结肠穿孔后,重症监护室重症医生的术后管理对预后的影响。

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q2 SURGERY Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery Pub Date : 2024-10-25 DOI:10.1007/s00423-024-03516-4
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
{"title":"结肠穿孔后,重症监护室重症医生的术后管理对预后的影响。","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":"{\"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}","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

摘要

目的:结肠穿孔的术后处理是一个重要的预后因素,但不同机构的重症监护医师是否进行术后处理存在差异:我们调查了2018年至2022年期间的291例结肠穿孔患者。患者被分为由重症监护医生管理的患者(ICU 组;n = 40)和非重症监护医生管理的患者(非 ICU 组;n = 251)。我们采用反概率加权法研究了由重症监护医生管理对预后的影响,并明确了哪些患者应咨询重症监护医生:结果:重症监护室组的休克指数明显更高(1.15 vs. 0.75,p 结论:重症监护室组的休克指数明显低于重症监护室组:重症医学科医生参与治疗全身状况不佳但预后极佳的患者。与重症监护医师进行适当的病例会诊非常重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Prognostic impact of postoperative management by an intensive care unit intensivist after colonic perforation.

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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
8.70%
发文量
342
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
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.
期刊最新文献
Intensified outpatient nutrition management improves body weight and skeletal muscle loss after esophageal cancer surgery: a single-center, retrospective, single-arm clinical study. Assessment of first-touch skills in robotic surgical training using hi-Sim and the hinotori surgical robot system among surgeons and novices. Comparing surgical outcomes of powered versus manual surgical staplers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. 3D vs. 2D-4 K: Performance and self-perception of laparoscopic novices in a randomized prospective teaching intervention using standard tasks and box trainers. Research methodologies for eliciting patients' preferences in invasive procedures: a scoping review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1