Search

Background: Infections after abdominal surgery remain a significant problem. Although preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis is a primary strategy used to reduce postoperative infections, it is typically prescribed based on standardized protocols, without attention to previous infection or antibiotic history. Patients with a previous infection after surgery may be at higher risk for infectious complications after subsequent operations owing to antibiotic resistance. We hypothesized that a previous postoperative infection is a significant risk factor for the development of infection after a second unrelated surgery., Study Design: We performed a retrospective study of patients who had undergone 2 unrelated abdominal operations at a tertiary care center from 2012 to 2018. Clinical variables and microbiological culture results were abstracted. Univariate and multivariable regression models were constructed., Results: Of 758 patients, 15.0% (n = 114) developed an infection after the first operation. After the second operation, 22.8% (n = 26) of those with a previous infection developed another infection, whereas the incidence of an infection after the second operation was only 9.5% (n = 61) in patients who did not develop an infection after the first operation. Multivariable analysis demonstrated that previous infection (odds ratio 2.49, 95% CI 1.46 to 4.25) was associated with future infection risk. Microbiological analysis found that infections after the second surgery were significantly more likely to be antibiotic resistant than infections after the first surgery (82.3% vs 64.1%; p = 0.036). Strikingly, 49% of infections after the second surgery were resistant to the antibiotic prophylaxis given at the time of incision., Conclusions: Previous postoperative infection is an independent risk factor for a subsequent postoperative infection and is associated with resistance to standard prophylaxis. Individualization of antibiotic prophylaxis in patients with a previous postoperative infection is warranted., (Copyright © 2022 by the American College of Surgeons. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Anastomotic leak is a serious complication of gastrointestinal surgery. Abnormal vital signs are often cited in retrospective peer review and medicolegal settings as evidence of negligence in the failure to make an early diagnosis. We aimed to profile the postoperative courses of patients who undergo intestinal anastomosis and determine how reliably abnormal vital signs predict anastomotic leaks., Study Design: Consecutive patients undergoing bowel resection with anastomosis at an academic medical center from July 2009 through July 2011 were identified from a prospective complication database. The electronic medical record was queried for postoperative vital signs and laboratory studies, which were digitally abstracted. Abnormal values were defined as temperature >38°C, white blood cell count ≤4,000 or ≥12,000 cells/uL, systolic blood pressure ≤80 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure ≤50 mmHg, pulse ≥100 beats per minute, and respiratory rate ≥20 breaths per minute. Patients who developed an anastomotic leak were compared with those with an uncomplicated postoperative course., Results: Of the 452 patients, 141 (31.2%) suffered a total of 271 complications, including 19 anastomotic leaks. Even in "uncomplicated" recoveries, tachycardia and tachypnea were almost routine, occurring in more than half of the patients frequently throughout the postoperative period. Hypotension, fever, and leukocytosis were also remarkably common. The positive predictive value of any aberrant vital sign or white blood cell count ranged between 4% and 11%., Conclusions: Abnormal vital signs are extremely common after bowel resection with anastomosis. Even sustained aberrant vital signs and/or leukocytosis are not necessarily suggestive of a leak or other postoperative complication., (Copyright © 2014. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Anastomotic leak is a dreaded complication of intestinal surgery and has been associated with a high mortality rate. But it is uncertain exactly which patient populations are at risk of death from the leak. We sought to assess the impact of surgeon volume on leak rate and to better understand the relationship of a leak to postoperative mortality., Study Design: All adult patients having a small or large bowel resection with anastomosis at a university hospital from July 2003 to June 2006 were entered into a prospectively maintained quality database; data were entered by a specially trained nurse practitioner who rounded daily with housestaff. Patients with a postoperative leak based on standardized criteria were identified. Patient characteristics, surgical procedure, and operating surgeon were noted. Overall complication and leak rates by surgeon were compared using Fisher's exact test. Individual case review by a group of peers was performed for all patients with a leak who died, to determine the relationship to mortality., Results: Five hundred fifty-six patients underwent resection with anastomosis during the study period. There were 27 patients with leaks (4.9%), 6 of whom died. Leak rate for the highest-volume surgeons ranged from 1.6% to 9.9% (p <0.01), and overall complication rate varied from 30.5% to 44% (p=0.04). In four of six deaths, leaks occurred in very ill patients undergoing emergency procedures and appeared to be premorbid events. In only one patient did the leak appear to be the primary cause of death., Conclusions: The variability in leak rate by surgeons doing similar operations suggests that many leaks may be preventable. But death after a leak is most often a surrogate for a critically ill patient and was infrequently the actual cause of death.

Background: The need for risk-adjusted databases to benchmark quality is well recognized. Data entry is typically performed by physician surrogates who are variably involved in patient care and might be unable to capture key elements of patient care known only to the operating surgeon. The primary purpose of this study was to assess the feasibility of developing a multi-institutional, prospective, surgeon-initiated database and, secondarily, to compare the data collected with chart review., Study Design: The New England Colorectal Society project registry was a prospective, multi-institutional regional database of consecutive patients undergoing operation for colorectal cancer at 13 participating institutions from July 2003 to June 2004. Three sites were chosen for case entry compliance and a random 10% sampling of cases was selected for chart review., Results: Five hundred sixty-nine patients were entered by 26 surgeons at 13 study sites. Two hundred nineteen complications were reported in 168 patients including 6 deaths (1.1%). Case entry compliance ranged from 45% to 100% by site and 25.5% to 100% by surgeon. There was at least one discrepancy between surgeon entry and chart review in 96% of cases; intraoperative complications and key surgical details reported by the surgeon were frequently absent from the chart., Conclusions: Surgeons will participate in a collaborative, multi-institutional quality database. Compliance was variable, indicating that surgeon data entry cannot reliably replace other means of data collection. The surgeon might be able to provide key pieces of data, not otherwise available, that can be critical to understanding and improving outcomes.