INTRODUCTION: Emergency laparotomy (EL) is associated with high morbidity and mortality, often exceeding 10%. This study evaluated the impact of the EMergency Laparotomy Audit (EMLA) interdisciplinary perioperative pathway on patient outcomes, hospital costs and length of stay (LOS) within a single centre. METHOD: A prospective cohort study was conducted from August 2020 to July 2023. The intervention team included specialist clinicians, hospital administrators and an in-hospital quality improvement team. Patients who underwent EL were divided into a pre-intervention control group (n=136) and a post-intervention group (n=293), and an 8-item bundle was implemented. Propensity scoring with a 1:1 matching method was utilised to reduce confounding and selection bias. The primary outcomes examined were LOS, hospitalis-ation costs and surgical morbidity, while secondary outcomes included 30-day mortality and adherence to the intervention protocol. RESULTS: The utilisation of the EMLA perioperative care bundle led to a significant reduction in surgical complications (34.8% to 20.6%, P<0.01), a decrease in LOS by 3.3 days (15.4 to 12.1 days, P=0.03) and lower hospitalisation costs (SGD 40,160 to 30,948, P=0.04). Compliance with key interventions also showed improvement. However, there was no difference in 30-day mortality. CONCLUSION This study offers insights on how surgical units can implement systemic perioperative changes to improve outcomes for patients undergoing emergency laparotomy.
Humans ; Laparotomy/methods* ; Propensity Score ; Female ; Male ; Prospective Studies ; Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data* ; Middle Aged ; Hospital Costs/statistics & numerical data* ; Postoperative Complications/epidemiology* ; Aged ; Emergencies ; Perioperative Care/methods* ; Critical Pathways ; Singapore ; Adult

Background and Objectives: We compared real-world clinical outcomes of patients receiving intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) versus rotational atherectomy (RA) for heavily calcified coronary lesions. Methods: Fifty-three patients who received IVL from January 2017 to July 2020 were retrospectively compared to 271 patients who received RA from January 2017 to December 2018.Primary endpoints were in-hospital and 30-day major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Results: IVL patients had a higher prevalence of acute coronary syndrome (56.6% vs 24.4, p<0.001), multivessel disease (96.2% vs 73.3%, p<0.001) and emergency procedures (17.0% vs 2.2%, p<0.001) compared to RA. In-hospital MACE (11.3% vs 5.9%, p=0.152), MI (7.5% vs 3.3%, p=0.152), and mortality (5.7% vs 3.0%, p=0.319) were not statistically significant. 30-day MACE was higher in the IVL cohort vs RA (17.0% vs 7.4%, p=0.035). Propensity score adjusted regression using IVL was also performed on in-hospital MACE (odds ratio [OR], 1.677; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.588–4.779) and 30-day MACE (OR, 1.910; 95% CI, 0.774–4.718). Conclusions These findings represent our initial IVL experience in a high-risk, real-world cohort. Although the event rate in the IVL arm was numerically higher compared to RA, the small numbers and retrospective nature of this study preclude definitive conclusions. Theseclinical outcomes are likely to improve with greater experience and better case selection, allowing IVL to effectively treat complex calcified coronary lesions.