ArticleTechniques in coloproctology2023
Quantitative futility in emergency laparotomy: an exploration of early-postoperative death in the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit.
Article in Techniques in coloproctology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Decision-making in emergency colorectal surgery for cancer.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2026Article
- Perioperative predictors of critical care admission following emergency surgical procedures: a comprehensive evaluation of anesthesia management.Perioperative medicine (London, England) · 2026Article
- Emergency Medicine Perspectives on Quality of Life Outcomes After Emergency Laparotomy: A Systematic Review.Cureus · 2025Review
- Ethical considerations on the role of artificial intelligence in defining the futility in emergency surgery.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2025Article
- Costs of surgical futility in emergency laparotomy.Surgery in practice and science · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundQuantitative futility is an appraisal of the risk of failure of a treatment. For those who do not survive, a laparotomy has provided negligible therapeutic benefit and may represent a missed opportunity for palliation. The aim of this study was to define a timeframe for quantitative futility in emergency laparotomy and investigate predictors of futility using the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA) database.
methodsA two-stage methodology was used; stage one defined a timeframe for futility using an online survey and steering group discussion; stage two applied this definition to patients enrolled in NELA December 2013-December 2020 for analysis. Futility was defined as all-cause mortality within 3 days of emergency laparotomy. Baseline characteristics of this group were compared to all others. Multilevel logistic regression was carried out with potentially clinically important predictors defined a priori.
resultsQuantitative futility occurred in 4% of patients (7442/180,987). Median age was 74 years (range 65-81 years). Median NELA risk score was 32.4% vs. 3.8% in the surviving cohort (p < 0.001). Early mortality patients more frequently presented with sepsis (p < 0.001). Significant predictors of futility included age, arterial lactate and cardiorespiratory co-morbidity. Frailty was associated with a 38% increased risk of early mortality (95% CI 1.22-1.55). Surgery for intestinal ischaemia was associated with a two times greater chance of futile surgery (OR 2.67; 95% CI 2.50-2.85).
conclusionsQuantitative futility after emergency laparotomy is associated with quantifiable risk factors available to decision-makers preoperatively. These findings should be incorporated qualitatively by the multidisciplinary team into shared decision-making discussions with extremely high-risk patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.