ArticleBJS open2024
One-year mortality rates after standardized management for emergency laparotomy: results from the Swedish SMASH study.
Article in BJS open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Long-term survival in generalized peritonitis: the impact of early critical periods in major emergency abdominal surgery.BMC surgery · 2026Article
- Impact of a Care Pathway for Older Patients Undergoing Emergency Abdominal Surgery: A Before-and-After Study.Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPatients who require an emergency laparotomy suffer from high mortality and morbidity rates. Studies have shown that the standardization of perioperative management reduces complications in the short term. The aim of the present study was to report long-term mortality rates for the SMASH (Standardized perioperative Management of patients operated with acute Abdominal Surgery in a High-risk and emergency setting) study, as well as short- and long-term outcomes for different age groups within the SMASH study.
methodsA prospective intervention study was introduced in 2018, with the aim of investigating the introduction of a standardized protocol for emergency laparotomy. For 42 months, intervention patients were managed according to the protocol and outcomes were then compared with those of historical controls.
resultsA total of 1344 unique patients were included (681 in the intervention group and 663 in the control group). The 90-day mortality rate was 14.1 per cent in the intervention group and 20.8 per cent in the control group (P = 0.002) and the 1-year mortality rate in adjusted analyses was 19.7 and 27.8 per cent respectively (P =< 0.001). An age-related subgroup analysis showed that the oldest patients (76 years and older, 260 in the intervention group and 240 in the control group) had a 1-year mortality rate of 29.6 and 43.8 per cent respectively (P = 0.004) and a mean duration of hospital stay of 9.9 and 11.6 days respectively (P = 0.027). Among older adults (61-75 years), the mean duration of hospital stay was 11.7 days in the intervention group compared with 15.1 days in the control group (P = 0.009) and the mean duration of ICU care was reduced to 4.49 days compared with 7.29 days (P = 0.046).
conclusionThe standardized protocol associated with an emergency laparotomy appears to be beneficial, even in the long term. For elderly patients, it appears to reduce mortality rates and the durations of hospital stay and ICU care.
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.