Early Postoperative Death in Patients Undergoing Emergency High-Risk Surgery:Towards a Better Understanding of Patients for Whom Surgery May Not Be Beneficial

The timing, causes, and quality of care for patients who die after emergency laparotomy have not been extensively reported. A large database of 13,953 patients undergoing emergency laparotomy, between July 2014 and March 2017, from 28 hospitals in England was studied. Anonymized data was extracted on day of death, patient demographics, operative details, compliance with standards of care, and 30-day and in-patient mortality. Thirty-day mortality was 8.9%, and overall inpatient mortality was 9.8%. Almost 40% of postoperative deaths occurred within three days of surgery, and 70% of these early deaths occurred on the day of surgery or the first postoperative day. Such early deaths could be considered nonbeneficial surgery. Patients who died within three days of surgery had a significantly higher preoperative lactate, American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status (ASA-PS) grade, and Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the enumeration of Mortality and morbidity (P-POSSUM). Compliance with perioperative standards of care based on the Emergency Laparotomy Collaborative care bundle was high overall and better for those patients who died within three days of surgery. Multidisciplinary team involvement from intensive care, care of the elderly physicians, and palliative care may help both the communication and the burden of responsibility in deciding on the risk–benefit of operative versus nonoperative approaches to care

Understanding the influences on successful quality improvement in emergency general surgery: learning from the RCS Chole-QuIC project.

BACKGROUND: Acute gallstone disease is the highest volume Emergency General Surgical presentation in the UK. Recent data indicate wide variations in the quality of care provided across the country, with national guidance for care delivery not implemented in most UK hospitals. Against this backdrop, the Royal College of Surgeons of England set up a 13-hospital quality improvement collaborative (Chole-QuIC) to support clinical teams to reduce time to surgery for patients with acute gallstone disease requiring emergency cholecystectomy. METHODS: Prospective, mixed-methods process evaluation to answer the following: (1) how was the collaborative delivered by the faculty and received, understood and enacted by the participants; (2) what influenced teams' ability to improve care for patients requiring emergency cholecystectomy? We collected and analysed a range of data including field notes, ethnographic observations of meetings, and project documentation. Analysis was based on the framework approach, informed by Normalisation Process Theory, and involved the creation of comparative case studies based on hospital performance during the project. RESULTS: Chole-QuIC was delivered as planned and was well received and understood by participants. Four hospitals were identified as highly successful, based upon a substantial increase in the number of patients having surgery in line with national guidance. Conversely, four hospitals were identified as challenged, achieving no significant improvement. The comparative analysis indicate that six inter-related influences appeared most associated with improvement: (1) achieving clarity of purpose amongst site leads and key stakeholders; (2) capacity to lead and effective project support; (3) ideas to action; (4) learning from own and others' experience; (5) creating additional capacity to do emergency cholecystectomies; and (6) coordinating/managing the patient pathway. CONCLUSION: Collaborative-based quality improvement is a viable strategy for emergency surgery but success requires the deployment of effective clinical strategies in conjunction with improvement strategies. In particular, achieving clarity of purpose about proposed changes amongst key stakeholders was a vital precursor to improvement, enabling the creation of additional surgical capacity and new pathways to be implemented effectively. Protected time, testing ideas, and the ability to learn quickly from data and experience were associated with greater impact within this cohort

Does the implementation of a Quality Improvement Care Bundle reduce the incidence of acute kidney injury in patients undergoing emergency laparotomy?

Previous work has demonstrated a survival improvement following the introduction of an enhanced recovery protocol in patients undergoing emergency laparotomy (the emergency laparotomy pathway quality improvement care (ELPQuiC) bundle). Implementation of this bundle increased the use of intra-operative goal directed fluid therapy and ICU admission, both evidence-based strategies recommended to improve kidney outcomes. The aim of this study was to determine if the observed mortality benefit could be explained by a difference in the incidence of AKI pre- and post-implementation of the protocol.This article is freely available via Open Access. Click on the Publisher URL to access the full-text via the publisher's site

Understanding the influences on successful quality improvement in emergency general surgery: learning from the RCS Chole-QuIC project

Abstract: Background: Acute gallstone disease is the highest volume Emergency General Surgical presentation in the UK. Recent data indicate wide variations in the quality of care provided across the country, with national guidance for care delivery not implemented in most UK hospitals. Against this backdrop, the Royal College of Surgeons of England set up a 13-hospital quality improvement collaborative (Chole-QuIC) to support clinical teams to reduce time to surgery for patients with acute gallstone disease requiring emergency cholecystectomy. Methods: Prospective, mixed-methods process evaluation to answer the following: (1) how was the collaborative delivered by the faculty and received, understood and enacted by the participants; (2) what influenced teams’ ability to improve care for patients requiring emergency cholecystectomy? We collected and analysed a range of data including field notes, ethnographic observations of meetings, and project documentation. Analysis was based on the framework approach, informed by Normalisation Process Theory, and involved the creation of comparative case studies based on hospital performance during the project. Results: Chole-QuIC was delivered as planned and was well received and understood by participants. Four hospitals were identified as highly successful, based upon a substantial increase in the number of patients having surgery in line with national guidance. Conversely, four hospitals were identified as challenged, achieving no significant improvement. The comparative analysis indicate that six inter-related influences appeared most associated with improvement: (1) achieving clarity of purpose amongst site leads and key stakeholders; (2) capacity to lead and effective project support; (3) ideas to action; (4) learning from own and others’ experience; (5) creating additional capacity to do emergency cholecystectomies; and (6) coordinating/managing the patient pathway. Conclusion: Collaborative-based quality improvement is a viable strategy for emergency surgery but success requires the deployment of effective clinical strategies in conjunction with improvement strategies. In particular, achieving clarity of purpose about proposed changes amongst key stakeholders was a vital precursor to improvement, enabling the creation of additional surgical capacity and new pathways to be implemented effectively. Protected time, testing ideas, and the ability to learn quickly from data and experience were associated with greater impact within this cohort

Guidelines for Perioperative Care for Emergency Laparotomy Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society Recommendations: Part 1—Preoperative: Diagnosis, Rapid Assessment and Optimization

BackgroundEnhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols reduce length of stay, complications and costs fora large number of elective surgical procedures. A similar, structured approach appears to improve outcomes, including mortality, for patients undergoing high-risk emergency general surgery, and specifically emergency laparotomy. These are the first consensus guidelines for optimal care of these patients using an ERAS approach.MethodsExperts in aspects of 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 on English language publications were performed for ERAS elements and relevant specific topics. Studies on each item were selected with particular attention to randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses and large cohort studies, and reviewed and graded using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Recommendations were made on the best level of evidence, or extrapolation from studies on non-emergency patients when appropriate. The Delphi method was used to validate final recommendations. The guideline has been divided into two parts: Part 1—Preoperative Care and Part 2—Intraoperative and Postoperative management. This paper provides guidelines for Part 1.ResultsTwelve components of preoperative care were considered. Consensus was reached after three rounds.ConclusionsThese guidelines are based on the best available evidence for an ERAS approach to patients undergoing emergency laparotomy. Initial management is particularly important for patients with sepsis and physiological derangement. These guidelines should be used to improve outcomes for these high-risk patients

Early postoperative outcomes following hepatic resection for benign liver disease in 79 consecutive patients

AbstractBackgroundLiver resection is an accepted treatment modality for malignant disease of the liver. However, because of its potential morbidity and mortality, the practice of liver resection in benign disease is more controversial. This study was designed to assess the early outcomes of 79 consecutive liver resections for benign disease over a 12-year period and compare these with early outcomes of 390 consecutive liver resections for metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC) during the same period.MethodsConsecutive liver resections were carried out in a single hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) centre between 1996 and 2008. Patient demographics and early outcomes were recorded. Statistical analyses were performed using spss (Version 15). P<0.05 was considered to be significant.ResultsThere was no difference in median age between the benign group vs. the MCRC group (P=0.181). However, there was a significant trend towards a lower ASA grade in the benign group (P<0.001). There was no difference in median blood loss (P=0.139) or hospital stay (P=0.262). Morbidity rates were 8.9% in the benign group and 20.5% in the MCRC group (P=0.002). The rate of serious complications was 1.3% in the benign group compared with 4.4% in the MCRC group (P=0.041). There were no postoperative deaths in the benign group and eight (2%) in the MCRC group (P=0.004).ConclusionsLiver resection for benign liver tumours can be undertaken with a mortality rate approaching zero and minimal morbidity in specialist HPB units

Guidelines for Perioperative Care for Emergency Laparotomy Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society Recommendations: Part 2 -Emergency Laparotomy: Intra and Postoperative Care

This is Part 2 of the first consensus guidelines for optimal care of patients undergoing emergency laparotomy (EL) using an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) approach. This paper addresses intra- and postoperative aspects of care. Experts in aspects of management of high-risk and emergency general surgical patients were invited to contribute by the International ERAS &lt;sup&gt;®&lt;/sup&gt; Society. PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Medline database searches were performed for ERAS elements and relevant specific topics. Studies on each item 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 (GRADE) 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. Some ERAS &lt;sup&gt;®&lt;/sup&gt; components covered in other guideline papers are outlined only briefly, with the bulk of the text focusing on key areas pertaining specifically to EL. Twenty-three components of intraoperative and postoperative care were defined. Consensus was reached after three rounds of a modified Delphi Process. These guidelines are based on best available evidence for an ERAS &lt;sup&gt;®&lt;/sup&gt; approach to patients undergoing EL. 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