| 1. |
- Peden, Carol J., et al.
(författare)
-
Guidelines for Perioperative Care for Emergency Laparotomy Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society Recommendations : Part 1-Preoperative: Diagnosis, Rapid Assessment and Optimization
- 2021
-
Ingår i: World Journal of Surgery. - : Springer. - 0364-2313 .- 1432-2323. ; 45, s. 1272-1290
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols reduce length of stay, complications and costs for a large number of elective surgical procedures. A similar, structured approach appears to improve outcomes, including mortality, for patients undergoing high-risk emergency general surgery, and specifically emergency laparotomy. These are the first consensus guidelines for optimal care of these patients using an ERAS approach.METHODS: Experts in aspects of management of the high-risk and emergency general surgical patient were invited to contribute by the International ERAS® Society. Pubmed, Cochrane, Embase, and MEDLINE database searches on English language publications were performed for ERAS elements and relevant specific topics. Studies on each item were selected with particular attention to randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses and large cohort studies, and reviewed and graded using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Recommendations were made on the best level of evidence, or extrapolation from studies on non-emergency patients when appropriate. The Delphi method was used to validate final recommendations. The guideline has been divided into two parts: Part 1-Preoperative Care and Part 2-Intraoperative and Postoperative management. This paper provides guidelines for Part 1.RESULTS: Twelve components of preoperative care were considered. Consensus was reached after three rounds.CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines are based on the best available evidence for an ERAS approach to patients undergoing emergency laparotomy. Initial management is particularly important for patients with sepsis and physiological derangement. These guidelines should be used to improve outcomes for these high-risk patients.
|
|
| 2. |
- Forssten, Maximilian Peter, 1996-, et al.
(författare)
-
Postoperative mortality in hip fracture patients stratified by the Revised Cardiac Risk Index : a Swedish nationwide retrospective cohort study
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Trauma surgery & acute care open. - : BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. - 2397-5776. ; 6:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives: The Revised Cardiac Risk Index (RCRI) is a tool that can be used to evaluate the 30-day risk of postoperative myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest and mortality. This study aims to confirm its association with postoperative mortality in patients who underwent hip fracture surgery.Methods: All adults who underwent primary emergency hip fracture surgery in Sweden between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2017 were included in this study. The database was retrieved by cross-referencing the Swedish National Quality Register for hip fractures with the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare registers. The outcomes of interest were the association between the RCRI score and mortality at 30 days, 90 days and 1 year postoperatively.Results: 134 915 cases were included in the current study. There was a statistically significant linear trend in postoperative mortality with increasing RCRI scores at 30 days, 90 days and 1 year. An RCRI score ≥4 was associated with a 3.1 times greater risk of 30-day postoperative mortality (adjusted incidence rate ratio (IRR) 3.13, p<0.001), a 2.5 times greater risk of 90-day postoperative mortality (adjusted IRR 2.54, p<0.001) and a 2.8 times greater risk of 1-year postoperative mortality (adjusted HR 2.81, p<0.001) compared with that observed with an RCRI score of 0.Conclusion: An increasing RCRI score is strongly associated with an elevated risk 30-day, 90-day and 1-year postoperative mortality after primary hip fracture surgery. The objective and easily retrievable nature of the variables included in the RCRI calculation makes it an appealing choice for risk stratification in the clinical setting.Levels of evidence: Level III.
|
|
