Suppr超能文献

经皮引流与开放性手术引流术后腹腔内感染的发病率和死亡率差异:686例病例回顾

Differences in morbidity and mortality with percutaneous versus open surgical drainage of postoperative intra-abdominal infections: a review of 686 cases.

作者信息

Politano Amani D, Hranjec Tjasa, Rosenberger Laura H, Sawyer Robert G, Tache Leon Carlos A

机构信息

Department of Surgery, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, Virginia, USA.

出版信息

Am Surg. 2011 Jul;77(7):862-7.

Abstract

Intra-abdominal infections following surgical procedures result from organ-space surgical site infections, visceral perforations, or anastomotic leaks. We hypothesized that open surgical drainage is associated with increased patient morbidity and mortality compared with percutaneous drainage. A single-institution, prospectively collected database over a 13-year period revealed 2776 intra-abdominal infections, 686 of which required an intervention after the index operation. Percutaneous procedures (simple aspiration or catheter placement) were compared with all other open procedures by univariate and multivariate analyses. Analysis revealed 327 infections in 240 patients undergoing open surgical drainage and 359 infections in 260 patients receiving percutaneous drainage. Those undergoing open drainage had significantly higher Acute Physiology Score (APS) and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II scores and were more likely to be immunosuppressed, require intensive care unit treatment, and have longer hospital stays. Mortality was higher in the open group: 14.6 versus 4.2 per cent (P = 0.0001). Variables independently associated with death by multivariate analysis were APACHE II, dialysis, intensive care unit (ICU) care, age, immunosuppression, and drainage method. Open intervention for postsurgical intra-abdominal infections is associated with increased mortality compared with percutaneous drainage even after controlling for severity of illness by multivariate analysis. Although some patients are not candidates for percutaneous drainage, it should be considered the preferential treatment in eligible patients.

摘要

外科手术后的腹腔内感染源于器官间隙手术部位感染、内脏穿孔或吻合口漏。我们推测,与经皮引流相比,开放手术引流会增加患者的发病率和死亡率。一项单机构前瞻性收集的、为期13年的数据库显示有2776例腹腔内感染,其中686例在初次手术后需要进行干预。通过单因素和多因素分析,将经皮操作(单纯抽吸或置管)与所有其他开放手术进行比较。分析显示,240例行开放手术引流的患者中有327例感染,260例接受经皮引流的患者中有359例感染。接受开放引流的患者急性生理学评分(APS)和急性生理学与慢性健康状况评估(APACHE)II评分显著更高,更有可能免疫抑制,需要重症监护病房治疗,住院时间更长。开放手术组的死亡率更高:分别为14.6%和4.2%(P = 0.0001)。多因素分析中与死亡独立相关的变量为APACHE II评分、透析、重症监护病房(ICU)治疗、年龄、免疫抑制和引流方式。即使在通过多因素分析控制了疾病严重程度之后,与经皮引流相比,外科手术后腹腔内感染的开放干预仍与死亡率增加相关。虽然有些患者不适合经皮引流,但对于符合条件的患者应将其视为优先治疗方法。

相似文献

4
Prophylactic abdominal drainage for pancreatic surgery.胰腺手术的预防性腹腔引流
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jun 21;6(6):CD010583. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010583.pub4.
7
Prophylactic abdominal drainage for pancreatic surgery.胰腺手术的预防性腹腔引流
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Oct 21;10(10):CD010583. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010583.pub3.

引用本文的文献

10
Intramesenteric abscess caused by non-typhoidal .非伤寒性肠系膜内脓肿
IDCases. 2022 Jun 6;29:e01523. doi: 10.1016/j.idcr.2022.e01523. eCollection 2022.

本文引用的文献

1
Re-laparotomy for severe intra-abdominal infections.再次剖腹手术治疗严重腹腔内感染。
Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2010 Jun;11(3):307-10. doi: 10.1089/sur.2010.023.
7
Risk factors for severe sepsis in secondary peritonitis.继发性腹膜炎中严重脓毒症的危险因素。
Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2003 Winter;4(4):355-62. doi: 10.1089/109629603322761418.
8
The continuing challenge of intra-abdominal infection.腹腔内感染的持续挑战。
Am J Surg. 2003 Nov 28;186(5A):15S-22S; discussion 31S-34S. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2003.10.003.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验