DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2349-2902.isj20213194

East surgical ward enteric perforation score: a new statistically valid scoring criteria for decision between repair or ileostomy in patients with peritonitis due to enteric perforation

Ahmed Siddique Ammar, Syed Asghar Naqi, Zahra Sattar, Farwa Inayat, Affifa Liaquat, Azwa Munim Janjua

Abstract


Background: Enteric fever leading to enteric perforation is very common surgical emergency in the developing nations. The two surgical solutions used worldwide are to repair or exteriorize the perforation as ileostomy. The aim of the study was to setup and validate a statistically reliable scoring system for decision between repair and ileostomy in patients with peritonitis due to enteric perforation.

Methods: It was an observational cross-sectional study done at East Surgical Ward of Mayo Hospital, Lahore. 256 patients were selected by consecutive non-probability sampling after ethical approval. The duration of study was 2 years from 1st August to 2018 to 30th July 2020. Patients with age more than 13 years presented in emergency department with diagnosis of peritonitis due to enteric perforation were included. A preformed scoring criterion named as East surgical ward enteric perforation (ESWEP) score was set by giving each variable a score of 1 to 3. Cut-off value between repair and ileostomy was observed.

Results: 142 (55.4%) patients were male and 114 (44.5%) were female. Male to female ratio was 1: 1.24. The average age of patients is about 37 years with SD of ±9.67 years. ROC curve showed cut-off of pre-operative ESWEP score of 4 (sensitivity78%, specificity of 88%), per operative score of 7 (sensitivity 96%, specificity of 85%) and total ESWEP score of 11 (sensitivity 94%, specificity of 88%).

Conclusions: ESWEP score is new score which helps in standardization of operative procedure done for the patients with peritonitis due to enteric perforation.


Keywords


Enteric, Ileostomy, Peritonitis, Repair, Score

Full Text:

PDF

References


Agrawal P, Imbisat MZJ. Our experience with enteric ileal perforation: a retrospective study at a tertiary care centre in northern India. Int J Surg. 2019;6(12):4318-22.

Azhar M, Zamir N, Shaikh MJP. Enteric Fever Complicated by Intestinal Perforation in Children: A Persistent Health Problem Requiring Surgical Management. Pak J Med Sci Q. 2020;36(5):890.

Paryani JJ, Patel V, Rathod GJ. Etiology of peritonitis and factors predicting the mortality in peritonitis. NJCM. 2013;4(1):145.

Kham MD, Kakar M, Zarkoon N. Typhoid Perforation: Comparison of Outcomes between Primary Repair and Ileostomy in Children. J Med Health Sci. 2020;14(1):44-6.

Koppad SN, Vandakudri AB, Desai M. Analysis of Mannheim peritonitis index scoring in predicting outcome in patients with peritonitis secondary to hollow viscous perforation. Int J Surg. 2016;3(3):1116-20.

Mahesh P, Ali SAS, Kaludi ZA. Outcome of various surgical procedures and their outcome following enteric perforation at Dr. Ruth KM Pfau, Civil Hospital, Karachi. Professional Med J. 2019;26(10):1613-7.

Malik RN, Quddus A, Ahmad S. Comparison between Primary Repair Versus Loop ileostomy in ileal Perforation. JFMJMU. 2020;31(8):46.

Mishra M, Singh P, Tripathi A. Typhoid ileal perforation: comparative study of ileostomy versus primary ileal repair and associated morbidity and mortality. Int Surg J. 2018;5(9):3129-33.

Neelma UA, Khan H, Jan Y. Outcome of primary repair versus ileostomy in patients with typhoid ileal perforation. RMJ. 2020;45(2).

Yadav BL, Bansal S, Gupta S. Incidence and management of intestinal perforation in typhoid: a prospective, observational study. Int Surg J. 2020;7(5):1570-74.

Ramanaiah J, Kumar CP, Indla RJT. Protective Ileostomy in Ileal Perforation and Its Outcome Compared to Primary Repair. Tuberc Airborne Dis Wkly. 2019;5:10.

Sharma S, Singh S, Makkar N. Assessment of severity of peritonitis using mannheim peritonitis index. Niger J Surg. 2016;22(2):118-22.

Khalilur RA, Krishnaswamy J, Muthukumaran G, Prakash SJ. A comparative study on outcome of ileal perforation after primary perforation closure and resection and ileostomy. Int Surg J 2018;5:445-51.

Qazi SH, Yousafzai MT, Saddal NS. Burden of Ileal Perforations Among Surgical Patients Admitted in Tertiary Care Hospitals of Three Asian countries: Surveillance of Enteric Fever in Asia Project (SEAP). Clinical Infectious Disease. America: Oxford press; 2020: 232-238.

Koppad SN, Vandakudri AB, Desai M, Kodliwadmath H. Analysis of Mannheimperitonitis index scoring in predicting outcome inpatients with peritonitis secondary to hollowviscous perforation. Int Surg J. 2016;3:1116-20.

Usang UE, Inyang AW, Nwachukwku IE, Emehute JC. Typhoid perforation in children: an unrelenting plague in developing countries. J Infect Dev Ctries. 2017;11(10):747-52.

Singh R, Chaudhary A, Khan AJA. A Comparative Study between the Outcome of Primary Repair versus Loop Ileostomy in Traumatic and Non- traumatic Ileal Perforation. APJHS. 2020;7(1):57-61.

Gurjar S, Jain S, Kansal A, Prakash A. Study of POSSUM Score for Risk Assessment in Patients of Perforation Peritonitis at a Tertiary Care teaching hospital. Int J Health Clinical Res. 2021;4(9):99-105.

Goel KS, Goel NJ. Prognostic factors of morbidity in enteric perforation in a peripheral hospital. Sci JEMDS. 2016;5(90):6722-5.

Kamble RS, Singh M, Jaiswal YJISJ. Prognostic factors in perforative peritonitis: an observational study. Int J Surg. 2016;3(3):1082-92.

Abdulhameed MME, Abdulmuthalif A, Vamanaprabhu RRJ. Clinicopathological evaluation of preoperative findings and outcome of perforation peritonitis. JEMDS. 2017;6(29):2338-46.

Hodonou MA, Allode SA, Seto DM. Prognostic Factors of Non-Traumatic Small Bowel Perforation Peritonitis: A Multicenter Study in North Benin. JSLS. 2018;6(1):29-32.