13 research outputs found
The development and validation of a scoring tool to predict the operative duration of elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy
Background: The ability to accurately predict operative duration has the potential to optimise theatre efficiency and utilisation, thus reducing costs and increasing staff and patient satisfaction. With laparoscopic cholecystectomy being one of the most commonly performed procedures worldwide, a tool to predict operative duration could be extremely beneficial to healthcare organisations.
Methods: Data collected from the CholeS study on patients undergoing cholecystectomy in UK and Irish hospitals between 04/2014 and 05/2014 were used to study operative duration. A multivariable binary logistic regression model was produced in order to identify significant independent predictors of long (> 90 min) operations. The resulting model was converted to a risk score, which was subsequently validated on second cohort of patients using ROC curves.
Results: After exclusions, data were available for 7227 patients in the derivation (CholeS) cohort. The median operative duration was 60 min (interquartile range 45–85), with 17.7% of operations lasting longer than 90 min. Ten factors were found to be significant independent predictors of operative durations > 90 min, including ASA, age, previous surgical admissions, BMI, gallbladder wall thickness and CBD diameter. A risk score was then produced from these factors, and applied to a cohort of 2405 patients from a tertiary centre for external validation. This returned an area under the ROC curve of 0.708 (SE = 0.013, p 90 min increasing more than eightfold from 5.1 to 41.8% in the extremes of the score.
Conclusion: The scoring tool produced in this study was found to be significantly predictive of long operative durations on validation in an external cohort. As such, the tool may have the potential to enable organisations to better organise theatre lists and deliver greater efficiencies in care
Complicated Acute Cholecystitis: The Role of C-Reactive Protein and Neutrophil-Lymphocyte Ratio as Predictive Markers of Severity.
Objectives The clinical diagnosis of complicated acute cholecystitis (CAC) remains difficult with several pathological or ultrasonography criteria used to differentiate it from uncomplicated acute cholecystitis (UAC). This study aims to evaluate the use of combined inflammatory markers C-reactive protein (CRP) and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) as surrogate markers to differentiate between UAC and CAC. Methods We identified 600 consecutive patients admitted with biliary symptoms during an acute surgical take from our electronic prospectively maintained database over a period of 55 months. Only patients undergoing emergency cholecystectomy performed during the index admission were included. The primary outcome was the finding of CAC versus UAC. Results A total of 176 patients underwent emergency laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ELC) during the index admission, including 118 (67%) females with a median age of 51 years (range: 21-97 years). The proportion of UAC (130 [74%]) and CAC (46 [26%]) was determined along with demographic data. Multivariate regression analysis showed that patient's age (OR=1.047; p=0.003), higher CRP (OR=1.005; p=0.012) and NLR (OR=1.094; p=0.047) were significant independent factors associated with severity of cholecystitis. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis for CRP showed an AUC (area under the curve) of 0.773 (95% CI: 0.698- 0.849). Using a cut-off value of 55 mg/L for CRP, the sensitivity of CAC was 73.9% and specificity was 73.1% in predicting CAC. The median post-operative length of stay was four days. The conversion rate from laparoscopic cholecystectomy to open surgery was 2% (4/176), and 5% (9/176) patients suffered post-operative complications with no mortality at 30 days. Conclusion CRP, NLR and age were independent factors associated with the severity of acute cholecystitis. NLR and CRP can be used as surrogate markers to predict patients at risk of CAC during emergency admission, which can inform future guidelines. Moreover, ELC for CAC can be safely performed under the supervision of dedicated upper GI surgeons
Critical number of lymph node involvement in esophageal and gastric cancer and its impact on long‐term survival—A single‐center 8‐year study
Hepatic artery thrombosis following orthotopic liver transplantation:a 10-year experience from a single centre in the United Kingdom
Effect of BMI on safety of bariatric surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic, procedure choice, and safety protocols - An analysis from the GENEVA Study
Background: It has been suggested that patients with a Body Mass Index (BMI) of > 60 kg/m2 should be offered expedited Bariatric Surgery (BS) during the Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The main objective of this study was to assess the safety of this approach. Methods: We conducted a global study of patients who underwent BS between 1/05/2020 and 31/10/2020. Patients were divided into three groups according to their preoperative BMI -Group I (BMI < 50 kg/m2), Group II (BMI 50-60 kg/m2), and Group III (BMI > 60 kg/m2). The effect of preoperative BMI on 30-day morbidity and mortality, procedure choice, COVID-19 specific safety protocols, and comorbidities was assessed. Results: This study included 7084 patients (5197;73.4 % females). The mean preoperative weight and BMI were 119.49 & PLUSMN; 24.4 Kgs and 43.03 & PLUSMN; 6.9 Kg/m2, respectively. Group I included 6024 (85 %) patients, whereas Groups II and III included 905 (13 %) and 155 (2 %) patients, respectively.The 30-day mortality rate was higher in Group III (p = 0.001). The complication rate and COVID-19 infection were not different. Comorbidities were significantly more likely in Group III (p = < 0.001). A significantly higher proportion of patients in group III received Sleeve Gastrectomy or One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass compared to other groups. Patients with a BMI of > 70 kg/m2 had a 30-day mortality of 7.7 % (2/26). None of these patients underwent a Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass. Conclusion: The 30-day mortality rate was significantly higher in patients with BMI > 60 kg/m2. There was, however, no significant difference in complications rates in different BMI groups, probably due to differences in procedure selection
30-Day Morbidity and Mortality of Bariatric Surgery During the COVID-19 Pandemic: a Multinational Cohort Study of 7704 Patients from 42 Countries.
BACKGROUND
There are data on the safety of cancer surgery and the efficacy of preventive strategies on the prevention of postoperative symptomatic COVID-19 in these patients. But there is little such data for any elective surgery. The main objectives of this study were to examine the safety of bariatric surgery (BS) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and to determine the efficacy of perioperative COVID-19 protective strategies on postoperative symptomatic COVID-19 rates.
METHODS
We conducted an international cohort study to determine all-cause and COVID-19-specific 30-day morbidity and mortality of BS performed between 01/05/2020 and 31/10/2020.
RESULTS
Four hundred ninety-nine surgeons from 185 centres in 42 countries provided data on 7704 patients. Elective primary BS (n = 7084) was associated with a 30-day morbidity of 6.76% (n = 479) and a 30-day mortality of 0.14% (n = 10). Emergency BS, revisional BS, insulin-treated type 2 diabetes, and untreated obstructive sleep apnoea were associated with increased complications on multivariable analysis. Forty-three patients developed symptomatic COVID-19 postoperatively, with a higher risk in non-whites. Preoperative self-isolation, preoperative testing for SARS-CoV-2, and surgery in institutions not concurrently treating COVID-19 patients did not reduce the incidence of postoperative COVID-19. Postoperative symptomatic COVID-19 was more likely if the surgery was performed during a COVID-19 peak in that country.
CONCLUSIONS
BS can be performed safely during the COVID-19 pandemic with appropriate perioperative protocols. There was no relationship between preoperative testing for COVID-19 and self-isolation with symptomatic postoperative COVID-19. The risk of postoperative COVID-19 risk was greater in non-whites or if BS was performed during a local peak
Safety of Bariatric Surgery in ≥ 65-Year-Old Patients During the COVID-19 Pandemic
Background Age >= 65 years is regarded as a relative contraindication for bariatric surgery. Advanced age is also a recognised risk factor for adverse outcomes with Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) which continues to wreak havoc on global populations. This study aimed to assess the safety of bariatric surgery (BS) in this particular age group during the COVID-19 pandemic in comparison with the younger cohort.Methods We conducted a prospective international study of patients who underwent BS between 1/05/2020 and 31/10/2020. Patients were divided into two groups - patients >= 65-years-old (Group I) and patients < 65-years-old (Group II). The two groups were compared for 30-day morbidity and mortality.Results There were 149 patients in Group 1 and 6923 patients in Group II. The mean age, preoperative weight, and BMI were 67.6 +/- 2.5 years, 119.5 +/- 24.5 kg, and 43 +/- 7 in Group I and 39.8 +/- 11.3 years, 117.7 +/- 20.4 kg, and 43.7 +/- 7 in Group II, respectively. Approximately, 95% of patients in Group 1 had at least one co-morbidity compared to 68% of patients in Group 2 (p = < 0.001). The 30-day morbidity was significantly higher in Group I ( 11.4%) compared to Group II (6.6%) (p = 0.022). However, the 30-day mortality and COVID-19 infection rates were not significantly different between the two groups.Conclusions Bariatric surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic is associated with a higher complication rate in those >= 65 years of age compared to those < 65 years old. However, the mortality and postoperative COVID-19 infection rates are not significantly different between the two groups