Damage-control surgery in patients with non-traumatic abdominal emergencies: A meta-analysis

Abstract

Objective After the successful implementation in trauma patients, damage control surgery (DCS) is being increasingly used in non-traumatic abdominal emergencies, too. However, non-trauma DCS (NT-DCS) is currently a matter of debate and has not yet been comprehensively assessed. The aim of this meta-analysis was to investigate the effect of NT-DCS on mortality in patients with abdominal emergencies. Methods Systematic literature search using PubMed. Original articles addressing mortality in patients undergoing NT-DCS or non-trauma conventional surgery (NT-CS) for abdominal emergencies were included. Descriptive statistics and two meta-analyses were performed. Meta-analysis 1 compared mortality in patients undergoing NT-DCS vs. NT-CS. Meta-analysis 2 assessed the observed vs. expected mortality rate, based on APACHE, POSSUM and SAPS scores, in the NT-DCS group. Continuous and categorical variables were reported as weighted means and proportions. Effect sizes were described as risk differences (RD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results Literature search revealed 1314 articles. Of these, 21 studies published 2004-2019 were included. NT-DCS was performed in 1238 and NT-CS in 936 patients. In the NT-DCS vs. NT-CS group mean age was 61.0 vs. 64.9 years and the proportion of male patients 58.6% vs. 52.9%, respectively. Most frequent indications for NT-DCS were hollow viscus perforation (28.4%), mesenteric ischemia (26.5%), anastomotic leak (19.6%), haemorrhage (18.4%), abdominal compartment syndrome (17.4%), bowel obstruction (15.5%), and pancreatitis (13.1%). In meta-analysis 1, mortality was not significantly different in the NT-DCS vs. NT-CS group (RD 0.09, 95% CI -0.06/0.24). Meta-analysis 2 revealed a significantly lower observed than the expected mortality rate in patients undergoing NT-DCS (RD -0.18, 95 % CI -0.29/-0.06). Heterogeneity of included studies was high in both meta-analyses (I2=89.0% and 79.9%, respectively). Conclusion This meta-analysis revealed no significantly different mortality in patients with abdominal emergencies undergoing NT-DCS vs. NT-CS. However, observed mortality was significantly lower than the expected mortality rate in the NT-DCS group, suggesting a benefit of the DCS approach. Based on these results, the effect of DCS in patients with non-traumatic abdominal emergencies remains unclear. Further prospective investigation into this topic is warranted.

Use of Temporary Abdominal Closure in Non‐Trauma Surgery: A Cohort Study

“…A recent systemic review and meta-analysis of this topic identified 21 studies, only eight of which were comparative [3]. There were no randomised controlled trials.…”

“…An international consensus paper proposed indications for the use of open abdomen in non-trauma surgery which included: decompressive laparotomy for compartment syndrome, management of peritonitis, vascular emergencies and severe acute pancreatitis not responsive to step-up conservative management [2]. The studies examining the role for laparostomy in non-trauma emergency in general, aside from the previous mentioned conditions, have not shown a clear benefit for laparostomy over conventional laparotomy [3]. There are currently no randomised controlled trials of this treatment, and non-randomised comparative studies have struggled to match like-for-like patients or to adjust for the many potentially confounding variables between treatment groups [4][5][6][7][8].…”