Literature DB >> 8611076

Prognosis and treatment of peritonitis. Do we need new scoring systems?

T Koperna1, F Schulz.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical significance of present scoring systems for prognosis and treatment in patients with secondary bacterial peritonitis and to define risk factors for patient survival and outcome not included in the scores. A secondary objective was to review our therapeutic regimens and the need for reoperation with regard to outcome.
DESIGN: Prospective observational study.
SETTING: University hospital, secondary referral center. PATIENTS: From 1992 to 1995, 92 patients with secondary peritonitis were examined at the University Surgical Clinic, Vienna, Austria. the populations as a whole consisted of 56 men and 36 women with an average age of 56 +/- 19 years. Forty-four percent of patients had postoperative peritonitis. OUTCOME MEASURES: Mortality, multiple organ system failure (MOSF), relaparotomy.
RESULTS: The mortality rate in patients with an APACHE II (Adult Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation) score of less than 15 was 4.8%, while mortality rose to 46.7% in those with a score of 15 or higher (P = .001). The average total mortality rate was 18.5%. The prognosis for patients without organ failure or with failure of one organ system was excellent (mortality rate, 0%); quadruple organ failure, however, had a mortality rate of 90%. Initial thrombocytopenia ( < 60 x 10(9)/L), four-quadrant peritonitis, and diabetes mellitus were associated with significantly higher mortality. Leukopenia (white blood cells, < 6 x 10(9)/L) and inappropriate antibiotic therapy as determined by the antibiogram were mildly significant for higher mortality. The need for relaparotomy resulted in substantially higher mortality (P < .001). The impossibility of definitive operative resolution of the intra-abdominal pathologic findings at initial operation had no significant effect on mortality, possibly because planned reoperations were always carried out in those cases. For patients with definitive resolution at initial operation, it was possible to reduce the traditionally high mortality rate associated with relaparotomy on demand by making the decision for reexploration promptly, within the first 48 hours. Nevertheless, the 52.4% mortality rate observed in those cases was still much higher than the 33% found in patients who were not free of disease after the initial operation.
CONCLUSION: The prognosis in peritonitis is decisively influenced by the health status of the patient at the beginning of treatment and by any concomitant risk factors. As a result, a fairly accurate prediction of the outcome of the disease can initially be made on the basis of the APACHE II score and the MOSF score according to Goris. However, the certainty that severely ill patients with high scores often die has little clinical relevance, since it does not provide any therapeutic alternatives to the attending physician. The decision to perform a relaparotomy must be made as soon as possible, at least before MOSF emerges. Already existing MOSF will lead to the "point of no return."

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8611076     DOI: 10.1001/archsurg.1996.01430140070019

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Surg        ISSN: 0004-0010


  35 in total

Review 1.  [Surgical concepts for treatment of severe sepsis].

Authors:  O Kollmar; M K Schilling
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 1.041

Review 2.  Management of peritonitis in the critically ill patient.

Authors:  Carlos A Ordoñez; Juan Carlos Puyana
Journal:  Surg Clin North Am       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 2.741

Review 3.  [Relaparotomy in secondary peritonitis Planned relaparotomy or relaparotomy on demand?].

Authors:  B Lamme; C W Mahler; J W O van Till; O van Ruler; D J Gouma; M A Boermeester
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 0.955

4.  Liver injury and abscess formation in secondary murine peritonitis.

Authors:  Andreas M Lenz; Mark Fairweather; James C Peyton; Sarah A Gardner; William G Cheadle
Journal:  Inflamm Res       Date:  2010-10-26       Impact factor: 4.575

5.  High mortality rate for patients requiring intensive care after surgical revision following bariatric surgery.

Authors:  Nathalie Kermarrec; Jean-Pierre Marmuse; Judith Faivre; Sigismond Lasocki; Philippe Mognol; Denis Chosidow; Claudette Muller; Jean-Marie Desmonts; Philippe Montravers
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2008-01-04       Impact factor: 4.129

6.  Short-and long-term outcomes of surgery for diffuse peritonitis in patients 80 years of age and older.

Authors:  Ryoko Okubo; Kazuhito Yajima; Yasuo Sakai; Tomoki Kido; Ken-Ichiro Hirano; Nobuyuki Musha; Toshihiro Tsubono; Katsuyoshi Hatakeyama
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2008-04-30       Impact factor: 2.549

7.  Clinical and therapeutic features of nonpostoperative nosocomial intra-abdominal infections.

Authors:  Philippe Montravers; Annie Chalfine; Remy Gauzit; Alain Lepape; Jean Pierre Marmuse; Corinne Vouillot; Claude Martin
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 12.969

8.  Age, microbiology and prognostic scores help to differentiate between secondary and tertiary peritonitis.

Authors:  Peter Panhofer; Barbara Izay; Markus Riedl; Veronika Ferenc; Martin Ploder; Raimund Jakesz; Peter Götzinger
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2008-03-15       Impact factor: 3.445

9.  A focus on intra-abdominal infections.

Authors:  Massimo Sartelli
Journal:  World J Emerg Surg       Date:  2010-03-19       Impact factor: 5.469

10.  Factors associated with septic shock and mortality in generalized peritonitis: comparison between community-acquired and postoperative peritonitis.

Authors:  Florence C Riché; Xavier Dray; Marie-Josèphe Laisné; Joaquim Matéo; Laurent Raskine; Marie-José Sanson-Le Pors; Didier Payen; Patrice Valleur; Bernard P Cholley
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2009-06-24       Impact factor: 9.097

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.