Person:

Cooper, Zara

BACKGROUND: There is increasing emphasis on the appropriateness and quality of acute surgical care for patients with serious illness and at the end of life. However, there is a lack of evidence regarding outcomes after emergent major abdominal surgery among patients with advanced cancer to guide treatment decisions. This analysis sought to characterize adverse outcomes (mortality, complications, institutional discharge) and to identify factors independently associated with 30-day mortality among patients with disseminated cancer who undergo emergent abdominal surgery for intestinal obstruction or perforation.

METHODS:This is a retrospective cohort study of 875 disseminated cancer patients undergoing emergency surgery for perforation (n = 499) or obstruction (n = 376) at hospitals participating in the American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program from 2005 to 2012. Predictors of 30-day mortality were identified using multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS:Among patients who underwent surgery for perforation, 30-day mortality was 34%, 67% had complications, and 52% were discharged to an institution. Renal failure, septic shock, ascites, dyspnea at rest, and dependent functional status were independent preoperative predictors of death at 30 days. When complications were considered, postoperative respiratory complications and age (75-84 years) were also predictors of mortality.Patients who had surgery for obstruction had a 30-day mortality rate of 18% (n = 68), 41% had complications, and 60% were discharged to an institution. Dependent functional status and ascites were independent predictors of death at 30 days. In addition to these predictors, postoperative predictors of mortality included respiratory and cardiac complications. Few patients (4%) had do-not-resuscitate orders before surgery.

CONCLUSION:Emergency abdominal operations in patients with disseminated cancer are highly morbid, and many patients die soon after surgery. High rates of complications and low rates of preexisting do-not-resuscitate orders highlight the need for targeted interventions to reduce complications and integrate palliative approaches into the care of these patients.

IMPORTANCE: Inpatient palliative care improves symptom management and patient satisfaction with care and reduces hospital costs in seriously ill patients. However, the role of palliative care in the treatment of patients undergoing surgery (surgical patients) remains poorly defined.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the content, design, and results of interventions to improve access to palliative care or the quality of palliative care for surgical patients.

EVIDENCE REVIEW: This systematic review was conducted according to PRIMSA guidelines. Articles were identified through searches of PubMed, PsycINFO, EMBASE, and CINAHL as well as manual review of references. Eligible articles included experimental, quasi-experimental, and observational studies published in English from January 1, 1994, through October 31, 2014, in which patient outcomes of palliative care interventions for adult surgical patients were reported. Data on the study setting, design, intervention, participants, and results were extracted from the final study set and analyzed from December 22, 2014, to February 7, 2015.

FINDINGS: A total of 3838 abstracts were identified and screened by 2 reviewers, 77 articles were reviewed in full text, and 25 articles (22 unique interventions involving 8575 unique patients) met the study criteria. Interrater agreement was good (κ = 0.78). Nine single-institution retrospective cohort studies, 7 single-institution prospective cohort studies, 7 single-institution randomized clinical studies, and 2 multicenter randomized clinical studies were included. Nineteen of the 23 single-site studies were performed at academic hospitals. Given the heterogeneity of study methods and measures, meta-analysis was not possible. Preoperative decision-making interventions were associated with decreased mortality in 4 studies. Three studies reported improved quality of communication; 4, improved symptom management; and 7, decreased use of health care resources and decreased cost. However, many studies were small, performed in academic settings, and methodologically flawed and did not measure clinically meaningful outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The sparse evidence regarding interventions to introduce or improve palliative care for surgical patients is further limited by methodologic flaws. Rigorous evaluations of standardized palliative care interventions measuring meaningful patient outcomes are needed.