An evaluation of the epidemiology, management and outcomes for perforated peptic ulcers across the North of England over 15 years: A retrospective cohort study.


Journal

International journal of surgery (London, England)
ISSN: 1743-9159
Titre abrégé: Int J Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101228232

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Apr 2019
Historique:
received: 18 11 2018
revised: 08 02 2019
accepted: 05 03 2019
pubmed: 16 3 2019
medline: 16 5 2019
entrez: 16 3 2019
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

The management of perforated peptic ulcers has evolved over time and includes laparoscopic or open repair, and conservative management. The utilisation of, and outcomes from these strategies are not clear. Trends in epidemiology, management and outcomes for perforated peptic ulcer across the North of England over a 15-year period were analyzed. Emergency General Surgical admissions data from nine NHS trusts in the North of England from 2002 to 2016 were collected and analyzed, including demographics, interventions and outcomes. Cases were identified using ICD-10 codes K25, K26 and K27 0.1, 0.2, 0.5, 0.6. Peptic ulcer perforation accounted for 2373 of 491141 admissions (0.48%), with a decreased incidence over time (0.62% in 2002-2006 to 0.36% in 2012-2016). Over the 15 years studied, an increasing proportion of cases were managed laparoscopically (4.5%-18.4%, p < 0.001) and under upper-gastrointestinal consultants (15.4%-28.6%, p < 0.001). Thirty-day inpatient mortality improved significantly over time (20.0%-10.8%, p < 0.001) as did mean length of stay (17.3-13.0 days, p = 0.001). Independent predictors of increased 30-day mortality were increasing age, Charlson co-morbidity score, clinical and operative risk, earlier year of admission, winter admission, weekend/bank holiday procedure and management strategy, with laparotomy and conservative management increasing risk. Outcomes (30-day mortality and LOS) improved significantly over the study period. Laparoscopic approach was increasingly utilised and was an independently significant factor associated with improved mortality. Management by upper-gastrointestinal specialists increased rates of laparoscopy, with fewer conversions to open.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
The management of perforated peptic ulcers has evolved over time and includes laparoscopic or open repair, and conservative management. The utilisation of, and outcomes from these strategies are not clear. Trends in epidemiology, management and outcomes for perforated peptic ulcer across the North of England over a 15-year period were analyzed.
PATIENTS AND METHODS METHODS
Emergency General Surgical admissions data from nine NHS trusts in the North of England from 2002 to 2016 were collected and analyzed, including demographics, interventions and outcomes. Cases were identified using ICD-10 codes K25, K26 and K27 0.1, 0.2, 0.5, 0.6.
RESULTS RESULTS
Peptic ulcer perforation accounted for 2373 of 491141 admissions (0.48%), with a decreased incidence over time (0.62% in 2002-2006 to 0.36% in 2012-2016). Over the 15 years studied, an increasing proportion of cases were managed laparoscopically (4.5%-18.4%, p < 0.001) and under upper-gastrointestinal consultants (15.4%-28.6%, p < 0.001). Thirty-day inpatient mortality improved significantly over time (20.0%-10.8%, p < 0.001) as did mean length of stay (17.3-13.0 days, p = 0.001). Independent predictors of increased 30-day mortality were increasing age, Charlson co-morbidity score, clinical and operative risk, earlier year of admission, winter admission, weekend/bank holiday procedure and management strategy, with laparotomy and conservative management increasing risk.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
Outcomes (30-day mortality and LOS) improved significantly over the study period. Laparoscopic approach was increasingly utilised and was an independently significant factor associated with improved mortality. Management by upper-gastrointestinal specialists increased rates of laparoscopy, with fewer conversions to open.

Identifiants

pubmed: 30872174
pii: S1743-9191(19)30061-5
doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2019.03.005
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Evaluation Study Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

24-32

Informations de copyright

Crown Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Charles Hn Johnson (CH)

Health Education England North East, United Kingdom. Electronic address: charles.johnson@doctors.net.uk.

Ross C McLean (RC)

Health Education England North East, United Kingdom.

Iain McCallum (I)

Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, United Kingdom.

Daniel Perren (D)

Health Education England North East, United Kingdom.

Alexander W Phillips (AW)

Newcastle-Upon-Tyne Hospitals Foundation Trust, United Kingdom.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH