Background
This study aimed to determine the impact of preoperative exposure to intravenous contrast for CT and the risk of developing postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI) in patients undergoing major gastrointestinal surgery.
Methods
This prospective, multicentre cohort study included adults undergoing gastrointestinal resection, stoma reversal or liver resection. Both elective and emergency procedures were included. Preoperative exposure to intravenous contrast was defined as exposure to contrast administered for the purposes of CT up to 7 days before surgery. The primary endpoint was the rate of AKI within 7 days. Propensity score‐matched models were adjusted for patient, disease and operative variables. In a sensitivity analysis, a propensity score‐matched model explored the association between preoperative exposure to contrast and AKI in the first 48 h after surgery.
Results
A total of 5378 patients were included across 173 centres. Overall, 1249 patients (23·2 per cent) received intravenous contrast. The overall rate of AKI within 7 days of surgery was 13·4 per cent (718 of 5378). In the propensity score‐matched model, preoperative exposure to contrast was not associated with AKI within 7 days (odds ratio (OR) 0·95, 95 per cent c.i. 0·73 to 1·21; P = 0·669). The sensitivity analysis showed no association between preoperative contrast administration and AKI within 48 h after operation (OR 1·09, 0·84 to 1·41; P = 0·498).
Conclusion
There was no association between preoperative intravenous contrast administered for CT up to 7 days before surgery and postoperative AKI. Risk of contrast‐induced nephropathy should not be used as a reason to avoid contrast‐enhanced CT.
The peri-operative use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin-2 receptor blockers is thought to be associated with an increased risk of postoperative acute kidney injury. To reduce this risk, these agents are commonly withheld during the peri-operative period. This study aimed to investigate if withholding angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin-2 receptor blockers peri-operatively reduces the risk of acute kidney injury following major non-cardiac surgery. Patients undergoing elective major surgery on the gastrointestinal tract and/or the liver were eligible for inclusion in this prospective study. The primary outcome was the development of acute kidney injury within seven days of operation. Adjusted multi-level models were used to account for centre-level effects and propensity score matching was used to reduce the effects of selection bias between treatment groups. A total of 949 patients were included from 160 centres across the UK and Republic of Ireland. From this population, 573 (60.4%) patients had their angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin-2 receptor blockers withheld during the peri-operative period. One hundred and seventy-five (18.4%) patients developed acute kidney injury; there was no difference in the incidence of acute kidney injury between patients who had their angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin-2 receptor blockers continued or withheld (107 (18.7%) vs. 68 (18.1%), respectively; p = 0.914). Following propensity matching, withholding angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin-2 receptor blockers did not demonstrate a protective effect against the development of postoperative acute kidney injury (OR (95%CI) 0.89 (0.58-1.34); p = 0.567).
Introduction Approximately 5000 major lower-limb amputations (MLLA) for PAD occur per-annum in the UK with clinical outcomes being poor for this high-risk cohort of patients. Existing evidence suggests that anaemic surgical patients have an increased 30-day mortality, but this has not been explored in the context of MLLA. Recent prioritization processes suggested that MLLAs are a target area for research into outcome improvement. This cohort study evaluates the impact of anaemia on the outcome of MLLA to understand if optimization might improve outcomes. Methods All PAD patients undergoing MLLA during 2015–2018 at a tertiary vascular centre were reviewed. Patients were stratified into groups; non-anaemia (>12 g/dL), mild-anaemia (12-10 g/dL) and severe-anaemia (<10 g/dL) by pre-operative haemoglobin (Hb). Primary outcome was overall survival by Kaplan–Meier. Secondary outcomes included length of stay (LOS), post-operative blood-transfusion, surgical-site infection (SSI) and myocardial infarction (MI). Cox-proportional-hazard and receiver-operator characteristics (ROC) analyses were conducted. Results 345 patients were followed up over (mean) 23 months. 105 were non-anaemic, 111 mildly anaemic and 129 severely anaemic. Patients with severe-anaemia had a higher incidence of heart and renal failure ( p = 0.003) than those with non- or mild-anaemia. Overall survival worsened significantly with increasing anaemia ( p = 0.001). LOS was significantly longer in mild-anaemia which is 26 (16–43) days, ( p = 0.006) and severe-anaemia of 28 days (17–40), ( p < 0.001) compared to non-anaemia of 18 (10–30) days. Post-operative blood-transfusion (RBC) was required more frequently in 70.5% of severely anaemic patients ( p < 0.001), compared to mildly anaemic (24.3%) and non-anaemic (7.6%) patients, with those receiving RBCs having a significantly worse survival. There was no difference in MI, SSI or wound dehiscence. Anaemia was significantly associated with mortality; (HR 1.7 (1.04–2.78), p = 0.03). A minimum-Hb of 10.4 g/L (by ROC) was identified as a cutoff Hb for an increased risk of mortality. Conclusion Pre-operative anaemia is associated with worse outcome following MLLA, with increasing severity of anaemia associated with increasing mortality and RBC transfusion being potentially detrimental. More work is required to prospectively evaluate this relationship in this complex and multi-morbid cohort of patients.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.