The American surgeon · 2023
Readmission and Disposition in Patients With Malignant Bowel Obstructions Following Gastrostomy Tube.
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.
Yu Jingjing, Sullivan Brittany G, Nguyen Ninh T, Hohmann Samuel F, Harris Alyssa H, Micic Dejan, Turaga Kiran K, Senthil Maheswari, Eng Oliver S
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) can develop malignant bowel obstructions (MBOs) requiring inpatient admission and nasogastric tube decompression. Palliative decompressive gastrostomy tubes (G-tubes) may affect patient disposition, allowing for self-management and reduction in inpatient services. Therefore, we sought to assess disposition and inpatient readmission rates in patients admitted with PC and MBO following G-tube placement.
METHODS: The Vizient® Clinical Data Base was queried for inpatient admissions from October 2018 to May 2022 utilizing ICD-10 codes to identify patients admitted with PC and bowel obstruction, with or without G-tube placement. Demographics and hospital outcomes were recorded. Descriptive statistics and multivariate logistic regression analysis were performed.
RESULTS: From 750 patients, 59 (7.9%) had a G-tube placed. Compared to patients without G-tubes, those with G-tubes had lower rates of disposition to home (32.2% vs 70.0%, P < .001) and higher rates of disposition to hospice (home: 30.5% vs 7.8%, P < .001, facility: 10.2% vs 3.9%, P = .02). There was no significant difference in the rate (17.3% vs 22.3%, P = .40) or risk (OR = 1.44, 95% CI .69-3.01) of 30-day readmissions with G-tubes. However, palliative care consultation (OR 33.77, 95% CI 19.16-59.52) and G-tube placement (OR 5.82, 95% CI 2.56-13.25) were independent predictors for hospice.
DISCUSSION: Placement of G-tubes in patients with PC and MBO was associated with higher rates of disposition to hospice but there is no difference in 30-day readmission rates compared to those without G-tubes. Further prospective studies are needed to understand the role of G-tube placement in patients with MBO in relation to outcomes and disposition.
METHODS: The Vizient® Clinical Data Base was queried for inpatient admissions from October 2018 to May 2022 utilizing ICD-10 codes to identify patients admitted with PC and bowel obstruction, with or without G-tube placement. Demographics and hospital outcomes were recorded. Descriptive statistics and multivariate logistic regression analysis were performed.
RESULTS: From 750 patients, 59 (7.9%) had a G-tube placed. Compared to patients without G-tubes, those with G-tubes had lower rates of disposition to home (32.2% vs 70.0%, P < .001) and higher rates of disposition to hospice (home: 30.5% vs 7.8%, P < .001, facility: 10.2% vs 3.9%, P = .02). There was no significant difference in the rate (17.3% vs 22.3%, P = .40) or risk (OR = 1.44, 95% CI .69-3.01) of 30-day readmissions with G-tubes. However, palliative care consultation (OR 33.77, 95% CI 19.16-59.52) and G-tube placement (OR 5.82, 95% CI 2.56-13.25) were independent predictors for hospice.
DISCUSSION: Placement of G-tubes in patients with PC and MBO was associated with higher rates of disposition to hospice but there is no difference in 30-day readmission rates compared to those without G-tubes. Further prospective studies are needed to understand the role of G-tube placement in patients with MBO in relation to outcomes and disposition.