{"title":"Prognostic impact of postoperative management by an intensive care unit intensivist after colonic perforation.","authors":"Tetsuro Tominaga, Takashi Nonaka, Hiroshi Yano, Shuntaro Sato, Taiga Ichinomiya, Motohiro Sekino, Toshio Shiraishi, Shintaro Hashimoto, Keisuke Noda, Rika Ono, Makoto Hisanaga, Mitsutoshi Ishii, Shosaburo Oyama, Kazuhide Ishimaru, Tetsuya Hara, Keitaro Matsumoto","doi":"10.1007/s00423-024-03516-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Postoperative management for colonic perforation is an important prognostic factor, but whether intensivists perform postoperative management varies between institutions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We investigated 291 patients with colonic perforation between 2018 and 2022. Patients were divided into those managed by an intensivists (ICU group; n = 40) and those not managed by an intensivists (non-ICU group; n = 251). We examined how management by intensivists affected prognosis using inverse probability weighting, and clarified which patients should consult an intensivists.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The ICU group showed a significantly higher shock index (1.15 vs. 0.75, p < 0.01), higher APACHE II score (16.0 vs. 10.0, p < 0.001), and more severe comorbidities (Charlson Comorbidity Index 5.0 vs. 1.0, p < 0.001) and general peritonitis (85% vs. 38%, p < 0.001). Adjusted risk differences were - 24% (-34% to -13%) for 6-month mortality rate. Six-month mortality was improved by ICU intensivist management in patients with general peritonitis (risk difference - 22.8; 95% confidence interval - 34 to -11); APACHE II score ≥20 (-0.79; -1.06 to -0.52); lactate ≥1.6 (-0.38; -0.57 to -0.29); shock index ≥1.0 (-40.01; -54.87 to -25.16); and catecholamine index ≥10 (-41.16; -58.13 to -24.19).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Intensivists were involved in treating patients in poor general condition, but prognosis was extremely good. Appropriate case consultation with intensivists is important.</p>","PeriodicalId":17983,"journal":{"name":"Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-024-03516-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: Postoperative management for colonic perforation is an important prognostic factor, but whether intensivists perform postoperative management varies between institutions.
Methods: We investigated 291 patients with colonic perforation between 2018 and 2022. Patients were divided into those managed by an intensivists (ICU group; n = 40) and those not managed by an intensivists (non-ICU group; n = 251). We examined how management by intensivists affected prognosis using inverse probability weighting, and clarified which patients should consult an intensivists.
Results: The ICU group showed a significantly higher shock index (1.15 vs. 0.75, p < 0.01), higher APACHE II score (16.0 vs. 10.0, p < 0.001), and more severe comorbidities (Charlson Comorbidity Index 5.0 vs. 1.0, p < 0.001) and general peritonitis (85% vs. 38%, p < 0.001). Adjusted risk differences were - 24% (-34% to -13%) for 6-month mortality rate. Six-month mortality was improved by ICU intensivist management in patients with general peritonitis (risk difference - 22.8; 95% confidence interval - 34 to -11); APACHE II score ≥20 (-0.79; -1.06 to -0.52); lactate ≥1.6 (-0.38; -0.57 to -0.29); shock index ≥1.0 (-40.01; -54.87 to -25.16); and catecholamine index ≥10 (-41.16; -58.13 to -24.19).
Conclusions: Intensivists were involved in treating patients in poor general condition, but prognosis was extremely good. Appropriate case consultation with intensivists is important.
期刊介绍:
Langenbeck''s Archives of Surgery aims to publish the best results in the field of clinical surgery and basic surgical research. The main focus is on providing the highest level of clinical research and clinically relevant basic research. The journal, published exclusively in English, will provide an international discussion forum for the controlled results of clinical surgery. The majority of published contributions will be original articles reporting on clinical data from general and visceral surgery, while endocrine surgery will also be covered. Papers on basic surgical principles from the fields of traumatology, vascular and thoracic surgery are also welcome. Evidence-based medicine is an important criterion for the acceptance of papers.