Dataset Information

Is There a High Risk for GI Bleeding Complications in Patients Undergoing Abdominal Surgery?

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) can cause life-threatening situations. Here, endoscopy is the first-line diagnostic and therapeutic mode in patients with GIB among further therapeutic approaches such as embolization or medical treatment. Although GIB is considered the most common indication for emergency endoscopy in clinical practice, data on GIB in abdominal surgical patients are still scarce.

Patients and methods

For the present study, all emergency endoscopies performed on hospitalized abdominal surgical patients over a 2-year period (1 July 2017-30 June2019) were retrospectively analyzed. Primary endpoint was 30-day mortality. Secondary endpoints were length of hospital stay, cause of bleeding, and therapeutic success of endoscopic intervention.

Results

During the study period, bleeding events with an indication for emergency endoscopy occurred in 2.0% (129/6455) of all surgical inhouse patients, of whom 83.7% (n = 108) underwent a surgical procedure. In relation to the total number of respective surgical procedures during the study period, the bleeding incidence was 8.9% after hepatobiliary surgery, 7.7% after resections in the upper gastrointestinal tract, and 1.1% after colonic resections. Signs of active or past bleeding in the anastomosis area were detected in ten patients (6.9%). The overall 30-day mortality was 7.75%.

Conclusions

The incidence of relevant gastrointestinal bleeding events in visceral surgical inpatients was overall rare. However, our data call for critical peri-operative vigilance for bleeding events and underscore the importance of interdisciplinary emergency algorithms.

SUBMITTER: Wichmann D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9965273 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Is There a High Risk for GI Bleeding Complications in Patients Undergoing Abdominal Surgery?

Wichmann Dörte D Orlova Olena O Königsrainer Alfred A Quante Markus M

Journal of clinical medicine 20230209 4

<h4>Introduction</h4>Gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) can cause life-threatening situations. Here, endoscopy is the first-line diagnostic and therapeutic mode in patients with GIB among further therapeutic approaches such as embolization or medical treatment. Although GIB is considered the most common indication for emergency endoscopy in clinical practice, data on GIB in abdominal surgical patients are still scarce.<h4>Patients and methods</h4>For the present study, all emergency endoscopies per ...[more]

PMID: 36835910

Similar Datasets

Project description:Importance:It is not known if use of colloid solutions containing hydroxyethyl starch (HES) to correct for intravascular deficits in high-risk surgical patients is either effective or safe. Objective:To evaluate the effect of HES 130/0.4 compared with 0.9% saline for intravascular volume expansion on mortality and postoperative complications after major abdominal surgery. Design, Setting, and Participants:Multicenter, double-blind, parallel-group, randomized clinical trial of 775 adult patients at increased risk of postoperative kidney injury undergoing major abdominal surgery at 20 university hospitals in France from February 2016 to July 2018; final follow-up was in October 2018. Interventions:Patients were randomized to receive fluid containing either 6% HES 130/0.4 diluted in 0.9% saline (n = 389) or 0.9% saline alone (n = 386) in 250-mL boluses using an individualized hemodynamic algorithm during surgery and for up to 24 hours on the first postoperative day, defined as ending at 7:59 am the following day. Main Outcomes and Measures:The primary outcome was a composite of death or major postoperative complications at 14 days after surgery. Secondary outcomes included predefined postoperative complications within 14 days after surgery, durations of intensive care unit and hospital stays, and all-cause mortality at postoperative days 28 and 90. Results:Among 826 patients enrolled (mean age, 68 [SD, 7] years; 91 women [12%]), 775 (94%) completed the trial. The primary outcome occurred in 139 of 389 patients (36%) in the HES group and 125 of 386 patients (32%) in the saline group (difference, 3.3% [95% CI, -3.3% to 10.0%]; relative risk, 1.10 [95% CI, 0.91-1.34]; P = .33). Among 12 prespecified secondary outcomes reported, 11 showed no significant difference, but a statistically significant difference was found in median volume of study fluid administered on day 1: 1250 mL (interquartile range, 750-2000 mL) in the HES group and 1500 mL (interquartile range, 750-2150 mL) in the saline group (median difference, 250 mL [95% CI, 83-417 mL]; P = .006). At 28 days after surgery, 4.1% and 2.3% of patients had died in the HES and saline groups, respectively (difference, 1.8% [95% CI, -0.7% to 4.3%]; relative risk, 1.76 [95% CI, 0.79-3.94]; P = .17). Conclusions and Relevance:Among patients at risk of postoperative kidney injury undergoing major abdominal surgery, use of HES for volume replacement therapy compared with 0.9% saline resulted in no significant difference in a composite outcome of death or major postoperative complications within 14 days after surgery. These findings do not support the use of HES for volume replacement therapy in such patients. Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02502773.

Project description:BackgroundIn chronic anticoagulant users undergoing surgery, bleeding and thromboembolism are common and serious complications. Many studies on mainly elective or minor emergency surgical procedures with low associated risks have focused on these outcomes. In comparison, patients undergoing high-risk emergency abdominal surgical procedures have not received sufficient attention. This study aimed to compare outcomes between oral anticoagulant users and nonusers who required emergency laparotomy for high-risk abdominal emergencies.MethodsPatients who underwent surgery for abdominal emergencies at our institution between January 2012 and July 2019 were retrospectively reviewed.ResultsThere were 875 patients, including 370 anticoagulant users and 505 nonusers. Of the 370 anticoagulant users, 189 (51.3), 77 (20.8%), 45 (12.2%), and 59 (15.9%) were prescribed antiplatelets, a vitamin k antagonist, a direct oral anticoagulant, and a combination drug regimen, respectively. The most common high-risk emergencies requiring surgery in both groups were perforated viscus (25.7% vs 40.9%), mesenteric ischemia with enteric necrosis (27% vs 12.8%), and bowel obstruction (17.6% vs 28.1%). The overall bleeding rate was higher (29.2% vs 22%, p = 0.015) in anticoagulant users than in nonusers, but the major bleeding rate was similar (17.8% vs 14.1%, p = 0.129) between the two groups. The rates of thromboembolic events and mortality were significantly higher in anticoagulant users than in nonusers (25.7% vs 9.7%, p < 0.0001 and 39.7% vs 31.1%, p = 0.01, respectively). Liver cirrhosis, peripheral arterial diseases, reoperation, and blood product transfusion were independent predictors of the overall risk of bleeding or TEEs, according to the multivariate analysis. In this model, liver cirrhosis had the largest overall effect on mortality, followed by pneumonia, thromboembolism, peripheral arterial disease, blood product transfusion, and atrial fibrillation. The use of oral anticoagulants was not an independent predictor of either bleeding or in-hospital mortality. The use of oral anticoagulants was associated with a decreased risk of all-cause in-hospital mortality.ConclusionBased on our results, the continued use of oral anticoagulants is more protective than harmful considering the overall outcomes in this subset of patients.

Project description:ImportanceAlthough major bleeding is among the most common and prognostically important perioperative complications, the relative timing of bleeding events is not well established. This information is critical for preventing bleeding complications and for informing the timing of pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis.ObjectiveTo determine the timing of postoperative bleeding among patients undergoing surgery for up to 30 days after surgery.Design, setting, and participantsThis is a secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study. Patients aged 45 years or older who underwent inpatient noncardiac surgery were recruited in 14 countries between 2007 and 2013, with follow-up until December 2014. Data analysis was performed from June to July 2023.ExposureNoncardiac surgery requiring overnight hospital admission.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome (postoperative major bleeding) was a composite of the timing of the following bleeding outcomes: (1) bleeding leading to transfusion, (2) bleeding leading to a postoperative hemoglobin level less than 7 g/dL, (3) bleeding leading to death, and (4) bleeding associated with reintervention. Each of the components of the composite primary outcome (1-4) and bleeding independently associated with mortality after noncardiac surgery, which was defined as a composite of outcomes 1 to 3, were secondary outcomes.ResultsAmong 39 813 patients (median [IQR] age, 63.0 [54.8-72.5] years; 19 793 women [49.7%]), there were 5340 major bleeding events (primary outcome) in 4638 patients (11.6%) within the first 30 days after surgery. Of these events, 42.7% (95% CI, 40.9%-44.6%) occurred within 24 hours after surgery, 77.7% (95% CI, 75.8%-79.5%) by postoperative day 7, 88.3% (95% CI, 86.5%-90.2%) by postoperative day 14, and 94.6% (95% CI, 92.7%-96.5%) by postoperative day 21. Within 48 hours of surgery, 56.2% of major bleeding events, 56.2% of bleeding leading to transfusion, 56.1% of bleeding independently associated with mortality after noncardiac surgery, 51.8% of bleeding associated with hemoglobin less than 7 g/dL, and 51.8% of bleeding associated with reintervention had occurred.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study, of the major postoperative bleeding events in the first 30 days, more than three-quarters occurred during the first postoperative week. These findings are useful for researchers for the planning future clinical research and for clinicians in prevention of bleeding-related surgical complications and in decision-making regarding starting of pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis after surgery.

Project description:ObjectivePrevious studies reported a poor outcome in patients with coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) undergoing cardiac surgery. Complications most frequently described were respiratory failure, renal failure, and thromboembolic events. In their recent experience, the authors observed a very high incidence of bleeding complications. The purpose of the study was to investigate a possible significant correlation between perioperative COVID-19 infection and hemorrhagic complications compared to non-COVID-19 patients.DesignSingle-center, observational, retrospective, matched case-control (1:2) study involving patients who underwent open-heart cardiac surgery from February 2020 and March 2021 with positive perioperative diagnosis of COVID-19 infection, matched with patients without COVID-19 infection.SettingCardiac surgery unit and intensive care unit of a university tertiary center in a metropolitan area.ParticipantsIn the study period, 773 patients underwent cardiac surgery on cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). Among them, 23 consecutive patients had perioperative diagnosis of COVID-19 infection (study group). These patients were compared with 46 corresponding controls (control group) that matched for age, sex, body mass index, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons score.InterventionsOpen-heart cardiac surgery on CPB.Measurements and main resultsIn the study group, 2 patients (9%) died in the intensive care unit from severe respiratory failure, shock, and multiple organ failure. In the study group, patients showed a significantly higher incidence of bleeding complications (48% v 2%, p = 0.0001) and cases of surgical reexploration for bleeding (35% v 2%, p = 0.0001), a higher incidence of severe postoperative thrombocytopenia (39% v 6%, p = 0.0007), and a higher need of blood components transfusions (74% v 30%, p = 0.0006). Chest tubes blood loss and surgical hemostasis time were markedly prolonged (p = 0.02 and p = 0.003, respectively).ConclusionsA worrisome increased risk of early and late bleeding complications in COVID-19 patients was observed, and it should be considered when assessing the operative risk. CPB-related inflammatory reaction could exacerbate the deleterious effect of COVID-19 on the coagulation system and likely deviate it toward a hemorrhagic pattern.

Dataset Information

Is There a High Risk for GI Bleeding Complications in Patients Undergoing Abdominal Surgery?

Introduction

Patients and methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Is There a High Risk for GI Bleeding Complications in Patients Undergoing Abdominal Surgery?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets