BACKGROUND: Early detection and treatment of complications after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) are mandatory. This study aimed to evaluate C-reactive protein (CRP), white blood cell (WBC) count, and neutrophil (NEU) count in relation to the early diagnosis of major surgical complications after LSG. METHODS: A prospective study of 177 patients who underwent LSG during 2008-2011 was performed. Measurements of WBC, NEU, and CRP performed on postoperative days 0, 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, and 30 were correlated with postoperative surgical complications. RESULTS: Both WBC and NEU were correlated with leak or abscess on postoperative days 3, 5, 7, 9, and 11, whereas on day 1, only NEU was significantly increased. Elevated CRP was correlated with leak or abscess on all the days (p < 0.001). The parameters measured were not correlated with postoperative bleeding unless leak or abscess coexisted. According to receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, CRP detected leak or abscess with remarkably higher sensitivity and specificity than WBC or NEU on all the days. Moreover, the area under the curve (AUC) of CRP was higher than the AUC of WBC or NEU, suggesting important statistical significance. On day 1, WBC and NEU achieved 77.8 and 78.3 % sensitivity, respectively, and an even lower specificity (68.4 and 52.6 %), whereas a CRP cutoff at 150 mg/l achieved 83.2 % sensitivity and 100 % specificity. On day 3, the sensitivity and specificity of CRP reached 100 % (cutoff level, 200 mg/l), and on day 5, CRP achieved 83.2 % sensitivity and 100 % specificity (cutoff level, 150 mg/l), whereas for WBC and NEU, specificity was high (>92 %), but sensitivity did not exceed 78.2 %. CONCLUSION: Because CRP detected leak or abscess after LSG with remarkably higher sensitivity and specificity than WBC or NEU, CRP seems to be a more accurate market for the early detection of these complications.
BACKGROUND: Early detection and treatment of complications after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) are mandatory. This study aimed to evaluate C-reactive protein (CRP), white blood cell (WBC) count, and neutrophil (NEU) count in relation to the early diagnosis of major surgical complications after LSG. METHODS: A prospective study of 177 patients who underwent LSG during 2008-2011 was performed. Measurements of WBC, NEU, and CRP performed on postoperative days 0, 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, and 30 were correlated with postoperative surgical complications. RESULTS: Both WBC and NEU were correlated with leak or abscess on postoperative days 3, 5, 7, 9, and 11, whereas on day 1, only NEU was significantly increased. Elevated CRP was correlated with leak or abscess on all the days (p < 0.001). The parameters measured were not correlated with postoperative bleeding unless leak or abscess coexisted. According to receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, CRP detected leak or abscess with remarkably higher sensitivity and specificity than WBC or NEU on all the days. Moreover, the area under the curve (AUC) of CRP was higher than the AUC of WBC or NEU, suggesting important statistical significance. On day 1, WBC and NEU achieved 77.8 and 78.3 % sensitivity, respectively, and an even lower specificity (68.4 and 52.6 %), whereas a CRP cutoff at 150 mg/l achieved 83.2 % sensitivity and 100 % specificity. On day 3, the sensitivity and specificity of CRP reached 100 % (cutoff level, 200 mg/l), and on day 5, CRP achieved 83.2 % sensitivity and 100 % specificity (cutoff level, 150 mg/l), whereas for WBC and NEU, specificity was high (>92 %), but sensitivity did not exceed 78.2 %. CONCLUSION: Because CRP detected leak or abscess after LSG with remarkably higher sensitivity and specificity than WBC or NEU, CRP seems to be a more accurate market for the early detection of these complications.
Authors: Christine Stroh; D Birk; R Flade-Kuthe; M Frenken; B Herbig; S Höhne; H Köhler; V Lange; K Ludwig; R Matkowitz; G Meyer; P Pick; Th Horbach; S Krause; L Schäfer; M Schlensak; E Shang; T Sonnenberg; M Susewind; H Voigt; R Weiner; S Wolff; A M Wolf; U Schmidt; H Lippert; Th Manger Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2009-01-29 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Raquel Sánchez-Santos; Carlos Masdevall; Aniceto Baltasar; Candido Martínez-Blázquez; Amador García Ruiz de Gordejuela; Enric Ponsi; Andres Sánchez-Pernaute; Gregorio Vesperinas; Daniel Del Castillo; Ernest Bombuy; Carlos Durán-Escribano; Luis Ortega; Juan Carlos Ruiz de Adana; Javier Baltar; Ignacio Maruri; Emilio García-Blázquez; Antonio Torres Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2009-07-02 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Hakeam A Hakeam; Patrick J O'Regan; Abdulrahman M Salem; Fahad Y Bamehriz; Lina F Jomaa Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2008-10-08 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Matthew Da Silva; Michelle C Cleghorn; Ahmad Elnahas; Timothy D Jackson; Allan Okrainec; Fayez A Quereshy Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2016-10-14 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Jaime Ruiz-Tovar; Jose Luis Muñoz; Juan Gonzalez; Alejandro Garcia; Carlos Ferrigni; Montiel Jimenez; Manuel Duran Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2017-06-07 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Peter McAnena; Colm Neary; Conor Doyle; Michael J Kerin; Oliver J McAnena; Chris Collins Journal: Ir J Med Sci Date: 2019-08-01 Impact factor: 1.568
Authors: Marcel Binnebösel; Tim Schuler; Christian D Klink; Daniel Busch; Dominik S Schöb; Klaus T von Trotha; Ulf P Neumann; Karsten Junge Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2014-04-13 Impact factor: 2.571
Authors: Marie Ashley Villard; Melissa C Helm; Tammy L Kindel; Matthew I Goldblatt; Jon C Gould; Rana M Higgins Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2018-10-19 Impact factor: 4.584