Mahmoud, Khalid H.

Background: Candidemia is a serious complication after gastrointestinal (GI) perforation and/or ischemia, yet most evidence pools candidemia with intra-abdominal candidiasis (IAC). We sought candidemia-specific risk factors after GI perforation and/or ischemia and evaluated associated outcomes. Methods: We conducted a single-center, retrospective matched case–control study of adults undergoing emergency surgical procedure for GI perforation and/or ischemia and admitted to a surgical intensive care unit. Cases with candidemia during index admission were matched 4:1 to controls by age, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and surgical procedure year. Conditional logistic regression assessed pre-specified risk factors, and exploratory outcomes included mortality, length of stay, and days on invasive ventilation. Results: Twenty-four cases were matched to 99 controls. Factors identified to be independently associated with candidemia include the presence of IAC (adjusted OR [aOR]: 5.51, 95% CI: 1.61, 18.89; p = 0.007), upper GI injury (aOR: 4.28, 95% CI: 1.52–12.08; p = 0.006), and diffuse intra-abdominal contamination, compared with contained/none (aOR: 3.21, 95% CI: 1.06–9.74; p = 0.040). Among candidemia cases, species distribution was Candida albicans 41.7%, C. glabrata 33.3%, C. parapsilosis 12.5%, with single cases of C. tropicalis, C. krusei , and C. dubliniensis . Candidemia was associated with a longer hospital length of stay (+13.97 d; 95% CI: 0.90–27.04; p = 0.036), without significant differences in ICU stay, duration of invasive ventilation, or mortality. Conclusions: After GI perforation and/or ischemia, the risk of candidemia is highest in patients with upper GI injury and diffuse contamination, independent of IAC. These readily identifiable operative features may guide targeted surveillance and selective early antifungal strategies. Prospective validation is warranted.

ABSTRACTBackgroundWe aimed to determine the performance of postoperative computed tomography (CT) and upper gastrointestinal series (UGI) in patients who underwent surgery for a perforated peptic ulcer and to assess the yield of routine postoperative studies.MethodsRetrospective, single‐institution, chart‐review study of patients who underwent a repair of a perforated gastric or duodenal ulcer between August 2004 and September 2021 at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.ResultsWe identified a total of 240 patients, 28 (12%) were found to have leaks. When any of the four findings (extraluminal gas or fluid collection adjacent to the repair, worsening pneumoperitoneum, or enteral contrast extravasation) was present on postoperative CT scan (n = 116) it had sensitivity of 76% (95% CI 53%–90%), with a specificity of 90% (95% CI 84%–91%). Upper gastrointestinal series (UGI, n = 150) showed a sensitivity of 57% (95% CI 25%–84%) and a specificity of 99% (95% CI 96%–100%). UGI demonstrated higher specificity compared to CT (p < 0.01); there was no significant difference in sensitivity (p = 0.34). The findings from CT scans led to changes in management for a significantly greater number of patients compared to UGI (20% vs. 4%, p < 0.01). The diagnostic yield for leak identification was 3% for routine postoperative CT (n = 63) and 2% for routine UGI studies (n = 141).ConclusionsPostoperative CT is more likely to change management in patients who underwent repair of a perforated peptic ulcer compared to postoperative upper gastrointestinal series. The yield of routine postoperative studies is low, and their benefit is uncertain.