Surgical Rescue: An Essential Component of Acute Care Surgery

"Stabilize the Unstable": Treatment Pathophysiology in Bleeding Trauma Patients, from the Field to the ICU. State of the Art

The results of the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study showed that, in 2019, 8% of deaths worldwide were trauma related [...].

Acute Care Surgery and Surgical Rescue: Expanding the Definition

BACKGROUND

Surgical rescue (SR) is the recovery of patients with surgical complications. Patients transferred (TP) for surgical diagnoses to higher-level care or inpatients (IP) admitted to nonsurgical services may develop intra-abdominal infection (IAI) and require emergency surgery (ES). The aims were to characterize the SR population by the site of ES consultation, open abdomen (OA), and risk of mortality.

STUDY DESIGN

This was an international, multi-institutional prospective observational study of patients requiring ES for IAI. Laparotomy before the transfer was an exclusion criterion. Patients were divided into groups: clinic/ED (C/ED), IP, or TP. Data collected included demographics, the severity of illness (SOI), procedures, OA, and number of laparotomies. The primary outcome was mortality. Multivariable logistic regression models were constructed.

RESULTS

There were 752 study patients (C/ED 63.8% vs TP 23.4% and IP 12.8%), with a mean age of 59 years and 43.6% women. IP had worse SOI scores (Charlson Comorbidity Index, American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification System, and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment). The most common procedures were small and large bowel (77.3%). IP and TP had similar rates of OA (IP 52.1% and TP 52.3 %) vs C/ED (37.7%, p < 0.001), and IP had more relaparotomies (3 or 4). The unadjusted mortality rate was highest in IP (n = 24, 25.0%) vs TP (n = 29, 16.5%) and C/ED (n = 68, 14.2%, p = 0.03). Adjusting for age and SOI, only SOI had an impact on the risk of mortality (area under the curve 86%).

CONCLUSIONS

IP had the highest unadjusted mortality after ES for IAI and was followed by the TP; SOI drove the risk of mortality. SR must be extended to IP for timely recognition of the IAI.

Failure to Rescue (FTR) and Pitfalls in the Management of Complex Enteric Fistulas (CEF): From Rescue Surgery to Rescue Strategy

Purpose: Complex enteric fistulas (CEF) represent general surgeons’ nightmare. This paper aims to explore the impact on failure-to-rescue (FTR) rate of a standardised and integrated surgical and critical care step-up approach. Methods: This was a retrospective observational cohort study. Patients treated for CEF from 2009 to 2019 at Niguarda Hospital were included. Each patient was approached following a three-step approach: study phase, sepsis control and strategy definition phase, and surgical rescue phase. Results: Sixteen patients were treated for CEF. Seven fistulas were classified as complex entero-cutaneous (ECF) and nine as entero-atmospheric fistula (EAF). Median number of surgical procedures for fistula control before definitive surgical attempt was 11 (IQR 2–33.5). The median time from culprit surgery and the first access at Niguarda Hospital to definitive surgical attempt were 279 days (IQR 231–409) and 120 days (IQR 34–231), respectively. Median ICU LOS was 71 days (IQR 28–101), and effective hospital LOS was 117 days, (IQR 69.5–188.8). Three patients (18.75%) experienced spontaneous fistula closure after conversion to simple ECF, whereas 13 (81.25%) underwent definitive surgery for fistula takedown. Surgical rescue was possible in nine patients. Nine patients underwent multiple postoperative revision for surgical complications. Four patients failed to be rescued. Conclusion: An integrated step-up rescue strategy is crucial to standardise the approach to CEF and go beyond the basic surgical rescue procedure. The definition of FTR is dependent from the examined population. CEF patients are a unique cluster of emergency general surgery patients who may need a tailored definition of FTR considering the burden of postoperative events influencing their outcome.

Surgical Rescue in Medical Patients: The Role of Acute Care Surgeons as the Surgical Rapid Response Team

Failure to rescue is death occurring after a complication. Rapid response teams developed as a prompt intervention for patients with early clinical deterioration, generally from medical conditions or complications. Patients with surgical complications or surgical pathology require prompt evaluation and management by surgeons to avoid deterioration; this is surgical rescue. Patients in the medical intensive care unit may develop intra-abdominal pathology that requires expeditious operative intervention. Acute care surgeons should serve as the surgical rapid response team to help assess and manage these complex patients. Collaboration between intensivists and surgeons is essential to rescue patients from complications and surgical disease.

Surgical rescue: The next pillar of acute care surgery

BACKGROUND

The evolving field of acute care surgery (ACS) traditionally includes trauma, emergency general surgery, and critical care. However, the critical role of ACS in the rescue of patients with a surgical complication has not been explored. We here describe the role of "surgical rescue" in the practice of ACS.

METHODS

A prospective, electronic medical record-based ACS registry spanning January 2013 to May 2014 at a large urban academic medical center was screened by ICD-9 codes for acute surgical complications of an operative or interventional procedure. Long-term outcomes were derived from the Social Security Death Index.

RESULTS

Of 2,410 ACS patients, 320 (13%) required "surgical rescue": most commonly, from wound complications (32%), uncontrolled sepsis (19%), and acute obstruction (15%). The majority of complications (85%) were related to an operation; 15% were related to interventional procedures. The most common rescue interventions required were bowel resection (23%), wound debridement (18%), and source control of infection (17%); 63% of patients required operative intervention, and 22% required surgical critical care. Thirty-six percent of complications occurred in ACS primary patients ("local"), whereas 38% were referred from another surgical service ("institutional") and 26% referred from another institution ("regional"). Hospital length of stay was longer, and in-hospital and 1-year mortalities were higher in rescue patients compared with those without a complication. Outcomes were equivalent between "local" and "institutional" patients, but hospital length of stay and discharge to home were significantly worse in "institutional" referrals.

CONCLUSION

We here describe the distinct role of the acute care surgeon in the surgical management of complications; this is an additional pillar of ACS. In this vital role, the acute care surgeon provides crucial support to other providers as well as direct patient care in the "surgical rescue" of surgical and procedural complications.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Epidemiological study, level III; therapeutic/care management study, level IV.