Is there a role for prophylactic mesh in abdominal wall closure after emergency laparotomy? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background Incisional hernias are a common complication of emergency laparotomy and are associated with significant morbidity. Recent studies have found a reduction in incisional hernias when mesh is placed prophylactically during abdominal closure in elective laparotomies. This systematic review will assess the safety and efficacy of prophylactic mesh placement in emergency laparotomy. Methods A systematic review was performed according to the PROSPERO registered protocol (CRD42018109283). Papers were dual screened for eligibility, and included when a comparison was made between closure with prophylactic mesh and closure with a standard technique, reported using a comparative design (i.e. case–control, cohort or randomised trial), where the primary outcome was incisional hernia. Bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias in non-randomised studies tool. A meta-analysis of incisional hernia rate was performed to estimate risk ratio using a random effects model (Mantel–Haenszel approach). Results 332 studies were screened for eligibility, 29 full texts were reviewed and 2 non-randomised studies were included. Both studies were biased due to confounding factors, as closure technique was based on patient risk factors for incisional hernia. Both studies found significantly fewer incisional hernias in the mesh groups [3.2% vs 28.6% (p < 0.001) and 5.9% vs 33.3% (p = 0.0001)]. A meta-analysis of incisional hernia risk favoured prophylactic mesh closure [risk ratio 0.15 (95% CI 0.6–0.35, p < 0.001)]. Neither study found an association between mesh and infection or enterocutaneous fistula. Conclusion This review found that there are limited data to assess the effect or safety profile of prophylactic mesh in the emergency laparotomy setting. The current data cannot reliably assess the use of mesh due to confounding factors, and a randomised controlled trial is required to address this important clinical question

Atrial fibrillation after gastrointestinal surgery: incidence and associated risk factors

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common dysrhythmia that can occur after major physiological stress including surgery (postoperative AF). There are few data on postoperative AF after abdominal surgery. We set out to define the incidence of de novo postoperative AF after abdominal surgery and associated risk factors. METHODS: The Patient History Integrated Data store administrative database was interrogated for patients aged ≥65 y undergoing abdominal surgery from April 2012 to April 2014. Patients with pre-existing AF were excluded. The primary outcome was diagnosis of AF. RESULTS: Two thousand nine hundred and sixty-seven cases were included of whom 187 developed postoperative AF within 90 d (6.3%). The rate of postoperative AF varied by operation and was highest in small bowel resection (17.2%) and lowest in biliary surgery (4.8%). Median time to detection of postoperative AF was 32 d. Patients who developed postoperative AF were significantly older than those who did not develop AF (median age 75.3 y versus 72.4 y, P < 0.01). Logistic regression modeling found increasing age (odds ratio [OR] 1.03 [confidence interval {CI} 1.01-1.06], hypertension OR 1.73 [CI 1.19-2.51]), congestive cardiac failure (OR 3.04 [CI 1.88-4.92], and vascular disease OR 2.29 [CI 1.39-3.37]) were predictive of the development of postoperative AF within 30 d. The area under the curve for this model was 0.733. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative AF affects a significant number of patients after abdominal surgery. Demographics such as history of cardiovascular disease might aid prediction of postoperative AF. Postoperative AF is mostly identified after discharge, suggesting the need for postoperative screening

A systematic review of the incidence of and risk factors for postoperative atrial fibrillation following general surgery

Atrial fibrillation is a common cardiac arrhythmia and can occur de novo following a surgical procedure. It is associated with increased inpatient and long-term mortality. There is limited evidence concerning new-onset atrial fibrillation following abdominal surgery. This study aimed to identify the prevalence of and risk factors for postoperative atrial fibrillation in the general surgical population. A systematic search of the Embase, MEDLINE and Cochrane (CENTRAL) databases was conducted. Studies were included in the review if they reported cases of new-onset atrial fibrillation within 30 days of the index operation. Results were evaluated qualitatively due to substantial clinical heterogeneity. Incidence rates were pooled using a weighted random-effects meta-analysis model. A total of 835 records were initially identified, from which 32 full texts were retrieved. Following review, 13 studies were included that involved 52,959 patients, of whom 10.94% (95%CI 7.22-15.33) developed atrial fibrillation. Five studies of patients undergoing oesophagectomy (n = 376/1923) had a weighted average rate of 17.66% (95%CI 12.16-21.47), compared with 7.63% (95%CI 4.39-11.98) from eight studies of non-oesophageal surgery (n = 2927/51,036). Identified risk factors included: increasing age; history of cardiac disease; postoperative complications, particularly, sepsis, pneumonia and pleural effusions. New-onset postoperative atrial fibrillation is common, and is more frequent after surgery involving the thorax. Future work should focus on stratifying risk to allow targeted prophylaxis of atrial fibrillation and other peri-operative complications

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

Background Patient selection for critical care admission must balance patient safety with optimal resource allocation. This study aimed to determine the relationship between critical care admission, and postoperative mortality after abdominal surgery. Methods This prespecified secondary analysis of a multicentre, prospective, observational study included consecutive patients enrolled in the DISCOVER study from UK and Republic of Ireland undergoing major gastrointestinal and liver surgery between October and December 2014. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Multivariate logistic regression was used to explore associations between critical care admission (planned and unplanned) and mortality, and inter-centre variation in critical care admission after emergency laparotomy. Results Of 4529 patients included, 37.8% (n=1713) underwent planned critical care admissions from theatre. Some 3.1% (n=86/2816) admitted to ward-level care subsequently underwent unplanned critical care admission. Overall 30-day mortality was 2.9% (n=133/4519), and the risk-adjusted association between 30-day mortality and critical care admission was higher in unplanned [odds ratio (OR): 8.65, 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.51–19.97) than planned admissions (OR: 2.32, 95% CI: 1.43–3.85). Some 26.7% of patients (n=1210/4529) underwent emergency laparotomies. After adjustment, 49.3% (95% CI: 46.8–51.9%, P<0.001) were predicted to have planned critical care admissions, with 7% (n=10/145) of centres outside the 95% CI. Conclusions After risk adjustment, no 30-day survival benefit was identified for either planned or unplanned postoperative admissions to critical care within this cohort. This likely represents appropriate admission of the highest-risk patients. Planned admissions in selected, intermediate-risk patients may present a strategy to mitigate the risk of unplanned admission. Substantial inter-centre variation exists in planned critical care admissions after emergency laparotomies