Comparison of on-demand vs planned relaparotomy for treatment of severe intra-abdominal infections.

Abstract

AIM: To compare morbidity and mortality of patients with severe intra-abdominal infections after two types of surgical treatment, on-demand ("wait and see") relaparotomy and modified planned relaparotomy. METHODS: We prospectively analyzed the outcomes of 65 patients with severe peritonitis surgically treated in two Croatian hospitals. In one hospital, 34 patients were treated on-demand, and in another hospital 31 patients were treated by planned relaparotomy. We compared severe postoperative complications, mortality, and length of hospital stay in the two groups of patients. RESULTS: Severity of patient's disease, as measured from preoperative group-average Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II scores, was comparable in both on-demand and planned relaparotomy groups. The mortality rate was higher in patients operated on-demand (59% vs 29%, P=0.024). In nonadjusted model, the relative risk of dying was 2.5-fold higher for patients treated by on-demand operation in comparison with planned relaparatomy (P=0.030). However, after the adjustment of the survival data for individual patient's sex and APACHE II scores, the difference in the relative risk became non-significant (P=0.178). The patients who died had higher APACHE II scores (26.1+/-8.9 vs 19.7+/-5.9, P=0.009). Relative risk of dying per 5-point increase in APACHE II score was 1.24 (95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.51; P=0.039), irrespective of the surgical technique. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with severe peritonitis treated with planned relaparotomy seemed to have lower mortality. However, the relative risk of dying was not statistically different between the on-demand and planned relaparotomy groups after adjustment for preoperative APACHE II scores. The severity of disease rather than surgical approach plays more important role in survival of these patients.