View clinical trials related to Emergency Surgery.
Filter by:Pulmonary aspiration of gastric contents is a serious patient safety problem accounting for 50% of anesthesia-related mortality. The risk is higher in patients undergoing emergency surgery as the gastric content is uncertain which poses a challenge to anesthetic decision-making. Standard clinical assessment to identify at-risk patients primarily relies on preoperative fasting guidelines and is not adequate for patients undergoing emergency surgeries. Point-of-care gastric ultrasound (GUS) has emerged as an accurate bedside tool providing information regarding the type and volume of gastric contents. When GUS was added to standard clinical assessment, anesthetic management plan changed in 71% of adult elective and 37% of pediatric emergency surgical procedures. Such data is lacking in adult patients undergoing emergency surgeries. The investigators propose a multicentre mixed-method study to evaluate the impact of GUS on aspiration risk assessment and subsequent Anesthetic Plan before emergency surgeries. The evidence from this study will improve patient safety by accurately identifying patients at risk of aspiration and tailoring anesthetic techniques and airway management to prevent pulmonary aspiration in patients undergoing emergency surgeries.
The goal of this clinical trial is to test the safety and effectiveness of the ERAS protocols compared to a conventional care protocols in patients who received emergency laparotomy. The main question it aims to answer are: • Can the ERAS protocols be used safely and effectively in patients undergoing emergency laparotomy? Participants will be randomised into the ERAS group and the conventional group and will be given the ERAS protocols and the conventional protocols in the perioperative period. Researchers will compare the ERAS group with the conventional group to see if the ERAS programme is effective.
Treatment of disorders such as gastrointestinal tract (GI) perforation, ischemia and obstruction often require acute high-risk abdominal surgery, which is associated with a high risk of complications such as myocardial injury after non-cardiac surgery (MINS) and mortality. The majority of patients with MINS will not experience any symptoms, and thus MINS remains undetected without routine troponin measurements. The investigators hypothesized that implementing surveillance with troponin I as a standard care might be useful as risk stratification, and that increased surveillance, examinations, and subsequent individually based medical interventions, might improve the outcomes for patients with MINS.
Background: Despite the capability of emergency surgery to reduce the mortality of severe spontaneous intracranial hemorrhage (SSICH) patients, the effect and safety of surgical treatment for severe spontaneous intracranial hemorrhage (SSICH) patients receiving long-term oral antiplatelet treatment (LOAPT) remains unclear. In consideration of this, the cohort study is aimed at figuring out the effect and safety of emergency surgery for SSICH patients on LOAPT. Methods: As a multicenter and prospective cohort study, it will be conducted across 7 representative clinical centers. Starting in September 2019, the observation is scheduled to be completed by December 2022, with a total of 450 SSICH patients recruited. The information on clinical, radiological, and laboratory practices will be recorded objectively. All of the patients will be monitored until death or 6 months after the occurrence of primary hemorrhage. Study Design: In this study, two comparative cohorts and an observational cohort will be set up. The primary outcome is the effect of emergency surgery, which is subject to assessment using the total mortality and comparison in the survival rate of SSICH patients on LOAPT between surgical treatment and conservative treatment. The second outcome is the safety of surgery, with the postoperative hemorrhagic complication which is compared between the operated SSICH patients on and not on LOAPT. Based on the observation of the characteristics and outcome of SSICH patients on LOAPT, the ischemic events after discontinuing LOAPT will be further addressed, and the coagulation function assessment system for operated SSICH patients on LOAPT will be established. Objective: In this study, investigators will estimate the effect and safety of emergency surgery for SSICH patients on LOAPT, which will provide an evidence for management in the future.
Reducing surgical waiting time has been shown to be associated with a reduction in postoperative morbidity and mortality in this type of surgery. The use of a gradation of surgical emergencies makes it possible to prioritise them in an objective, consensual manner and to carry them out within a theoretical expected waiting time relative to the degree of urgency. The investigators hypothesise that exceeding the theoretical expected waiting time relative to the degree of urgency defined by the gradation of surgical emergencies is associated with an increase in postoperative morbidity and mortality in emergency surgery. The objective is to assess the impact on post-operative morbidity and mortality of waiting times exceeding the theoretical expected time by grading the surgical emergencies of patients undergoing emergency surgery.
Background: Despite the capability of emergency surgery to reduce the mortality of severe spontaneous intracranial hemorrhage (SSICH) patients, the effect and safety of surgical treatment for severe spontaneous intracranial hemorrhage (SSICH) patients receiving long-term oral antiplatelet treatment (LOAPT) remains unclear. In consideration of this, the cohort study is aimed at figuring out the effect and safety of emergency surgery for SSICH patients on LOAPT. Methods: As a multicenter and prospective cohort study, it will be conducted across 7 representative clinical centers. Starting in September 2019, the observation is scheduled to be completed by December 2022, with a total of 450 SSIC H patients recruited. The information on clinical, radiological, and laboratory practices will be recorded objectively. All of the patients will be monitored until death or 6 months after the occurrence of primary hemorrhage. Results: In this study, two comparative cohorts and an observational cohort will be set up. The primary outcome is the effect of emergency surgery, which is subject to assessment using the total mortality and comparison in the survival rate of SSICH patients on LOAPT between surgical treatment and conservative treatment. The second outcome is the safety of surgery, with the postoperative hemorrhagic complication which is compared between the operated SSICH patients on and not on LOAPT. Based on the observation of the characteristics and outcome of SSICH patients on LOAPT, the ischemic events after discontinuing LOAPT will be further addressed, and the coagulation function assessment system for operated SSICH patients on LOAPT will be established. Conclusions: In this study, we will investigate the effect and safety of emergency surgery for SSICH patients on LOAPT, which will provide an evidence for management in the future.
Recovery from surgery is a complex process, depending on the characteristics of the patient, the anesthesia used, and the time required for surgical management. In the context of emergency surgery, the perioperative period is associated with an increase in morbidity and mortality, which may lead us to suspect an alteration in the quality of recovery. Different scales to measure the quality of post-operative recovery have been developed. The QoR-40 and QoR-15 questionnaires assess recovery after elective surgery.These scoring tools accurately measure postoperative recovery by addressing key domains: pain, physical comfort, physical independence, psychological support and emotional state. Their use is recommended as an endpoint for assessing patient comfort in clinical trials, according to the Standardized Endpoints in Perioperative Medicine (StEP) initiative. In addition, monitoring of the QoR-15 is recommended by the American Society for Enhanced Recovery. A recent French translation of the QoR-15 score has been validated for use in scheduled surgery. All of these scores, regardless of the language in which they are translated, have been developed and validated in patients who have undergone scheduled surgery. Until now, no validated scoring tool has been available to assess recovery after emergency surgery, whether traumatological or not.
Gastro-intestinal perforation is a condition that can become life-threatening in case of appearance of systemic symptoms, sepsis-related peripheral hypoperfusion and single or multiple organ failure needing a prompt intervention in Emergency Department (ED) setting. Literature reports disagreeing data about the effect of surgical timing on mortality and postoperative outcomes: Buck et al. described a 2.4 % of decreased survival every hour of surgical delay in case of perforated peptic ulcers. Other authors documented significantly longer postoperative hospital stay, greater health costs and a significant increase of postoperative complication and mortality rates when surgery is delayed in high-risk patients with comorbidities or age > 65 years. Azuhata described a highly significant relationship between delayed surgery and patients' survival: after 6 hours from admission to ED, patients with gastrointestinal perforation and associated septic shock don't survive to surgery. The aim of this study is to assess the impact of delay of time between patient admission to ED and surgery for source control on 30-d mortality and postoperative outcomes in patients with gastrointestinal perforation with or without septic shock. Furthermore, we want to define the time threshold within which surgery can affect patients' survival.
This study defines a standardized protocol inspired to the ERAS philosophy for the peri-operative treatment of patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery. Primary endpoint is the feasibility of the application of the standardized protocol; secondary endpoint is the safety
Emergency general surgical care during the COVID-19 pandemic presents a unique set of considerations and challenges. Patients presenting with acute surgical conditions and concomitant COVID-19 infection have higher risk of mortality and morbidity. The investigators present their experience with COVID-19 positive patients presenting with acute surgical conditions and reviewed the implementation of a protocolized pathway to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 infection.