Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2012
Early versus late adhesiolysis for adhesive-related intestinal obstruction: a nationwide analysis of inpatient outcomes.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Chu Daniel I, Gainsbury Melanie L, Howard Lauren A, Stucchi Arthur F, Becker James M
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Classical teaching advocates watchful waiting for 2 days before operating on adhesive-related intestinal obstructions (AIOs). Our aim was to compare the clinical and cost outcomes of early versus late adhesiolysis for AIOs.
DESIGN: Patients undergoing adhesiolysis for AIOs from the 2007 Nationwide Inpatient Sample were stratified to early (≤2 days from admission) vs. late (>2 days) adhesiolysis. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality and secondary outcomes were post-operative complications (POCs), post-operative length of stay (PLOS), and in-hospital cost.
RESULTS: From 5,443 patients who underwent adhesiolysis for AIOs, 53 and 47 % underwent early and late adhesiolysis, respectively. Late adhesiolysis patients were older (65.0 vs. 60.1 years) and more co-morbid compared to the early group (p < 0.05). After adjustment with propensity score methods, late adhesiolysis patients had no difference in mortality (odds ratio [OR] 0.95, 95%-confidence intervals [CI] 0.67-1.36, p = 0.79) or POCs (OR 1.01, 95%CI 0.89-1.14, p = 0.91) compared to the early group, but had 9.8 % increased PLOS and 41.9 % increased in-hospital cost (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The 2-day limit of watchful waiting is not associated with increased mortality or POCs for those patients undergoing adhesiolysis for an AIO. Late adhesiolysis, however, was associated with significantly increased PLOS and in-hospital cost compared to early adhesiolysis.
DESIGN: Patients undergoing adhesiolysis for AIOs from the 2007 Nationwide Inpatient Sample were stratified to early (≤2 days from admission) vs. late (>2 days) adhesiolysis. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality and secondary outcomes were post-operative complications (POCs), post-operative length of stay (PLOS), and in-hospital cost.
RESULTS: From 5,443 patients who underwent adhesiolysis for AIOs, 53 and 47 % underwent early and late adhesiolysis, respectively. Late adhesiolysis patients were older (65.0 vs. 60.1 years) and more co-morbid compared to the early group (p < 0.05). After adjustment with propensity score methods, late adhesiolysis patients had no difference in mortality (odds ratio [OR] 0.95, 95%-confidence intervals [CI] 0.67-1.36, p = 0.79) or POCs (OR 1.01, 95%CI 0.89-1.14, p = 0.91) compared to the early group, but had 9.8 % increased PLOS and 41.9 % increased in-hospital cost (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The 2-day limit of watchful waiting is not associated with increased mortality or POCs for those patients undergoing adhesiolysis for an AIO. Late adhesiolysis, however, was associated with significantly increased PLOS and in-hospital cost compared to early adhesiolysis.