• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

一项前瞻性队列研究描述了拒绝急诊剖腹手术的患者特征:“不剖腹”人群的生存率。

A prospective cohort study characterising patients declined emergency laparotomy: survival in the 'NoLap' population.

机构信息

Department of General Surgery, Royal Alexandra Hospital, Paisley, UK.

School of Medicine, University of Glasgow, UK.

出版信息

Anaesthesia. 2020 Jan;75(1):54-62. doi: 10.1111/anae.14839. Epub 2019 Sep 18.

DOI:10.1111/anae.14839
PMID:31531978
Abstract

Patients eligible for emergency laparotomy who do not proceed to surgery are not as well characterised as patients who do proceed to surgery. We studied patients eligible for laparotomy, as defined by National Emergency Laparotomy Audit criteria, from August 2015 to October 2016. We analysed the association of individual variables with survival and two composite scores: P-POSSUM and a general survival model. Out of 314 patients, 214 (68%) underwent laparotomy and 100 (32%) did not. Median (IQR [range]) follow-up was 1.3 (0.1-1.8 [0.0-2.5]) years for the cohort, 1.5 (1.1-2.0 [0.0-2.6]) years after laparotomy and 0.0 (0.0-1.1 [0.0-2.2]) years without laparotomy. There were 126/314 (40%) deaths in the follow-up period, 52/214 (24%) deaths after laparotomy and 74/100 (74%) deaths without surgery. Ninety out of 126 deaths (71%) were within one month of hospital admission. Patient variables were different for the two groups, which when combined in the general survival model generated background median (IQR [range]) life expectancies of 12 (6-21 [0-49]) and 4 (2-6 [0-36]) years, respectively, p < 0.0001. 'Poor fitness' precluded laparotomy in 74/100 (74%) patients. The decision to not operate involved a consultant less often than the decision to operate: 66/100 (66%) vs. 178/214 (83%), p = 0.001. Our study supports the contention that survival beyond 30 postoperative days could be predicted reasonably accurately. Survival in patients who did not have laparotomy was shorter than expected. Emergency laparotomy might have prolonged survival in some patients.

摘要

未接受手术的符合急诊剖腹手术条件的患者的特征不如接受手术的患者明确。我们研究了 2015 年 8 月至 2016 年 10 月符合国家急诊剖腹手术审核标准的剖腹手术患者。我们分析了个体变量与生存的关系以及两个综合评分:P-POSSUM 和一般生存模型。在 314 名患者中,214 名(68%)接受了剖腹手术,100 名(32%)未接受。队列的中位(IQR [范围])随访时间为 1.3 年(0.1-1.8 年[0.0-2.5 年]),剖腹手术后为 1.5 年(1.1-2.0 年[0.0-2.6 年]),未剖腹手术后为 0.0 年(0.0-1.1 年[0.0-2.2 年])。在随访期间,314 名患者中有 126 名(40%)死亡,214 名患者中有 52 名(24%)死亡,100 名患者中有 74 名(74%)未接受手术。126 例死亡中有 90 例(71%)发生在入院后一个月内。两组患者的个体变量不同,将这些变量合并到一般生存模型中,分别产生背景中位(IQR [范围])预期寿命为 12 年(6-21 年[0-49 年])和 4 年(2-6 年[0-36 年]),p<0.0001。“身体状况不佳”导致 100 名患者中的 74 名(74%)无法进行剖腹手术。不手术的决定比手术的决定更不容易被顾问否决:100 名患者中有 66 名(66%)与 214 名患者中有 178 名(83%)相比,p=0.001。我们的研究支持这样一种观点,即在术后 30 天内可以合理地准确预测患者的生存情况。未接受剖腹手术的患者的预期寿命更短。对于某些患者来说,急诊剖腹手术可能延长了他们的生存时间。

相似文献

1
A prospective cohort study characterising patients declined emergency laparotomy: survival in the 'NoLap' population.一项前瞻性队列研究描述了拒绝急诊剖腹手术的患者特征:“不剖腹”人群的生存率。
Anaesthesia. 2020 Jan;75(1):54-62. doi: 10.1111/anae.14839. Epub 2019 Sep 18.
2
Characterisation of older patients that require, but do not undergo, emergency laparotomy: a multicentre cohort study.需要但未接受急诊剖腹手术的老年患者特征:一项多中心队列研究。
Br J Anaesth. 2024 Nov;133(5):973-982. doi: 10.1016/j.bja.2024.07.009. Epub 2024 Oct 4.
3
Emergency Abdominal Surgery in the Elderly: Can We Predict Mortality?老年患者的急诊腹部手术:我们能否预测死亡率?
World J Surg. 2017 Feb;41(2):402-409. doi: 10.1007/s00268-016-3751-3.
4
Clinical frailty and its effect on the septuagenarian population after emergency laparotomy.临床虚弱及其对 70 岁以上急诊剖腹手术后人群的影响。
Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2021 Mar;103(3):180-185. doi: 10.1308/rcsann.2020.7028.
5
Pre-NELA vs NELA - has anything changed, or is it just an audit exercise?NELA实施前与NELA对比——有什么变化吗,还是仅仅是一次审核工作?
Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2016 Nov;98(8):554-559. doi: 10.1308/rcsann.2016.0248. Epub 2016 Aug 9.
6
Rural Emergency Laparotomy Audit.农村急诊剖腹手术审计
ANZ J Surg. 2019 Jun;89(6):666-671. doi: 10.1111/ans.15167. Epub 2019 May 13.
7
Validation of the days alive and out of hospital outcome measure after emergency laparotomy: a retrospective cohort study.急诊剖腹术后生存天数和出院结局测量的验证:一项回顾性队列研究。
Br J Anaesth. 2022 Mar;128(3):449-456. doi: 10.1016/j.bja.2021.12.006. Epub 2022 Jan 7.
8
Evaluating outcomes following emergency laparotomy in the North of England and the impact of the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit - A retrospective cohort study.评估英格兰北部急诊剖腹手术后的结果以及国家急诊剖腹手术审计的影响——一项回顾性队列研究。
Int J Surg. 2020 May;77:154-162. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2020.03.046. Epub 2020 Mar 29.
9
Beyond high-risk: analysis of the outcomes of extreme-risk patients in the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit.超越高风险:国家急诊剖腹手术审计中极高风险患者的结局分析。
Anaesthesia. 2023 Nov;78(11):1376-1385. doi: 10.1111/anae.16130. Epub 2023 Sep 29.
10
Development and internal validation of a novel risk adjustment model for adult patients undergoing emergency laparotomy surgery: the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit risk model.开发并内部验证一种用于行急诊剖腹手术的成年患者的新型风险调整模型:国家急诊剖腹手术审核风险模型。
Br J Anaesth. 2018 Oct;121(4):739-748. doi: 10.1016/j.bja.2018.06.026. Epub 2018 Aug 23.

引用本文的文献

1
Emergency laparotomy preoperative risk assessment tool performance: A systematic review.急诊剖腹手术术前风险评估工具的性能:一项系统评价。
Surg Pract Sci. 2024 Oct 31;19:100264. doi: 10.1016/j.sipas.2024.100264. eCollection 2024 Dec.
2
Frailty and body composition predict adverse outcomes after emergency general surgery admission: a multicentre observational cohort study.衰弱和身体组成可预测急诊普通外科入院后的不良结局:一项多中心观察性队列研究。
Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2025 Apr;107(4):285-294. doi: 10.1308/rcsann.2024.0091. Epub 2024 Nov 21.
3
One-year mortality rates after standardized management for emergency laparotomy: results from the Swedish SMASH study.
标准化管理下急诊剖腹手术后 1 年的死亡率:来自瑞典 SMASH 研究的结果。
BJS Open. 2024 Jan 3;8(1). doi: 10.1093/bjsopen/zrad133.
4
Operative and non-operative management for intestinal emergencies: findings from a single-centre retrospective cohort study.肠急症的手术和非手术治疗:单中心回顾性队列研究的结果。
Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2024 Sep;106(7):585-591. doi: 10.1308/rcsann.2023.0093. Epub 2023 Dec 1.
5
Observations from Australia's National Surgical Mortality Audit.澳大利亚国家手术死亡率审计观察。
World J Surg. 2023 Dec;47(12):3140-3148. doi: 10.1007/s00268-023-07205-z. Epub 2023 Oct 26.
6
Long-term disease interactions amongst surgical patients: a population cohort study.外科患者的长期疾病相互作用:一项基于人群的队列研究。
Br J Anaesth. 2023 Aug;131(2):407-417. doi: 10.1016/j.bja.2023.04.041. Epub 2023 Jul 1.
7
Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society Consensus Guidelines for Emergency Laparotomy Part 3: Organizational Aspects and General Considerations for Management of the Emergency Laparotomy Patient.外科术后加速康复(ERAS®)协会共识指南:急诊剖腹术部分 3:组织结构方面和急诊剖腹术患者管理的一般注意事项。
World J Surg. 2023 Aug;47(8):1881-1898. doi: 10.1007/s00268-023-07039-9. Epub 2023 Jun 5.
8
Postoperative Complications and Outcome After Emergency Laparotomy: A Retrospective Study.急诊剖腹手术后的并发症和结局:一项回顾性研究。
World J Surg. 2023 Jan;47(1):119-129. doi: 10.1007/s00268-022-06783-8. Epub 2022 Oct 16.
9
The virtual uncertainty of futility in emergency surgery.急诊手术中无效的虚拟不确定性。
Br J Surg. 2022 Nov 22;109(12):1184-1185. doi: 10.1093/bjs/znac313.
10
Triage and outcomes for a whole cohort of patients presenting for major emergency abdominal surgery including the No-LAP population: a prospective single-center observational study.对包括非腹腔镜人群在内的所有接受大型急诊腹部手术的患者进行分诊和结局评估:一项前瞻性单中心观察性研究。
Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2023 Feb;49(1):253-260. doi: 10.1007/s00068-022-02052-4. Epub 2022 Jul 15.