Acute mesenteric ischemia (AMI) is a life-threatening emergency with persistently high mortality rates, requiring improved tools for perioperative risk assessment. This study investigates the real-world outcomes of patients with occlusive arterial AMI undergoing surgery, focusing on predictors of short-term mortality.

A retrospective, single-center analysis was conducted on patients undergoing emergent mesenteric surgery for occlusive arterial AMI between January 2015 and May 2024. The primary outcome was 30-day survival; secondary outcomes included predictors of in-hospital mortality based on preoperative laboratory parameters.

Sixty patients (mean age 75 ± 12 years) were included, with a 30-day survival rate of 45%. Of the 60 patients, 15 (75%) with acute-on-chronic symptoms (n = 20) survived, compared to 12 (30%) with acute onset (n = 40) (P = 0.003). Multivariate Cox regression identified lactate, bicarbonate (HCO3), the HCO3-to-lactate ratio, and neutrophil count as predictors of 30-day mortality. The HCO3-to-lactate ratio ≤10 demonstrated high predictive accuracy (area under the curve 0.832, sensitivity 90.6%, specificity 75%). In acute-onset cases, excluding acute-on-chronic symptoms improved specificity to 100%.

The HCO3-to-lactate ratio is a robust prognostic marker in occlusive arterial AMI, reflecting both tissue hypoperfusion and impaired metabolic compensation. These findings support its potential utility in risk stratification and in guiding clinical decision-making in the emergent management of AMI.

Evidence to guide the application of damage control laparotomy (DCL) in emergency surgery patients is limited. We assessed whether DCL use for emergent small bowel or colon surgery increased over time and its impact on outcomes. We hypothesized that DCL would be utilized more often in patients with significant comorbidities or septic shock with improved outcomes.

National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) data on DCL patients from 2014 to 2020 were used. Endpoints were incidence of DCL, in-hospital mortality, hospital length of stay (LOS), complications, and 30-day readmission over time. P-values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

DCL incidence increased over time (OR = 1.07 [1.05-1.08], p < 0.001). Presence of pre-operative septic shock increased over the years (OR = 1.04 [1.01-1.07], p = 0.007). Mortality, readmission, and post-operative septic complications did not change over the study period. Average LOS significantly decreased over time (OR = 0.93 [0.92-0.95], p < 0.001).

The odds of a surgeon using DCL increased by 7% each year. Although pre-operative septic shock incidence increased, LOS decreased over time while mortality remained unchanged.

This study aimed to analyze the prognostic value of the SOFA, APACHE II, and MPI (Mannheim Peritonitis Index) scores in the indication for Damage Control Surgery (DCS) in non-trauma. Retrospective analysis of patients undergoing DCS between 2014 and 2019. SOFA and APACHE II scores were calculated using parameters preceding DCS, while MPI was based on surgical descriptions. Statistical analysis: Qualitative variables were compared using the Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test, and quantitative variables using Pearson's correlation coefficient. The Student's T test was employed for mean comparisons. The sample comprised 104 patients (59 males), with a median age of 63.5 years, of whom 52 (50%) were ASA IV. Operative findings leading to DCS included peritonitis (54; 51.9%), intestinal ischemia (39; 37.5%), inability to close the abdomen (8; 7.6%), and bleeding (3; 2.9%). The mortality rate was 75% (78/104). Thirty patients (28.8%) died after DCS; the remainder underwent one (35; 33.6%), two (21; 20.2%); three (8; 7.7%), and four or more (10;9.7%) revision procedures. The median lengths of ICU and hospital stays were 12.5 and 20.5 days, respectively. The median score values were as follows: SOFA: 12 (0-38), APACHE II: 25 (2-47), and MPI: 26 (8-43). Besides ASA classification (p = 0.03), mortality risk was influenced by: age (≤ 65 years vs. > 65 years; p = 0.04), SOFA (≤ 10 vs. > 10; p = 0.03), APACHE II (≤ 25 vs. > 25; p = 0.04), and MPI (≤ 25 vs. > 25; p = 0.003). The SOFA, APACHE II, and MPI scores proved to be valuable tools in the prognostic assessment of patients undergoing DCS in non-traumatic abdominal emergencies.

Patients undergoing liver transplantation are in a state of coagulopathy before surgery because of liver failure. Intraoperative hemorrhage, massive transfusions, and post-reperfusion syndrome further contribute to coagulopathy, acidosis, and hypothermia. In such situations, temporary cessation of surgery with open abdominal management and resuscitation in the intensive care unit (ICU), which is commonly used as a damage control strategy in trauma care, may be effective. We assessed the outcomes of open abdominal management in liver transplantation and the corresponding complication rates.

We retrospectively reviewed the outcomes of patients undergoing open abdominal management among 250 consecutive liver transplantation cases performed at our institution from 2009 to 2022.

Open abdominal management was indicated in 16 patients. The open abdomen management group had higher Model for End-stage Liver Disease scores (24 versus 16, P < 0.01), a higher incidence of previous upper abdominal surgery (50% versus 18%, P < 0.01), more pretransplant ICU treatment (31% versus 10%, P = 0.03), and more renal replacement therapy (38% versus 12%, P = 0.01). At the time of the damage control decision, coagulopathy (81%), acidosis (38%), hypothermia (31%), and a high-dose noradrenaline requirement (75%) were observed. The abdominal wall was closed in the second operation in 75% of patients, in the third operation in 19%, and in the fourth operation in 6%. Postoperatively, the frequency of early allograft dysfunction was predominantly higher in the open abdominal management group (69%), whereas the frequency of vascular complications and intra-abdominal infection was the same as in other patients.

Open abdominal management can be a crucial option in cases of complex liver transplant complicated by conditions such as hypothermia, acidosis, coagulopathy, and hemodynamic instability. Damage control management minimizes deterioration of the patient's condition during surgery, allowing completion of the planned procedure after stabilizing the patient's overall condition in the ICU.

Uncontrolled massive bleeding and bowel edema are critical issues during liver transplantation. Temporal intra-abdominal packing with staged biliary reconstruction (SBR) yields acceptable outcomes in deceased donor liver transplantation; however, data on living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) are scarce.

A retrospective analysis of 1269 patients who underwent LDLT was performed. After one-to-two propensity score matching, patients who underwent LDLT with SBR were compared with those who underwent LDLT with one-stage biliary reconstruction (OSBR). The primary outcomes were graft survival (GS) and overall survival (OS), and the secondary outcomes were postoperative biliary complications.

There were 55 and 110 patients in the SBR and OSBR groups, respectively. The median blood loss was 6500 mL in the SBR and 4875 mL in the OSBR group. Patients receiving SBR-LDLT had higher incidence of sepsis (69.0% vs. 43.6%; P < 0.01) and intra-abdominal infections (60.0% vs. 30.9%; P < 0.01). Biliary complication rates (14.5% vs. 19.1%; P = 0.47) and 1-and 5-year GS (87.27%, 74.60% vs. 83.64%, 72.71%; P = 0.98) and OS (89.09%, 78.44% vs. 84.55%, 73.70%; P = 0.752) rates were comparable between the two groups.

SBR could serve as a life-saving procedure for patients undergoing complex critical LDLT, with GS, OS, and biliary outcomes comparable to those of OSBR.

The rupture of splenic artery pseudoaneurysm (SAP) is life-threatening disease, often caused by trauma and pancreatitis. SAPs often rupture into the abdominal cavity and rarely into the stomach.

A 70-year-old male with no previous medical history was transported to our emergency center with transient loss of consciousness and tarry stools. After admission, the patient become hemodynamically unstable and his upper abdomen became markedly distended. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography performed on admission showed the presence of a splenic artery aneurysm (SAP) at the bottom of a gastric ulcer. Based on the clinical picture and evidence on explorative tests, we established a preliminary diagnosis of ruptured SAP bleeding into the stomach and performed emergency laparotomy. Intraoperative findings revealed the presence of a large intra-abdominal hematoma that had ruptured into the stomach. When we performed gastrotomy at the anterior wall of the stomach from the ruptured area, we found pulsatile bleeding from the exposed SAP; therefore, the SAP was ligated from inside of the stomach, with gauze packing into the ulcer. We temporarily closed the stomach wall and performed open abdomen management, as a damage control surgery (DCS) approach. On the third day of admission, total gastrectomy and splenectomy were performed, and reconstruction surgery was performed the next day. Histopathological studies of the stomach samples indicated the presence of moderately differentiated tubular adenocarcinoma. Since no malignant cells were found at the rupture site, we concluded that the gastric rupture was caused by increased internal pressure due to the intra-abdominal hematoma.

We successfully treated a patient with intragastric rupture of the SAP that was caused by gastric cancer invasion, accompanied by gastric rupture, by performing DCS. When treating gastric bleeding, such rare causes must be considered and appropriate diagnostic and therapeutic strategies should be designed according to the cause of bleeding.

severe abdominal sepsis, accompained by diffuse peritonitis, poses a significant challenge for most surgeons. It often requires repetitive surgical interventions, leading to complications and resulting in high morbidity and mortality rates. The open abdomen technique, facilitated by applying a negative-pressure wound therapy (NPWT), reduces the duration of the initial surgical procedure, minimizes the accumulation of secretions and inflammatory mediators in the abdominal cavity and lowers the risk of abdominal compartment syndrome and its associated complications. Another approach is primary closure of the abdominal aponeurosis, which involves suturing the layers of the abdominal wall.

the objective of this study is to conduct a survival analysis comparing the treatment of severe abdominal sepsis using open abdomen technique versus primary closure after laparotomy in a public hospital in the South of Brazil. We utilized data extracted from electronic medical records to perform both descriptive and survival analysis, employing the Kaplan-Meier curve and a log-rank test.

the study sample encompassed 75 laparotomies conducted over a span of 5 years, with 40 cases employing NPWT and 35 cases utilizing primary closure. The overall mortality rate observed was 55%. Notably, survival rates did not exhibit statistical significance when comparing the two methods, even after stratifying the data into separate analysis groups for each technique.

recent publications on this subject have reported some favorable outcomes associated with the open abdomen technique underscoring the pressing need for a standardized approach to managing patients with severe, complicated abdominal sepsis.

We examined outcomes in Acute Mesenteric Ischemia (AMI) with the hypothesis that Open Abdomen (OA) is associated with decreased mortality.

We performed a cohort study reviewing NSQIP emergency laparotomy patients, 2016-2020, with a postoperative diagnosis of mesenteric ischemia. OA was defined using flags for patients without fascial closure. Logistic regression was used with outcomes of 30-day mortality and several secondary outcomes.

Out of 5514 cases, 4624 (83.9%) underwent resection and 387 (7.0%) underwent revascularization. The OA rate was 32.6%. 10.8% of patients who were closed required reoperation. After adjustment for demographics, transfer status, comorbidities, preoperative variables including creatinine, white blood cell count, and anemia, as well as operative time, OA was associated with OR 1.58 for mortality (95% CI [1.38, 1.81], p < 0.001). Among revascularizations, there was no such association (p = 0.528). OA was associated with ventilator support >48 h (OR 4.04, 95% CI [3.55, 4.62], and p < 0.001).

OA in AMI was associated with increased mortality and prolonged ventilation. This is not so in revascularization patients, and 1 in 10 patients who underwent primary closure required reoperation. OA should be considered in specific cases of AMI.

Retrospective cohort, Level III.

While the principles of damage control surgery - rapid hemorrhage and contamination control with correction of physiologic derangements followed by delayed definitive reconstruction - have remained consistent, forms of damage control intervention have evolved and proliferated dramatically. This review aims to provide a historic perspective of the early trends of damage control surgery as well as an updated understanding of its current state and future trends.

Physiologically depleted patients in shock due to both traumatic and nontraumatic causes are often treated with damage control laparotomy and surgical principles. Damage control surgery has also been shown to be safe and effective in thoracic and orthopedic injuries. Damage control resuscitation is used in conjunction with surgical source control to restore patient physiology and prevent further collapse. The overuse of damage control laparotomy, however, is associated with increased morbidity and complications. With advancing technology, catheter- and stent-based endovascular modalities are playing a larger role in the resuscitation and definitive care of patients.

Optimal outcome in the care of the most severely injured patients requires judicious use of damage control surgery supplemented by advancements in resuscitation and surgical adjuncts.

Selective non traumatic emergency surgery patients are targets for damage control surgery (DCS) to prevent or treat abdominal compartment syndrome and the lethal triad. However, DCS is still a subject of controversy. As a concept, DCS describes a series of abbreviated surgical procedures to allow rapid source control of hemorrhage and contamination in patients with circulatory shock to allow resuscitation and stabilization in the intensive care unit followed by delayed return to the operating room for definitive surgical management once the patient becomes physiologic stable. If appropriately applied, the DCS morbidity and mortality can be significantly reduced.

Severe complicated intra-abdominal sepsis (SCIAS) has an increasing incidence with mortality rates over 80% in some settings. Mortality typically results from disruption of the gastrointestinal tract, progressive and self-perpetuating bio-mediator generation, systemic inflammation, and multiple organ failure. A further therapeutic option may be open abdomen (OA) management with negative peritoneal pressure therapy (NPPT) to remove inflammatory ascites and attenuate the systemic damage from SCIAS, although there are definite risks of leaving the abdomen open whenever it might possibly be closed. This potential therapeutic paradigm is the rationale being assessed in the Closed Or Open after Laparotomy (COOL trial) ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03163095 ). Initially, the COOL trial received Industry sponsorship; however, this funding mandated the use of a specific trademarked and expensive NPPT device in half of the patients allocated to the intervention (open) arm. In August 2022, the 3 M/Acelity Corporation without consultation but within the terms of the contract canceled the financial support of the trial. Although creating financial difficulty, there is now no restriction on specific NPPT devices and removing a cost-prohibitive intervention creates an opportunity to expand the COOL trial to a truly global basis. This document describes the evolution of the COOL trial, with a focus on future opportunities for global growth of the study.

The COOL trial is the largest prospective randomized controlled trial examining the random allocation of SCIAS patients intra-operatively to either formal closure of the fascia or the use of the OA with an application of an NPPT dressing. Patients are eligible if they have free uncontained intraperitoneal contamination and physiologic derangements exemplified by septic shock OR severely adverse predicted clinical outcomes. The primary outcome is intended to definitively inform global practice by conclusively evaluating 90-day survival. Initial recruitment has been lower than hoped but satisfactory, and the COOL steering committee and trial investigators intend with increased global support to continue enrollment until recruitment ensures a definitive answer.

OA is mandated in many cases of SCIAS such as the risk of abdominal compartment syndrome associated with closure, or a planned second look as for example part of "damage control"; however, improved source control (locally and systemically) is the most uncertain indication for an OA. The COOL trial seeks to expand potential sites and proceed with the evaluation of NPPT agnostic to device, to properly examine the hypothesis that this treatment attenuates systemic damage and improves survival. This approach will not affect internal validity and should improve the external validity of any observed results of the intervention.

National Institutes of Health ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03163095 ).

Severe complicated intra-abdominal sepsis (SCIAS) has an increasing incidence with mortality rates over 80% in some settings. Mortality typically results from disruption of the gastrointestinal tract, progressive and self-perpetuating bio-mediator generation, systemic inflammation, and multiple organ failure. A further therapeutic option may be open abdomen (OA) management with negative peritoneal pressure therapy (NPPT) to remove inflammatory ascites and attenuate the systemic damage from SCIAS, although there are definite risks of leaving the abdomen open whenever it might possibly be closed. This potential therapeutic paradigm is the rationale being assessed in the Closed Or Open after Laparotomy (COOL trial) ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03163095 ). Initially, the COOL trial received Industry sponsorship; however, this funding mandated the use of a specific trademarked and expensive NPPT device in half of the patients allocated to the intervention (open) arm. In August 2022, the 3 M/Acelity Corporation without consultation but within the terms of the contract canceled the financial support of the trial. Although creating financial difficulty, there is now no restriction on specific NPPT devices and removing a cost-prohibitive intervention creates an opportunity to expand the COOL trial to a truly global basis. This document describes the evolution of the COOL trial, with a focus on future opportunities for global growth of the study.

The COOL trial is the largest prospective randomized controlled trial examining the random allocation of SCIAS patients intra-operatively to either formal closure of the fascia or the use of the OA with an application of an NPPT dressing. Patients are eligible if they have free uncontained intraperitoneal contamination and physiologic derangements exemplified by septic shock OR severely adverse predicted clinical outcomes. The primary outcome is intended to definitively inform global practice by conclusively evaluating 90-day survival. Initial recruitment has been lower than hoped but satisfactory, and the COOL steering committee and trial investigators intend with increased global support to continue enrollment until recruitment ensures a definitive answer.

OA is mandated in many cases of SCIAS such as the risk of abdominal compartment syndrome associated with closure, or a planned second look as for example part of "damage control"; however, improved source control (locally and systemically) is the most uncertain indication for an OA. The COOL trial seeks to expand potential sites and proceed with the evaluation of NPPT agnostic to device, to properly examine the hypothesis that this treatment attenuates systemic damage and improves survival. This approach will not affect internal validity and should improve the external validity of any observed results of the intervention.

National Institutes of Health ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03163095 ).

Initially used in trauma management, delayed abdominal closure endeavors to decrease operative time during the index operation while still being lifesaving. Its use in emergency general surgery is increasing, but the data evaluating its outcome are sparse. We aimed to study the association between delayed abdominal closure, mortality, morbidity, and length of stay in an emergency surgery cohort.

The 2013 to 2017 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was examined for patients undergoing emergency laparotomy. The patients were classified by the timing of abdominal wall closure: delayed fascial closure versus immediate fascial closure. Propensity score matching was performed based on preoperative covariates, wound classification, and performance of bowel resection. The outcomes were then compared by univariable analysis.

After matching, both the delayed fascial closure and immediate fascial closure groups consisted of 3,354 patients each. Median age was 65 years, and 52.6% were female. The delayed fascial closure group had a higher in-hospital mortality (35.3% vs 25.0%, P < .001), a higher 30-day mortality (38.6% vs 29.0%, P < .001), a higher proportion of acute kidney injury (9.5% vs 6.6%, P < .001), a lower proportion of postoperative sepsis (11.8% vs 15.6%, P < .001), and a lower proportion of surgical site infection (3.4% vs 7.0%, P < .001).

Compared with immediate fascial closure, delayed fascial closure is associated with an increased mortality in the patients matched based on comorbidities and surgical site contamination. In emergency general surgery, delaying abdominal closure may not have the presumed overarching benefits, and its indications must be further defined in this population.

Acute mesenteric ischemia (AMI) is a group of diseases characterized by an interruption of the blood supply to varying portions of the intestine, leading to ischemia and secondary inflammatory changes. If untreated, this process may progress to life-threatening intestinal necrosis. The incidence is low, estimated at 0.09-0.2% of all acute surgical admissions, but increases with age. Although the entity is an uncommon cause of abdominal pain, diligence is required because if untreated, mortality remains in the range of 50%. Early diagnosis and timely surgical intervention are the cornerstones of modern treatment to reduce the high mortality associated with this entity. The advent of endovascular approaches in parallel with modern imaging techniques is evolving and provides new treatment options. Lastly, a focused multidisciplinary approach based on early diagnosis and individualized treatment is essential. Thus, we believe that updated guidelines from World Society of Emergency Surgery are warranted, in order to provide the most recent and practical recommendations for diagnosis and treatment of AMI.

Patients presenting with acute abdominal pain that occurs after months or years following bariatric surgery may present for assessment and management in the local emergency units. Due to the large variety of surgical bariatric techniques, emergency surgeons have to be aware of the main functional outcomes and long-term surgical complications following the most performed bariatric surgical procedures. The purpose of these evidence-based guidelines is to present a consensus position from members of the WSES in collaboration with IFSO bariatric experienced surgeons, on the management of acute abdomen after bariatric surgery focusing on long-term complications in patients who have undergone laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.

A working group of experienced general, acute care, and bariatric surgeons was created to carry out a systematic review of the literature following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) and to answer the PICO questions formulated after the Operative management in bariatric acute abdomen survey. The literature search was limited to late/long-term complications following laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.

The acute abdomen after bariatric surgery is a common cause of admission in emergency departments. Knowledge of the most common late/long-term complications (> 4 weeks after surgical procedure) following sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and their anatomy leads to a focused management in the emergency setting with good outcomes and decreased morbidity and mortality rates. A close collaboration between emergency surgeons, radiologists, endoscopists, and anesthesiologists is mandatory in the management of this group of patients in the emergency setting.

Wound class in hernia repairs impacts surgical technique and outcomes. Hernia recurrence and complications are high when dirty wounds are treated in one stage. We hypothesize patients who undergo intentionally staged repairs are less likely to have adverse outcomes and associated costs.

Patients were identified by retrospective chart review. Patient characteristics and outcome variables were collected. An economic analysis of cost variables was performed using medical records and published meta-analyses.

There were 8 patients in the staged repairs group and 10 patients in the control group. Length of stay was 14.9 days (±8.8), and 8.7 days (±6.4), respectively. Rate of hernia recurrence within 1 year was 14.3% and 37.5%. Rate of mesh infection at 30 days was 0% and 10%. Compared to controls, delayed-immediate repairs had a nearly 2-fold index surgical cost.

Although there is an increased cost associated with delayed-immediate repairs, this cost may be offset by the decreased infection, seroma, dehiscence, enterocutaneous fistula formation, and hernia recurrence rate that necessitates future interventions. Further data collection is required to determine if clinical and economic benefit is seen long-term.

Damage control laparotomy (DCL) is used for both traumatic and non-traumatic indications. Failure to achieve primary fascial closure (PFC) in a timely fashion has been associated with complications including sepsis, fistula, and mortality. We sought to identify factors associated with time to PFC in a multicenter retrospective cohort.

We reviewed retrospective data from 15 centers in the EAST SLEEP-TIME registry, including age, comorbidities (Charlson Comorbidity Index [CCI]), small and large bowel resection, bowel discontinuity, vascular procedures, retained packs, number of re-laparotomies, net fluid balance after 24 h, trauma, and time to first takeback in 12-h increments to identify key factors associated with time to PFC.

In total, 368 patients (71.2% trauma, of which 50.6% were penetrating, median ISS 25 [16, 34], with median Apache II score 15 [11, 22] in non-trauma) were in the cohort. Of these, 92.9% of patients achieved PFC at 60.8 ± 72.0 h after 1.6 ± 1.2 re-laparotomies. Each additional re-laparotomy reduced the odds of PFC by 91.5% (95%CI 88.2-93.9%, p < 0.001). Time to first re-laparotomy was highly significant (p < 0.001) in terms of odds of achieving PFC, with no difference between 12 and 24 h to first re-laparotomy (ref), and decreases in odds of PFC of 78.4% (65.8-86.4%, p < 0.001) for first re-laparotomy after 24.1-36 h, 90.8% (84.7-94.4%, p < 0.001) for 36.1-48 h, and 98.1% (96.4-99.0%, p < 0.001) for > 48 h. Trauma patients had increased likelihood of PFC in two separate analyses (p = 0.022 and 0.002).

Time to re-laparotomy ≤ 24 h and minimizing number of re-laparotomies are highly predictive of rapid achievement of PFC in patients after trauma- and non-trauma DCL.

2B.

Background: Trauma patients undergoing damage control surgery (DCS) have a propensity for complicated abdominal closures and intra-abdominal complications. Studies show that management of open abdomens with direct peritoneal resuscitation (DPR) reduces intra-abdominal complications and accelerates abdominal closure. This novel study compares intra-abdominal complication rates and the effect of DPR initiation in patients who received DPR and those who did not. Patients and Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed on 120 patients who underwent DCS. Fifty patients were identified as DCS with DPR, and matched to 70 controls by gender, race, age, body mass index (BMI), past medical history, mechanism of trauma, and injury severity score. Results: The two groups of patients, those without DPR (-DPR) and those with DPR (+DPR), were similar in their characteristics. The +DPR group was more likely to have a mesh closure than the -DPR (14% and 3%; p = 0.022). The +DPR group took longer to have a final closure (3.5 ± 2.6 days vs. 2.5 ± 1.8; p = 0.020). Infection complications and mechanical failure of the closure technique were similar among the two groups. Timing of DPR initiation had no effect on closure type but did statistically increase the number of days to closure (initiation at first operation 2.8 ± 1.8 days vs. initiation at subsequent operations 6.0 ± 3.3 days; p ≤ 0.001). Conclusions: The use of DPR did not result in different outcomes in trauma patients. Therefore, traditional resuscitative measures for DCS may not be inferior to DCS with DPR. When choosing to use DPR, initiating it at the first operation could reduce the number of days to closure.

To evaluate factors associated with ICU delirium in patients who underwent damage control laparotomy (DCL), with the hypothesis that benzodiazepines and paralytic infusions would be associated with increased delirium risk. We also sought to evaluate the differences in sedation practices between trauma (T) and non-trauma (NT) patients.

We reviewed retrospective data from 15 centers in the EAST SLEEP-TIME registry admitted from January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2018. We included all adults undergoing DCL, regardless of diagnosis, who had completed daily Richmond Agitation Sedation Score (RASS) and Confusion Assessment Method-ICU (CAM-ICU). We excluded patients younger than 18 years, pregnant women, prisoners and patients who died before the first re-laparotomy. Data collected included age, number of re-laparotomies after DCL, duration of paralytic infusion, duration and type of sedative and opioid infusions as well as daily CAM-ICU and RASS scores to analyze risk factors associated with the proportion of delirium-free/coma-free ICU days during the first 30 days (DF/CF-ICU-30) using multivariate linear regression.

A 353 patient subset (73.2% trauma) from the overall 567-patient cohort had complete daily RASS and CAM-ICU data. NT patients were older (58.9 ± 16.0 years vs 40.5 ± 17.0 years [p < 0.001]). Mean DF/CF-ICU-30 days was 73.7 ± 96.4% for the NT and 51.3 ± 38.7% in the T patients (p = 0.030). More T patients were exposed to Midazolam, 41.3% vs 20.3% (p = 0.002). More T patients were exposed to Propofol, 91.0% vs 71.9% (p < 0.001) with longer infusion times in T compared to NT (71.2 ± 85.9 vs 48.9 ± 69.8 h [p = 0.017]). Paralytic infusions were also used more in T compared to NT, 34.8% vs 18.2% (p < 0.001). Using linear regression, dexmedetomidine infusion and paralytic infusions were associated with decreases in DF/CF-ICU-30, (- 2.78 (95%CI [- 5.54, - 0.024], p = 0.040) and (- 7.08 ([- 13.0, - 1.10], p = 0.020) respectively.

Although the relationship between paralytic use and delirium is well-established, the observation that dexmedetomidine exposure is independently associated with increased delirium and coma is novel and bears further study.

Patients undergoing laparotomy for emergency general surgery (EGS) conditions, constitute a high-risk group with poor outcomes. These patients have a high prevalence of comorbidities. This study aims to identify patient factors, physiological and time-related factors, which place patients into a group at increased risk of mortality.

In a retrospective analysis of all patients undergoing an emergency laparotomy at Greys Hospital from December 2012 to 2018, we used decision tree discrimination to identify high-risk groups.

Our cohort included 1461 patients undergoing a laparotomy for an EGS condition. The mortality rate was 12.4% (181). Nine hundred and ten patients (62.3%) had at least one known comorbidity on admission. There was a higher rate of comorbidities among those that died (154; 85.1%). Patient factors found to be associated with mortality were the age of 46 years or greater (p < 0.001), current tuberculosis (p < 0.001), hypertension (p = 0.014), at least one comorbidity (0.006), and malignancy (0.033). Significant physiological risk factors for mortality were base excess less than -6.8 mmol/L (p < 0.001), serum urea greater than 7.0 mmol/L (p < 0.001) and waiting time from admission to operation (p = 0.014). In patients with an enteric breach, those younger than 46 years and a Shock Index of more than 1.0 were high-risk. Patients without an enteric breach were high-risk if operative duration exceeded 90 min (p = 0.004) and serum urea exceeding 7 mmol/dl (p = 0.016).

In EGS patients, patient factors as well as physiological factors place patients into a high-risk group. Identifying a high-risk group should prompt consideration for an adjusted approach that ameliorates outcomes.

Damage control surgery (DCS) with temporary abdominal closure (TAC) is increasingly utilized in emergency general surgery (EGS). As the population ages, more geriatric patients (GP) are undergoing EGS operations. Concern exists for GP's ability to tolerate DCS. We hypothesize that DCS in GP does not increase morbidity or mortality and has similar rates of primary closure compared to non-geriatric patients (NGP).

A retrospective chart review from 2014-2020 was conducted on all non-trauma EGS patients who underwent DCS with TAC. Demographics, admission lab values, fluid amounts, length of stay (LOS), timing of closure, post-operative complications and mortality were collected. GP were compared to NGP and results were analyzed using Chi square and Wilcox signed rank test.

Ninety-eight patients (n = 50, <65 y; n = 48, ≥65 y) met inclusion criteria. There was no significant difference in median number of operations (3 versus 2), time to primary closure (2.5 versus 3 d), hospital LOS (19 versus 17.5 d), ICU LOS (11 versus 8 d), rate of primary closure (66% versus 56%), post op ileus (44% versus 48%), abscess (14% versus 10%), need for surgery after closure (32% versus 19%), anastomotic dehiscence (16% versus 6%), or mortality (34% versus 42%). Average time until take back after index procedure did not vary significantly between young and elderly group (45.8 versus 38.5 h; P = 0.89). GP were more likely to have hypertension (83% versus 50%; P ≤ 0.05), atrial fibrillation (25% versus 4%; P ≤ 0.05) and lower median heart rate compared to NGP (90 versus 103; P ≤ 0.05).

DCS with TAC in geriatric EGS patients achieves similar outcomes and mortality to younger patients. Indication, not age, should factor into the decision to perform DCS.

Damage-control laparotomy (DCL) has been used for traumatic and nontraumatic indications. We studied factors associated with delirium and outcome in this population.

We reviewed DCL patients at 15 centers for 2 years, including demographics, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), diagnosis, operations, and outcomes. We compared 30-day mortality; renal failure requiring dialysis; number of takebacks; hospital, ventilator, and intensive care unit (ICU) days; and delirium-free and coma-free proportion of the first 30 ICU days (DF/CF-ICU-30) between trauma (T) and nontrauma (NT) patients. We performed linear regression for DF/CF-ICU-30, including age, sex, CCI, achievement of primary fascial closure (PFC), small and large bowel resection, bowel discontinuity, abdominal vascular procedures, and trauma as covariates. We performed one-way analysis of variance for DF/CF-ICU-30 against traumatic brain injury severity as measured by Abbreviated Injury Scale for the head.

Among 554 DCL patients (25.8% NT), NT patients were older (58.9 ± 15.8 vs. 39.7 ± 17.0 years, p < 0.001), more female (45.5% vs. 22.1%, p < 0.001), and had higher CCI (4.7 ± 3.3 vs. 1.1 ± 2.2, p < 0.001). The number of takebacks (1.7 ± 2.6 vs. 1.5 ± 1.2), time to first takeback (32.0 hours), duration of bowel discontinuity (47.0 hours), and time to PFC were similar (63.2 hours, achieved in 73.5%). Nontrauma and T patients had similar ventilator, ICU, and hospital days and mortality (31.0% NT, 29.8% T). Nontrauma patients had higher rates of renal failure requiring dialysis (36.6% vs. 14.1%, p < 0.001) and postoperative abdominal sepsis (40.1% vs. 17.1%, p < 0.001). Trauma and NT patients had similar number of hours of sedative (89.9 vs. 65.5 hours, p = 0.064) and opioid infusions (106.9 vs. 96.7 hours, p = 0.514), but T had lower DF/CF-ICU-30 (51.1% vs. 73.7%, p = 0.029), indicating more delirium. Linear regression analysis indicated that T was associated with a 32.1% decrease (95% CI, 14.6%-49.5%; p < 0.001) in DF/CF-ICU-30, while achieving PFC was associated with a 25.1% increase (95% CI, 10.2%-40.1%; p = 0.001) in DF/CFICU-30. Increasing Abbreviated Injury Scale for the head was associated with decreased DF/CF-ICU-30 by analysis of variance (p < 0.001).

Nontrauma patients had higher incidence of postoperative abdominal sepsis and need for dialysis, while T was independently associated with increased delirium, perhaps because of traumatic brain injury.

Therapeutic study, level IV.