American journal of surgery · 2022
Sigmoid volvulus: Evaluating identification strategies and contemporary multicenter outcomes.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Loria Anthony, Jacobson Tricia, Melucci Alexa D, Bartell Nicholas, Nabozny Michael J, Temple Larissa K, Fleming Fergal J
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: There is limited epidemiologic data on sigmoid volvulus (SV) from non-endemic regions. Therefore, we performed a multicenter study to report contemporary outcomes and appraise literature-based methods that pair diagnostic and procedural codes to identify SV.
METHOD: Using an automated search for patients with 'volvulus' in our system from 2011 to 2021, we reviewed electronic charts to clarify the diagnosis, automatically replicate three strategies to identify SV, and retrieved 6-month outcomes.
RESULTS: Of 895 patients, 109 had SV. Literature-based strategies poorly identified SV. At the index admission, patients underwent endoscopic reduction alone (33%), emergent (16.5%), semi-elective (34%), or elective (16.5%) surgery. Endoscopic reduction alone had high recurrence rates and delayed surgery was associated with worse outcomes.
CONCLUSION: Literature-based strategies to identify SV suffer from misclassification bias which affects patient counseling. In this large series, one-third of patients do not undergo during their index admission despite improved outcomes with earlier surgery.
METHOD: Using an automated search for patients with 'volvulus' in our system from 2011 to 2021, we reviewed electronic charts to clarify the diagnosis, automatically replicate three strategies to identify SV, and retrieved 6-month outcomes.
RESULTS: Of 895 patients, 109 had SV. Literature-based strategies poorly identified SV. At the index admission, patients underwent endoscopic reduction alone (33%), emergent (16.5%), semi-elective (34%), or elective (16.5%) surgery. Endoscopic reduction alone had high recurrence rates and delayed surgery was associated with worse outcomes.
CONCLUSION: Literature-based strategies to identify SV suffer from misclassification bias which affects patient counseling. In this large series, one-third of patients do not undergo during their index admission despite improved outcomes with earlier surgery.