients.

Methods

All patients aged ≥18 years who were referred but not admitted for post-operative management in a tertiary metropolitan intensive care unit following non-cardiac surgery between 1/7/2017 and 30/6/2018 were eligible for inclusion in this retrospective observational cohort study. Primary outcome was Medical Emergency Team activation. Secondary outcomes included unplanned intensive care unit admission; length of stay; and 30-day mortality. Risk of serious complications and predicted length of stay were calculated using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program scoring tool.

Results

Fifteen of 60 patients (25%) had a MET-call following surgery, eight (13%) patients required unplanned intensive care unit admission, with median (IQR) time to Medical Emergency Team call 9 (6–13) hours. No patients died within 30-days. There was no significant difference between mean National Surgical Quality Improvement Program predicted and actual length of stay; after adjustment, National Surgical Quality Improvement Program predicted risk of serious complications was associated with unplanned intensive care unit admission (OR [95% CI] = 1.08 [1.00–1.16], p = 0.04), although not Medical Emergency Team calls.

Conclusions

Post-operative deterioration occurs frequently, and early, in a cohort of high-risk surgical patients initially assessed as being safe for ward care. Changes to current triage models for post-operative intensive care unit admission may reduce the impact of complications in this high-risk group.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13037-021-00283-9.