Development and Validation of a Nomogram for Preoperative Prediction of Localization of Neonatal Gastrointestinal Perforation

Background: Information regarding the localization of gastrointestinal perforation is crucial for the following surgical procedure. This study was to determine the key indicators and develop a prediction model for the localization in neonates with gastrointestinal perforation.Methods: A nomogram to predict the location of neonatal gastrointestinal perforation was developed using a cohort of patients who underwent surgery between July 2009 and May 2021. Baseline variables were analyzed using logistics regression and nomogram developed using significant predictors. The predictive performance of the nomogram was assessed by the concordance index (C-index), calibration curve, and area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC). The nomogram was further validated in an integrated external cohort.Results: We investigated the data of 201 patients, of which 65 (32.3%) were confirmed with upper gastrointestinal perforation by surgery. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified the following as independent predictors: preterm [OR: 5.014 (1.492–18.922)], time of onset [OR: 0.705 (0.582–0.829)], preoperative hemoglobin [OR:1.017 (1.001–1.033)], bloody stool: No [OR: 4.860 (1.270–23.588)], shock [OR: 5.790 (1.683–22.455)] and sepsis: No [OR 3.044 (1.124–8.581)]. Furthermore, the nomogram was effective in predicting the perforation site, with an AUC of 0.876 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.830–0.923]. Internal validation showed that the average AUC was 0.861. Additionally, the model achieved satisfactory discrimination (AUC, 0.900; 95% CI, 0.826–0.974) and calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow test, P = 0.4802) in external validation.Conclusions: The nomogram based on the six factors revealed good discrimination and calibration, suggesting good clinical utility. The nomogram could help surgeons predict the location of gastrointestinal perforation before surgery to make a surgical plan.

Abdominal Cocoon With Intestinal Perforation: A Case Report

Introduction: Abdominal cocoon is a very rare abdominal disease. Abdominal cocoon mainly leads to intestinal obstruction, and abdominal cocoon with gastrointestinal perforation is rare.Case Presentation: We report a 63-year-old man who was admitted to our hospital with “persistent lower abdominal pain for one day”. Abdominal CT examination revealed a small amount of free gas in the abdominal cavity, ascites, and gastrointestinal perforation. An emergency operation was performed. During the operation, the end of the right lower abdominal ileum was found to be conglutinated and twisted into a mass, a local intestinal dilatation, and obstruction, local intestinal wall was black and gangrene, and fecal effusion flowed out. The adhesions were carefully separated, and the necrotic small intestine was removed. The operation process went smoothly, and the patient recovered well after the operation.Conclusion: The cases of intestinal perforation caused by the abdominal cocoon are very rare. In clinical work, when we encounter patients with gastrointestinal perforation, we need to carefully ask the history. When the patients had no digestive system diseases in the past, we need to consider the possibility of the abdominal cocoon with perforation.

EP.WE.829Does Covid-19 increase the risk of gastrointestinal perforation? A preliminary UK-based multicentre cohort study

Aims Recent case reports have described occult gastrointestinal perforation secondary to Covid-related microcirculatory thromboembolic phenomena. This study aims to evaluate the effect of Covid-19 on the incidence of gastrointestinal perforations across South West London (SWL). Methods A retrospective cohort study included all patients with gastrointestinal perforations presenting to three SWL-based NHS hospitals from 01/04/2020-31/12/2020 (i.e. “pandemic” cohort; from the first national lockdown), versus a representative “pre-pandemic” cohort (01/04/2019-31/12/2019). Data was extracted from the hospital coding records, patient case-notes, and the NELA database, and analysed by two independent clinicians. Results A total of 448 patients were included. 9.3% more (214 vs. 234, p = 0.286) gastrointestinal perforations presented during the pandemic period than beforehand. Comparing both periods, there were no significant differences between the numbers of colonic diverticular perforations (183 vs. 185), gastrojejunal ulcer perforations (1 per period), and terminal ileal perforations (1 per period). There were 78% more peptic ulcer perforations (9 vs. 16) and 55% more gallbladder perforations (20 vs. 31) during the pandemic period, although no overall significant difference was derived at the 95% confidence interval (Χ2=3.458, p = 0.484). Conclusions While there was no significant overall increase in spontaneous gastrointestinal perforation during Covid-19, this study clearly suggests increased rates of peptic and gallbladder perforations. Larger-scale epidemiological data are warranted to ascertain whether this is secondary to increased consumption of alcohol, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medication or other pro-ulcerative drug regimes during the pandemic. Further data will also be vital to highlight delays in investigation and/or presentation resulting in these increased perforation rates.

Spectrum of gastrointestinal perforation peritonitis in 462 consecutive patients in tertiary care institute of North India

Background: Gastrointestinal perforation is one of the common surgical emergencies in developing countries. The diagnosis is mainly clinical and is aided by radiological investigations. This study was designed to highlight the spectrum of hollow viscus perforation peritonitis in terms of etiology, clinical presentations, site of perforation, surgical treatment, postoperative complications, and mortality.Methods: The study was a hospital‑based observational study and included 462 patients of perforation peritonitis (diffuse or localized) who were studied retrospectively in terms of cause, site of perforation, surgical treatment, complications, and mortality. Only those patients who underwent exploratory laparotomy for management of perforation peritonitis were included.Results: Overall stomach was the most common site of perforation (33%). Ileum (26%) was the second common site of perforation. Duodenal perforations were seen in 88 (19%) cases whereas appendicular perforations were seen in 46 (10%) cases. Colonic perforations were least common. Acid peptic disease was the most common etiology of stomach perforations. Enteric fever (63%) was the most common etiology of jejuno-ileal perforation. Other causes include tuberculosis (23%), trauma (8%), malignancy (3%) and idiopathic in rest. Males were six times more commonly affected than females. Peak incidence was noted in the 2nd and 3rd decades of life.Conclusions: Spectrum of perforation peritonitis cases in developing world is different from developed countries The Western literature suggests that foreign body, ischemia, radiotherapy, diverticula, and Crohn’s disease are the main causes of perforations. In contrast to this, infection is the most common cause for perforations in developing countries.

Cecal Perforation in a COVID-19 Patient Treated with Tocilizumab: A Case Report

Tocilizumab is a monoclonal antibody against the interleukin-6 receptor. Gastrointestinal perforation has been associated with Tocilizumab treatment. In the absence of specific antiviral drugs, Tocilizumab is currently being used as a treatment option in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. This is being based on the implication of interleukin-6 in the aberrant host immune response that characterizes the disease and initiates patients' lung damage. Herein we present the case of a cecal perforation in a patient treated with Tocilizumab for COVID-19. In such context, we expect that there may be an increase in the incidence of gastrointestinal perforation related to Tocilizumab.

1404 NELA Risk Mortality Scores from Admission to Theatre in Emergency Gastrointestinal Perforation – A Retrospective Cohort Study

Background Patients with acute abdominal pathology requiring emergency laparotomy who experience a delay to theatre have an increased risk of morbidity, mortality and complications. The aim of this study was to assess delay, from symptom onset to theatre in patients with gastrointestinal perforation and its effect on perioperative risk. Method A single-centre retrospective study was performed in the Leeds Trust Hospitals, UK investigating the NELA database for patients requiring emergency laparotomy for perforated gastrointestinal viscus who presented to the acute surgical unit or emergency department between 1st February 2018 and 31st January 2020. Results 101 patients met the inclusion criteria (47% F and 53% M), mean age 59 [21-91]. 37% of patients’ NELA scores worsened from admission to pre-op (median change of + 5.9% IQR 1.3-11.5]), 14% stayed the same and 49% improved (median change of -4.4%[IQR 0.4-9.1]) 3% had their NELA score documented at the time of consent. 18% did not wait for a CT report or went straight to theatre. Mean time from admission to scan report was 9.3 hours (0.9-22.0). Median time from symptom onset to presentation (2 days [IQR 1-13]) was greater in patients with an Index of Multiple Deprivation Decile of 1-5, (n = 64, median 2 days [IQR 1-6]) compared to those in deciles 6-10, (n = 37, median 1 day[IQR 1-3]), p = 0.097. Conclusions NELA mortality risk score changes from presentation to surgery in patients with acute gastrointestinal perforation requiring emergency laparotomy. There is suggestion that delay in symptom onset to presentation may correlate with Index of Multiple Deprivation Decile.

1308 Investigating the Use of a Novel Pre-Hospital Triage Tool for Acute Abdominal Surgical Emergencies – A Two-Phase Single Centre Cohort Study

Background Despite the recent improvements in mortality in patients undergoing emergency laparotomy(EL) within the UK, delay to theatre continues to be associated with increased mortality. This study aimed to assess if patients requiring urgent surgical intervention for acute abdominal surgical pathology could be identified in the pre-hospital setting. Method A two-phase, single-centre, cohort study was performed. Phase 1 retrospectively investigated patients who underwent emergency laparotomy between 01/01/2019-31/12/2019 at Leeds Teaching Hospital Trust (LTHT) through the NELA database. Phase 2 prospectively assessed NEWS2 for all patients presenting to LTHT Surgical Admissions Unit with abdominal pain between 01/01/2020-31/01/2020. Results Phase 1: 45 patients were coded through NELA and confirmed through operation note review as undergoing EL for gastrointestinal perforation. 66%(n = 30) were assessed by the ambulance service and 80% (n = 24) had a NEWS2 of 3 or greater. Phase 2: 319 patients were assessed in SAU/ED, of which 69 initially treated by the ambulance service. 30% (n = 21) of these patients had an initial NEWS2 of 3 or above. Sensitivity of a NEWS2 score of >/3 in predicting the need for immediate surgical intervention including EL was 95%(95%CI, 74-99) and specificity was 95% (95%CI, 83-99) with a PPV of 86%(95%CI 67-95) and NPV of 98% (95%CI, 87-99). Conclusions A NEWS2 score of >/3 predicts the need for emergency surgical intervention including laparotomy for gastrointestinal perforation with reasonable sensitivity in this cohort. A pre-hospital triage tool for patients presenting with abdominal pain could utilise NEWS2 as an adjunct to decision-making in an acute abdominal pathway.