The Hellenic emergency laparotomy study (HELAS): a prospective multicentre study on the outcomes of emergency laparotomy in Greece

Background Emergency laparotomy (EL) is accompanied by high post-operative morbidity and mortality which varies significantly between countries and populations. The aim of this study is to report outcomes of emergency laparotomy in Greece and to compare them with the results of the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA). Methods This is a multicentre prospective cohort study undertaken between 01.2019 and 05.2020 including consecutive patients subjected to EL in 11 Greek hospitals. EL was defined according to NELA criteria. Demographics, clinical variables, and post-operative outcomes were prospectively registered in an online database. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify independent predictors of post-operative mortality. Results There were 633 patients, 53.9% males, ASA class III/IV 43.6%, older than 65 years 58.6%. The most common operations were small bowel resection (20.5%), peptic ulcer repair (12.0%), adhesiolysis (11.8%) and Hartmann’s procedure (11.5%). 30-day post-operative mortality reached 16.3% and serious complications occurred in 10.9%. Factors associated with post-operative mortality were increasing age and ASA class, dependent functional status, ascites, severe sepsis, septic shock, and diabetes. HELAS cohort showed similarities with NELA patients in terms of demographics and preoperative risk. Post-operative utilisation of ICU was significantly lower in the Greek cohort (25.8% vs 56.8%) whereas 30-day post-operative mortality was significantly higher (16.3% vs 8.7%). Conclusion In this study, Greek patients experienced markedly worse mortality after emergency laparotomy compared with their British counterparts. This can be at least partly explained by underutilisation of critical care by surgical patients who are at high risk for death

Development and internal validation of a clinical prediction model for serious complications after emergency laparotomy

Purpose Emergency laparotomy (EL) is a common operation with high risk for postoperative complications, thereby requiring accurate risk stratification to manage vulnerable patients optimally. We developed and internally validated a predictive model of serious complications after EL. Methods Data for eleven carefully selected candidate predictors of 30-day postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grade >  = 3) were extracted from the HELAS cohort of EL patients in 11 centres in Greece and Cyprus. Logistic regression with Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) was applied for model development. Discrimination and calibration measures were estimated and clinical utility was explored with decision curve analysis (DCA). Reproducibility and heterogeneity were examined with Bootstrap-based internal validation and Internal–External Cross-Validation. The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program’s (ACS-NSQIP) model was applied to the same cohort to establish a benchmark for the new model. Results From data on 633 eligible patients (175 complication events), the SErious complications After Laparotomy (SEAL) model was developed with 6 predictors (preoperative albumin, blood urea nitrogen, American Society of Anaesthesiology score, sepsis or septic shock, dependent functional status, and ascites). SEAL had good discriminative ability (optimism-corrected c-statistic: 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.79–0.81), calibration (optimism-corrected calibration slope: 1.01, 95% CI 0.99–1.03) and overall fit (scaled Brier score: 25.1%, 95% CI 24.1–26.1%). SEAL compared favourably with ACS-NSQIP in all metrics, including DCA across multiple risk thresholds. Conclusion SEAL is a simple and promising model for individualized risk predictions of serious complications after EL. Future external validations should appraise SEAL’s transportability across diverse settings

Prospective multicenter external validation of postoperative mortality prediction tools in patients undergoing emergency laparotomy

BACKGROUND Accurate preoperative risk assessment in emergency laparotomy (EL) is valuable for informed decision-making and rational use of resources. Available risk prediction tools have not been validated adequately across diverse healthcare settings. Herein, we report a comparative external validation of 4 widely cited prognostic models. METHODS A multicenter cohort was prospectively composed of consecutive patients undergoing EL in 11 Greek hospitals from January 2020 to May 2021 using the National Emergency Laparotomy (NELA) audit inclusion criteria. 30-day mortality risk predictions were calculated using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP), NELA, Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the enUmeration of Mortality and morbidity (P-POSSUM) and Predictive Optimal Trees in Emergency Surgery Risk (POTTER) tools. Surgeons’ assessment of postoperative mortality using pre-defined cutoffs was recorded, and a surgeon-adjusted ACS-NSQIP prediction was calculated when the original model’s prediction was relatively low. Predictive performances were compared using scaled Brier scores, discrimination and calibration measures and plots, and decision curve analysis. Heterogeneity across hospitals was assessed by random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS 631 patients were included and 30-day mortality was 16.3%. The ACS-NSQIP and its surgeon-adjusted version had the highest scaled Brier scores. All models presented high discriminative ability, with concordance statistics ranging from 0.79 for P-POSSUM to 0.85 for NELA. However, except the surgeon-adjusted ACS-NSQIP (Hosmer-Lemeshow test p = 0.742), all other models were poorly calibrated (p < 0.001). Decision curve analysis revealed superior clinical utility of the ACS-NSQIP. Following recalibrations, predictive accuracy improved for all models but ACS-NSQIP retained the lead. Between-hospital heterogeneity was minimum for the ACS-NSQIP model and maximum for P-POSSUM. CONCLUSION The ACS-NSQIP tool was most accurate for mortality predictions after EL in a broad external validation cohort, demonstrating utility for facilitating preoperative risk management in the Greek healthcare system. Subjective surgeon assessments of patient prognosis may optimise ACS-NSQIP predictions. Level of Evidence Level II, Diagnostic test/criteri

Prospective multicenter external validation of postoperative mortality prediction tools in patients undergoing emergency laparotomy

BACKGROUND: Accurate preoperative risk assessment in emergency laparotomy (EL) is valuable for informed decision making and rational use of resources. Available risk prediction tools have not been validated adequately across diverse health care settings. Herein, we report a comparative external validation of four widely cited prognostic models. METHODS: A multicenter cohort was prospectively composed of consecutive patients undergoing EL in 11 Greek hospitals from January 2020 to May 2021 using the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA) inclusion criteria. Thirty-day mortality risk predictions were calculated using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP), NELA, Portsmouth Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the Enumeration of Mortality and Morbidity (P-POSSUM), and Predictive Optimal Trees in Emergency Surgery Risk tools. Surgeons&apos; assessment of postoperative mortality using predefined cutoffs was recorded, and a surgeon-adjusted ACS-NSQIP prediction was calculated when the original model&apos;s prediction was relatively low. Predictive performances were compared using scaled Brier scores, discrimination and calibration measures and plots, and decision curve analysis. Heterogeneity across hospitals was assessed by random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: A total of 631 patients were included, and 30-day mortality was 16.3%. The ACS-NSQIP and its surgeon-adjusted version had the highest scaled Brier scores. All models presented high discriminative ability, with concordance statistics ranging from 0.79 for P-POSSUM to 0.85 for NELA. However, except the surgeon-adjusted ACS-NSQIP (Hosmer-Lemeshow test, p = 0.742), all other models were poorly calibrated ( p &lt; 0.001). Decision curve analysis revealed superior clinical utility of the ACS-NSQIP. Following recalibrations, predictive accuracy improved for all models, but ACS-NSQIP retained the lead. Between-hospital heterogeneity was minimum for the ACS-NSQIP model and maximum for P-POSSUM. CONCLUSION: The ACS-NSQIP tool was most accurate for mortality predictions after EL in a broad external validation cohort, demonstrating utility for facilitating preoperative risk management in the Greek health care system. Subjective surgeon assessments of patient prognosis may optimize ACS-NSQIP predictions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic Test/Criteria; Level II. Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved

Surgical outcomes of gallbladder cancer: the OMEGA retrospective, multicentre, international cohort study

Background Gallbladder cancer (GBC) is rare but aggressive. The extent of surgical intervention for different GBC stages is non-uniform, ranging from cholecystectomy alone to extended resections including major hepatectomy, resection of adjacent organs and routine extrahepatic bile duct resection (EBDR). Robust evidence here is lacking, however, and survival benefit poorly defined. This study assesses factors associated with recurrence-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS) and morbidity and mortality following GBC surgery in high income countries (HIC) and low and middle income countries (LMIC).Methods The multicentre, retrospective Operative Management of Gallbladder Cancer (OMEGA) cohort study included all patients who underwent GBC resection across 133 centres between 1st January 2010 and 31st December 2020. Regression analyses assessed factors associated with OS, RFS and morbidity.Findings On multivariable analysis of all 3676 patients, wedge resection and segment IVb/V resection failed to improve RFS (HR 1.04 [0.84-1.29], p = 0.711 and HR 1.18 [0.95-1.46], p = 0.13 respectively) or OS (HR 0.96 [0.79-1.17], p = 0.67 and HR 1.48 [1.16-1.88], p = 0.49 respectively), while major hepatectomy was associated with worse RFS (HR 1.33 [1.02-1.74], p = 0.037) and OS (HR 1.26 [1.03-1.53], p = 0.022). Furthermore, EBDR (OR 2.86 [2.3-3.52], p &lt; 0.0010), resection of additional organs (OR 2.22 [1.62-3.02], p &lt; 0.0010) and major hepatectomy (OR 3.81 [2.55-5.73], p &lt; 0.0010) were all associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Compared to LMIC, patients in HIC were associated with poorer RFS (HR 1.18 [1.02-1.37], p = 0.031) but not OS (HR 1.05 [0.91-1.22], p = 0.48). Adjuvant and neoadjuvant treatments were infrequently used.Interpretation In this large, multicentre analysis of GBC surgical outcomes, liver resection was not conclusively associated with improved survival, and extended resections were associated with greater morbidity and mortality without oncological benefit. Aggressive upfront resections do not benefit higher stage GBC, and international col-laborations are needed to develop evidence-based neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment strategies to minimise surgical morbidity and prioritise prognostic benefit.Funding Cambridge Hepatopancreatobiliary Department Research Fund.Copyright &amp; COPY; 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Pancreatic surgery outcomes: multicentre prospective snapshot study in 67 countries

Background: Pancreatic surgery remains associated with high morbidity rates. Although postoperative mortality appears to have improved with specialization, the outcomes reported in the literature reflect the activity of highly specialized centres. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes following pancreatic surgery worldwide.Methods: This was an international, prospective, multicentre, cross-sectional snapshot study of consecutive patients undergoing pancreatic operations worldwide in a 3-month interval in 2021. The primary outcome was postoperative mortality within 90 days of surgery. Multivariable logistic regression was used to explore relationships with Human Development Index (HDI) and other parameters.Results: A total of 4223 patients from 67 countries were analysed. A complication of any severity was detected in 68.7 percent of patients (2901 of 4223). Major complication rates (Clavien-Dindo grade at least IIIa) were 24, 18, and 27 percent, and mortality rates were 10, 5, and 5 per cent in low-to-middle-, high-, and very high-HDI countries respectively. The 90-day postoperative mortality rate was 5.4 per cent (229 of 4223) overall, but was significantly higher in the low-to-middle-HDI group (adjusted OR 2.88, 95 per cent c.i. 1.80 to 4.48). The overall failure-to-rescue rate was 21 percent; however, it was 41 per cent in low-to-middle-compared with 19 per cent in very high-HDI countries.Conclusion: Excess mortality in low-to-middle-HDI countries could be attributable to failure to rescue of patients from severe complications. The authors call for a collaborative response from international and regional associations of pancreatic surgeons to address management related to death from postoperative complications to tackle the global disparities in the outcomes of pancreatic surgery (NCT04652271; ISRCTN95140761)