Katalog Plus
Bibliothek der Frankfurt UAS
Bald neuer Katalog: sichern Sie sich schon vorab Ihre persönlichen Merklisten im Nutzerkonto: Anleitung.
Dieses Ergebnis aus OAIster kann Gästen nicht angezeigt werden.  Login für vollen Zugriff.

Propensity score matching analysis of acute care (ACS) versus colorectal surgeons (CRS) in the management of left colonic perforation: Patient and system-level insights from a multicenter study

Title: Propensity score matching analysis of acute care (ACS) versus colorectal surgeons (CRS) in the management of left colonic perforation: Patient and system-level insights from a multicenter study
Authors: Cioffi, S; Cimbanassi, S; Podda, M; Greca, A; Biloslavo, A; Coccolini, F; Ceresoli, M; Cioffi S. P. B.; Cimbanassi S.; Podda M.; Greca A. L.; Biloslavo A.; Coccolini F.; Ceresoli M.
Publisher Information: Springer Science and Business Media Deutschland GmbH country:DE 2026
Document Type: Electronic Resource
Abstract: Background Left-sided colonic perforation is a severe surgical emergency requiring prompt, technically expert intervention. In Italy, the coexistence of heterogeneous Acute Care Surgery (ACS) models and traditional Colorectal Surgery (CRS) programs provides a unique context to assess differences in outcomes and management for this condition. Methods We conducted a retrospective, multicenter cohort study across six tertiary Italian hospitals (2019-2023) including patients undergoing emergency resection for left-sided colonic perforation. Patients treated by ACS or CRS teams were compared after 1:1 propensity score matching for demographic, clinical, and operative factors. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included surgical strategy, minimally invasive use, postoperative complications, reoperation, readmission, 12-month survival, and stoma reversal. Results Of 516 eligible patients, 437 were analyzed (287 ACS, 150 CRS). After matching, 117 patients per group were balanced for 10/11 covariates. In-hospital mortality did not differ (ACS 9.4% vs. CRS 15.4%; p = 0.234), nor did 12-month survival (ACS 80.0% vs. CRS 77.5%; p = 0.813). ACS teams used more conservative strategies (Hartmann's 47.9% vs. CRS 35.0%), with lower rates of successful laparoscopy (8.6% vs. 18.8%; p = 0.036). Notably, ACS management was associated with significantly fewer unplanned reoperations (8.6% vs. 28.2%; p < 0.001) and hospital readmissions (5.7% vs. 17.4%; p = 0.017). Severe complication rates and anastomotic leak incidence were not significantly different, despite favorable trends for ACS. Conclusions In a nationwide matched cohort, ACS surgeons achieved outcomes equivalent to CRS specialists for left-sided colonic perforation, with lower reoperation and readmission rates despite lower rates of primary anastomosis and less frequent successful minimally invasive procedures. ACS may have prioritized physiology oriented approaches rather than anatomical ones, r
Index Terms: Acute care surgery; Colorectal surgery; Emergency general surgery; Propensity score matching; info:eu-repo/semantics/article
URL: https://hdl.handle.net/10281/585161; info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/pmid/41528489; info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/wos/WOS:001662863800013; volume:52; issue:1; journal:EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF TRAUMA AND EMERGENCY SURGERY
Availability: Open access content. Open access content
Note: STAMPA; English
Other Numbers: ITBAO oai:boa.unimib.it:10281/585161; 10.1007/s00068-025-03052-w; info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/scopus/2-s2.0-105027347583; 1574048584
Contributing Source: BICOCCA OPEN ARCH; From OAIster®, provided by the OCLC Cooperative.
Accession Number: edsoai.on1574048584
Database: OAIster