Outcomes and Decision Making in High-Risk Lap and NoLap Patients: Clinical Frailty Score vs NELA Score Clinical Frailty Score should be used in conjunction with NELA to aid decision making.
Main Article Content
Abstract
Introduction: High-risk emergency laparotomy patients are characterised as having a National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA) mortality prediction of ≥5%, but this often underestimates risk. Frailty has been reported as an important factor in decision-making for laparotomy. Outcomes for patients who do not proceed to laparotomy (NoLap) are less-reported, as are the reasons why this decision is made. Our aim was to explore the decision making process for high-risk patients eligible for laparotomy and to investigate which factors heavily influenced the decision. We then analysed outcomes in those were managed with a laparotomy (Lap), vs NoLap.
Methods: A prospective study over 6 months was conducted across two hospitals. Patients with NELA ≥5% and aged ≥65 warranting laparotomy were included. Fisher's and Mann-Whitney U testing was used to compare Lap and NoLap outcomes. Multivariable regression analysis was used to determine which factors were associated with the decision for or against laparotomy.
Results: A total of 62 patients were eligible for inclusion. NoLap patients had significantly higher NELA (p=<0.001), American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) classification (p=0.008) CFS (p=<0.001), and higher mortalities (<0.001). ASA was the only predictor of mortality (p=0.04). Only 32% of all cases had a full multidisciplinary team (intensivist, anaesthesiologist and surgeon) involved in decision-making. CFS was the most specific and sensitive factor influencing decision-making (p=<0.001), but only NELA predicted morbidity (p=0.03).
Conclusions: High-risk NoLap patients have worse outcomes than their Lap counterparts. Although CFS is not currently included in the NELA calculation, it is a crucial variable used in laparotomy decision making in high-risk patients.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
This is an open-access journal, which means that all content is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is under the BOAI definition of open access.
The journal is adopting the Creative Commons International Attribution 4. CC Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0CC BY-NC 4.0].
All articles published in BJSS are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY -NC 4.0) license. This permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is accurately cited.
Authors retain full copyright of their work. By submitting to BJSS, and once published, any third party may use the article freely provided the original authors, citation details, and publisher are clearly identified.
You are free to:
- Share— copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt— remix, transform, and build upon the material
- for any purpose
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
-
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes .
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation.
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
- https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
References
The National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA). Available at: www.ne- la.org.uk. Accessed September 2nd, 2024
Javanmard‐Emamghissi H, Doleman B, Lund JN, Lockwood S, Hare S, Pearce L, et al. Beyond high‐risk: analysis of the outcomes of extreme‐risk patients in the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit. Anaesthesia. 2023 Nov;78(11):1376-85
Palaniappan S, Soiza RL, Duffy S, Moug SJ, Myint PK. Comparison of the clinical frailty score (CFS) to the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA) risk calculator in all patients undergoing emergency laparotomy. Colorectal Disease. 2022 Jun;24(6):782-9
McIlveen EC, Wright E, Shaw `, Edwards J, Vella M, Quasim T, et al. A prospective cohort study characterising patients declined emergency laparotomy: survival in the ‘NoLap’ population. Anaesthesia. 2020 Jan;75(1):54-62
Ebrahim M, Lauritsen ML, Cihoric M, Hilsted KL, Foss NB. Triage and outcomes for a whole cohort of patients presenting for major emergency abdominal surgery including the No-LAP population: a prospective single-center observational study. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2023 Feb;49(1):253-60
Broughton KJ, Aldridge O, Pradhan S, Aitken RJ. The Perth Emergency Laparotomy Audit. ANZ Journal of Surgery. 2017 Nov;87(11):893-7
Price A, McLennan E, Knight SR, Reeves N, Chandler S, Boyle J, et al. Characterisation of older patients that require, but do not undergo, emergency laparotomy: a multicentre cohort study. British Journal of Anaesthesia. 2024 Nov;133(5):973-82
McLennan E, Price A, Boyle J. EP.FRI.257 ELF 2: Defining the Denominator. British Journal of Surgery. 2021 Oct 27;108
Parmar KL, Law J, Carter B, Hewitt J, Boyle JM, Casey P, et al. Frailty in Older Patients Undergoing Emergency Laparotomy. Annals of Surgery. 2021 Apr;273(4):709-18.
Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien P. Classification of Surgical Complications. Annals of Surgery. 2004 Aug;240(2):205-13
González-Martínez S, Martín-Baranera M, Martí-Saurí I, Borrell-Grau N, Pueyo-Zurdo JM. Comparison of the risk prediction systems POSSUM and P-POSSUM with the Surgical Risk Scale: A prospective cohort study of 721 patients. International Journal of Surgery. 2016 May;29:19-24
Tian BWCA, Stahel PF, Picetti E, Campanelli G, Di Saverio S, Moore E, et al. Assessing and managing frailty in emergency laparotomy: a WSES position paper. World J Emerg Surg. 2023 Jun 24;18(1):18-19
Ethiraj DS, Das DBM. Frailty and post operative outcomes in geriatric patients undergoing emergency laparotomy in Indian population. Int J Surg Sci. 2022 Jul 1;6(3):145-7
Isand KG, Hussain SF, Sadiqi M, Kirsimägi Ü, Bond-Smith G, Kolk H, et al. Impact of frailty on outcomes following emergency laparotomy: a retrospective analysis across diverse clinical conditions. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2024 Aug 21