AzTrials
AzTrials

General SurgeryBAHAMASNCT03582631

Biomarkers in Acute High-risk AbdoMinAl Surgery

An observational study of General Surgery and Inflammation, run by University of Copenhagen at 1 site in Denmark.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

Acute high-risk abdominal surgery (AHA) is performed in hospitals worldwide. Ethiologies are heterogeneous, but it carries a high mortality rate (1)(2). In particular, emergency laparotomies performed on elderly people has a high mortality rate(3)(4). Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and older
Conditions the study is for
General Surgery, Inflammation, Troponins
What is being tested?
Emergency abdominal surgery
Type of treatment
Surgery or procedure
How many people
600 participants
Where
1 siteDenmark
Study dates
1 Jun 2013to 1 May 2022
Phase
Observational
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 18 years and older
  • All sexes
  • Adult, Older adult

Study population: Include patients with a preoperative blood sample stored in the bio bank; the patients did undergo AHA at Hvidovre Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark, from June 1st 2013 when the AHA study protocol was initiated. In the primary study we will include the first 100 consecutive primary operations in the cohort.

Who may be able to join

  • Patients aged 18 or older with the suspicion for abdominal pathology requiring immediate emergency laparotomy or laparoscopy including reoperations after elective surgery and reoperations after previous AHA surgery.

Who cannot join

  • We excluded the following procedures: appendectomies; negative laparoscopies and laparotomies; cholecystectomies; simple herniotomies following incarceration (without intestinal resection); reoperation due to fascial separation with no other abdominal pathology; internal herniation after roux-en-y gastric bypass surgery; sub-acute surgery (planned within 48 hours) for inflammatory bowel disease; and sub-acute colorectal cancer surgery.
  • We excluded, traumas, pregnant woman, uro-genital, gynaecological and vascular pathology except for mesenteric ischemia.

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

Denmark1 site
  • Hvidovre University hospital

    Hvidovre, Capital Region, 2650

Other trials in Denmark

About this study

Acute high-risk abdominal surgery (AHA) is performed in hospitals worldwide. Ethiologies are heterogeneous, but it carries a high mortality rate (1)(2). In particular, emergency laparotomies performed on elderly people has a high mortality rate(3)(4). Different quality improvement programs have been suggested, but the quality of care and mortality varies between hospitals (5)(6). The use of postoperative intensive care seem to be inadequate for this high risk population (1)(7)(8). It is of paramount importance to identify the frailest and acutely deranged patients, who are in risk of poor outcome, to allocate resources for optimization postoperatively. Failure to escalate care intensity after having developed postoperative complications affect outcome. Organization, teamwork and culture is important postoperatively to be able to escalate care especially in standard care wards (9)(10). However, it is difficult to predict which patients will develop complications.

Different risk assessment tools have been proposed for patients undergoing AHA (11)(12). The APACHE-II score, even though developed for critical care, seems to give the best prediction of outcome. Objective risk assessment tools support clinical decision making as subjective clinical assessment often underestimates the risk for the patients in highest risk of complications and death (13). Good clinical decision-making is likely to improve the clinical outcome by allocating appropriate resources. Prognostic tools are also useful to inform patients about what to expect in the postoperative phase and of long-term outcome. Especially in the elder population with increased risk of loss of function or independency, this can be useful to give informed consent to treatment. Furthermore, good risk assessment is important to optimize palliative care after end-of-life decisions, which is often ignored in research, but highly relevant in clinical work.

Read more

Prognostic biomarkers in other high mortality populations have received much attention for risk stratification (14). An ideal biomarker should be readily available upon decision-making, easy to measure, and reliable. Furthermore, it should accurately differentiate prognosis for patients to have value in the clinical decision-making and guide the treatment. It should also be linked to the clinical outcomes.

The investigators aim to identify AHA biomarkers that are prognostic or predictive for postoperative morbidity, mortality and length of hospitalization.

Read the detailed description

Acute high-risk abdominal surgery (AHA) is performed in hospitals worldwide. Ethiologies are heterogeneous, but overall emergency surgery carries a very high mortality rate (1)(2). In particular, emergency laparotomies performed on elderly people has a high mortality rate(3)(4). Different quality improvement programmes for that particular patient group have been suggested, but the quality of care and thereby mortality varies considerably between hospitals(5)(6). The use of postoperative intensive care and monitoring seem to be inadequate for this high risk population in a variety of hospitals(1)(7)(8). It is of paramount importance to identify the frailest and most acutely deranged patients, who are in risk of poor outcome, in order to allocate resources for improved monitoring and optimisation postoperatively. It has been shown that failure to rescue patients after having developed postoperative complications and inability to escalate care intensity affects the outcome. Organisation, teamwork and culture is important in the postoperative phase to be able to escalate care especially in standard care wards(9)(10). However, it is found difficult to predict which patients will experience complications in a standard care ward.

Different risk assessment tools have been proposed for patients undergoing AHA(11)(12). The APACHE-II score, even though developed for critical care, seems to be the one with best prediction of outcome. Risk assessment tools are important to support clinical decision making by the perioperative team as subjective clinical assessment often underestimates the risk for the patients in highest risk of complications and death(13). Good clinical decision-making is likely to improve the clinical outcome by allocating appropriate resources. Prognostic tools are also useful to inform patients about what to expect in the immediate postoperative phase and of long-term outcome. Especially in the elder population with increased risk of long hospitalisation and loss of function or independency this can be useful to give informed consent to treatment strategy. Furthermore, good risk assessment is important to optimize palliative care after end-of-life decisions, which is often ignored in research, but highly relevant in clinical work.

During recent years use of prognostic biomarkers in other high mortality populations have received much attention for risk stratification(14). An ideal biomarker should be readily available upon decision-making, easy to measure, reliable and biologically stable. Furthermore it has to be able to accurately differentiate prognosis for patients to have value in the clinical decision-making and guide the treatment of the patient. It should be linked to the clinical outcomes.

The investigators aim to identify serological AHA biomarkers that are prognostic or predictive for postoperative morbidity, mortality and length of hospitalisation.

Data collection Data on mortality was obtained using the Danish Civil Registration System(30). This register is maintained by the Danish government and assigns a unique personal identification number to all Danish citizens. It contains data on address, immigration emigration, gender, date of birth and exact day of death. It is updated within days of any change in information.

Other data were collected in the medical records of patients. Complications were defined using the Clavien-Dindo Classification for Surgical Complications(31).

Outcome measures Primary outcomes are short and long-term mortality (30 days and 180 days respectively) and major complications during index hospitalization (Clavien-Dindo >2). Secondary outcomes are length of hospitalisation, length of intensive care admission as well as perioperative need for inotropic or vasopressor support and high volume fluid resuscitation.

Description of biological material Blood samples were collected at the time of induction of anaesthesia. For AHA-patients a pre-operative optimisation protocol was introduced in the hospital throughout the data collection period, which stated that the patient was optimized with goal directed fluid therapy before induction of anaesthesia. The blood samples were usually taken from the arterial line used for invasive blood pressure monitoring but some were obtained from venous puncture with standard preoperative tests.

The blood samples were collected in tubes with EDTA as anti-coagulant for plasma and in tubes with coagulation enhancer for serum. After centrifugation for 10 mins at room temperature the plasma and serum, respectively were transferred to freezing tubes for subsequent long-term storage at -80C.

Limitations of the study Data collection during clinical work including blood samples requires resources and is susceptible to selection and information bias. It is possible that resources for collecting blood samples correctly where reduced for the most unstable patients at the time of induction of anaesthesia. Patients who were considered too frail to undergo surgery, where a palliative or conservative approach was chosen, were not included in this study. Postoperatively, patients in the AHA-cohort were assigned to postoperative intensive monitoring in the post-operative care unit if they had American Society of Anaesthesiologist physical performance score(34) above two. This stratification is susceptible to information-bias because of inter-observer variation(35).

The data is collected in a single medical facility with and optimized care protocol for AHA and can therefore not uncritically be applied to other populations.

Economical support and budget:

The clinical study as well as establishment of the biobank has been supported by a grant from the Capital Region of Denmark (Region H). The cost of biochemical analysis will be covered by the Department of Clinical Biochemistry, Hvidovre Hospital. Other expenses will be covered by the AHA research group, Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care and Department of Surgical Gastroenterology, Hvidovre Hospital.

Publication of results:

Results from the studies will be published in medical journals indexed in the PubMed/EMBASE database.

Being tested
Emergency abdominal surgery
Medical subject headings
Inflammation

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Emergency abdominal surgeryProcedure or surgery

    Emergency surgery for high-risk abdominal pathology using a protocol for optimized perioperative care

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. No of patients died within 30 days postoperatively

    30 day mortality after surgery

    Measured: 30 days

  2. No of patients died within 180 days postoperatively

    180-day mortality after surgery

    Measured: 180 days

  3. No of patients with major postoperative complications within 30 days afer surgery

    Clavien Dindo grade more than 3a

    Measured: 30 days

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted11 Jul 2018
  2. Study start1 Jun 2013
  3. Primary completion1 May 2022
  4. Study completion1 May 2022

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Observational
Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrolment
600 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT03582631
Sponsor's protocol ID
BAHAMAS1
Acronym
BAHAMAS
Status last verified
Aug 2022
First submitted
11 Jun 2018
Last updated
5 Aug 2022
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
Undecided

Publications

  • Pearse RM, Moreno RP, Bauer P, Pelosi P, Metnitz P, Spies C, Vallet B, Vincent JL, Hoeft A, Rhodes A; European Surgical Outcomes Study (EuSOS) group for the Trials groups of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the European Society of Anaesthesiology. Mortality after surgery in Europe: a 7 day cohort study. Lancet. 2012 Sep 22;380(9847):1059-65. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61148-9.

    PubMed 22998715
  • Tolstrup MB, Watt SK, Gogenur I. Morbidity and mortality rates after emergency abdominal surgery: an analysis of 4346 patients scheduled for emergency laparotomy or laparoscopy. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2017 Jun;402(4):615-623. doi: 10.1007/s00423-016-1493-1. Epub 2016 Aug 9.

    PubMed 27502400
  • Stoneham M, Murray D, Foss N. Emergency surgery: the big three--abdominal aortic aneurysm, laparotomy and hip fracture. Anaesthesia. 2014 Jan;69 Suppl 1:70-80. doi: 10.1111/anae.12492.

    PubMed 24303863
  • Jeppesen MH, Tolstrup MB, Kehlet Watt S, Gogenur I. Risk factors affecting morbidity and mortality following emergency laparotomy for small bowel obstruction: A retrospective cohort study. Int J Surg. 2016 Apr;28:63-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2016.02.059. Epub 2016 Feb 18.

    PubMed 26912017
  • Saunders DI, Murray D, Pichel AC, Varley S, Peden CJ; UK Emergency Laparotomy Network. Variations in mortality after emergency laparotomy: the first report of the UK Emergency Laparotomy Network. Br J Anaesth. 2012 Sep;109(3):368-75. doi: 10.1093/bja/aes165. Epub 2012 Jun 22.

    PubMed 22728205
  • Symons NR, Moorthy K, Almoudaris AM, Bottle A, Aylin P, Vincent CA, Faiz OD. Mortality in high-risk emergency general surgical admissions. Br J Surg. 2013 Sep;100(10):1318-25. doi: 10.1002/bjs.9208. Epub 2013 Jul 17.

    PubMed 23864490
  • Jhanji S, Thomas B, Ely A, Watson D, Hinds CJ, Pearse RM. Mortality and utilisation of critical care resources amongst high-risk surgical patients in a large NHS trust. Anaesthesia. 2008 Jul;63(7):695-700. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2008.05560.x. Epub 2008 May 16.

    PubMed 18489613
  • Vester-Andersen M, Lundstrom LH, Moller MH, Waldau T, Rosenberg J, Moller AM; Danish Anaesthesia Database. Mortality and postoperative care pathways after emergency gastrointestinal surgery in 2904 patients: a population-based cohort study. Br J Anaesth. 2014 May;112(5):860-70. doi: 10.1093/bja/aet487. Epub 2014 Feb 10.

    PubMed 24520008
  • Johnston MJ, Arora S, King D, Bouras G, Almoudaris AM, Davis R, Darzi A. A systematic review to identify the factors that affect failure to rescue and escalation of care in surgery. Surgery. 2015 Apr;157(4):752-63. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2014.10.017.

    PubMed 25794627
  • Ghaferi AA, Dimick JB. Importance of teamwork, communication and culture on failure-to-rescue in the elderly. Br J Surg. 2016 Jan;103(2):e47-51. doi: 10.1002/bjs.10031. Epub 2015 Nov 30.

    PubMed 26616276
  • Oliver CM, Walker E, Giannaris S, Grocott MP, Moonesinghe SR. Risk assessment tools validated for patients undergoing emergency laparotomy: a systematic review. Br J Anaesth. 2015 Dec;115(6):849-60. doi: 10.1093/bja/aev350. Epub 2015 Nov 3.

    PubMed 26537629
  • Al-Temimi MH, Griffee M, Enniss TM, Preston R, Vargo D, Overton S, Kimball E, Barton R, Nirula R. When is death inevitable after emergency laparotomy? Analysis of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. J Am Coll Surg. 2012 Oct;215(4):503-11. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2012.06.004. Epub 2012 Jul 11.

    PubMed 22789546
  • Hobson SA, Sutton CD, Garcea G, Thomas WM. Prospective comparison of POSSUM and P-POSSUM with clinical assessment of mortality following emergency surgery. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2007 Jan;51(1):94-100. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.2006.01167.x. Epub 2006 Nov 1.

    PubMed 17073858
  • Sandquist M, Wong HR. Biomarkers of sepsis and their potential value in diagnosis, prognosis and treatment. Expert Rev Clin Immunol. 2014 Oct;10(10):1349-56. doi: 10.1586/1744666X.2014.949675. Epub 2014 Aug 21.

    PubMed 25142036
  • Donadello K, Scolletta S, Taccone FS, Covajes C, Santonocito C, Cortes DO, Grazulyte D, Gottin L, Vincent JL. Soluble urokinase-type plasminogen activator receptor as a prognostic biomarker in critically ill patients. J Crit Care. 2014 Feb;29(1):144-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2013.08.005. Epub 2013 Oct 9.

    PubMed 24120089

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

An observational study of General Surgery and Inflammation, run by University of Copenhagen at 1 site in Denmark.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 5 Aug 2022. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in Denmark. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

No of patients died within 30 days postoperatively (time frame: 30 days). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT03582631, which also lists 32 linked publications.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 5 Aug 2022.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in