Derivation and validation of a prognostic model for postoperative risk stratification of critically ill patients with faecal peritonitis

One Year of Experience Managing Peritonitis Secondary to Gastrointestinal Perforation at a Tertiary Care Hospital: A Retrospective Analysis

Introduction

Peritonitis secondary to gastrointestinal perforation causes high morbidity and mortality rates in the emergency department with an immediate need for surgical intervention. Despite improved surgical management procedures, patients are still suffering from gastrointestinal leak causing peritonitis that demands surgical management by highly skilled surgeons in high-quality surgical units.

Material and methods

This paper presents one year of experience in the surgical treatment of gastrointestinal perforation-related peritonitis by surgeons in Lahore General Hospital, Lahore, Pakistan. Data was retrospectively collected from patient records and quantitatively analyzed. Involved patients developed peritonitis secondary to gastrointestinal perforation requiring surgical exploration and interventions in the emergency department between November 2020 and October 2021.

Results

One hundred and fifty-eight patients were involved; the mean age was 43.46 years. The number of males was 87 (55.06%). The patients mostly presented with generalized abdominal pain (57.6%). All the patients had perforation-related peritonitis, which was most prevalent in the ileum (62%). The most performed surgical intervention was loop ileostomy (36.71%). Compared to other published reports, the incidence rate of wound dehiscence in the hospital was relatively higher. Postoperatively, wound infection was low if the skin was left open (23.62%) compared to closed skin (38.7%). Patient outcomes were acceptable as the death rate was low (3.2%, 5/158).

Conclusion

Peritonitis caused by gastrointestinal perforation is associated with a high risk of morbidity that necessitates surgical exploration. Leaving skin wound open after the surgical intervention is recommended to decrease the incidence of wound infection and dehiscence.

Patient outcomes and prognostic factors associated with colonic perforation surgery: a retrospective study

Background

Despite advances in surgery and intensive perioperative care, fecal peritonitis secondary to colonic perforation is associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality. This study was performed to review the outcomes of patients who underwent colonic perforation surgery and to evaluate the prognostic factors associated with mortality.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed on 224 consecutive patients who underwent emergency colonic perforation surgery between January 2008 and May 2019. We divided the patients into survivor and non-survivor groups and compared their surgical outcomes.

Results

The most common cause of colon perforation was malignancy in 54 patients (24.1%), followed by iatrogenic perforation in 41 (18.3%), stercoral perforation in 39 (17.4%), and diverticulitis in 37 (16.5%). The sigmoid colon (n=124, 55.4%) was the most common location of perforation, followed by the ascending colon, rectum, and cecum. Forty-five patients (20.1%) died within 1 month after surgery. Comparing the 179 survivors with the 45 non-survivors, the patient characteristics associated with mortality were advanced age, low systolic blood pressure, tachycardia, organ failure, high C-reactive protein, high creatinine, prolonged prothrombin time, and high lactate level. The presence of free or feculent fluid, diffuse peritonitis, and right-sided perforation were associated with mortality. In multivariate analysis, advanced age, organ failure, right-sided perforation, and diffuse peritonitis independently predicted mortality within 1 month after surgery.

Conclusion

Age and organ failure were prognostic factors for mortality associated with colon perforation. Furthermore, right-sided perforation and diffuse peritonitis demonstrated a significant association with patient mortality.

Evaluating the Possibility of Translating Technological Advances in Non-Invasive Continuous Lactate Monitoring into Critical Care

Lactate is widely measured in critically ill patients as a robust indicator of patient deterioration and response to treatment. Plasma concentrations represent a balance between lactate production and clearance. Analysis has typically been performed with the aim of detecting tissue hypoxia. However, there is a diverse range of processes unrelated to increased anaerobic metabolism that result in the accumulation of lactate, complicating clinical interpretation. Further, lactate levels can change rapidly over short spaces of time, and even subtle changes can reflect a profound change in the patient's condition. Hence, there is a significant need for frequent lactate monitoring in critical care. Lactate monitoring is commonplace in sports performance monitoring, given the elevation of lactate during anaerobic exercise. The desire to continuously monitor lactate in athletes has led to the development of various technological approaches for non-invasive, continuous lactate measurements. This review aims firstly to reflect on the potential benefits of non-invasive continuous monitoring technology within the critical care setting. Secondly, we review the current devices used to measure lactate non-invasively outside of this setting and consider the challenges that must be overcome to allow for the translation of this technology into intensive care medicine. This review will be of interest to those developing continuous monitoring sensors, opening up a new field of research.

Methodological challenges in European ethics approvals for a genetic epidemiology study in critically ill patients: the GenOSept experience

BACKGROUND

During the set-up phase of an international study of genetic influences on outcomes from sepsis, we aimed to characterise potential differences in ethics approval processes and outcomes in participating European countries.

METHODS

Between 2005 and 2007 of the FP6-funded international Genetics Of Sepsis and Septic Shock (GenOSept) project, we asked national coordinators to complete a structured survey of research ethic committee (REC) approval structures and processes in their countries, and linked these data to outcomes. Survey findings were reconfirmed or modified in 2017.

RESULTS

Eighteen countries participated in the study, recruiting 2257 patients from 160 ICUs. National practices differed widely in terms of composition of RECs, procedures and duration of the ethics approval process. Eight (44.4%) countries used a single centralised process for approval, seven (38.9%) required approval by an ethics committee in each participating hospital, and three (16.7%) required both. Outcomes of the application process differed widely between countries because of differences in national legislation, and differed within countries because of interpretation of the ethics of conducting research in patients lacking capacity. The RECs in four countries had no lay representation. The median time from submission to final decision was 1.5 (interquartile range 1-7) months; in nine (50%) approval was received within 1 month; six took over 6 months, and in one 24 months; had all countries been able to match the most efficient approvals processes, an additional 74 months of country or institution-level recruitment would have been available. In three countries, rejection of the application by some local RECs resulted in loss of centres; and one country rejected the application outright.

CONCLUSIONS

The potential benefits of the single application portal offered by the European Clinical Trials Regulation will not be realised without harmonisation of research ethics committee practices as well as national legislation.