About this Journal Publication ethics Editorial Board Editorial Council Editorial Office For the Authors Contacts

News feeds

Journal in Databases

eLIBRARY.RU - ═└ËÎ═└▀ Ţ╦┼╩Ďđ╬══└▀ ┴╚┴╦╚╬Ď┼╩└

Google Scholar

Google Scholar

Main arrow Archive of previous Issues arrow ╣3 2011 (19) arrow Reasons for lethal outcomes of digestive organ diseases in surgical hospitals in the Russian Federation, the north Caucasian federal district, and Stavropol territory in dynamics for 10 years
Reasons for lethal outcomes of digestive organ diseases in surgical hospitals in the Russian Federation, the north Caucasian federal district, and Stavropol territory in dynamics for 10 years Print
Friday, 30 September 2011

Summary. During the last years, an increase in the number of surgical operations and a rise of surgical activity are observed in hospitals in the Russian Federation. Urgent conditions in abdominal organ diseases are extensional and non-homogeneous that is evidenced in a large number of special literature. This group incorporates diseases different in etiology and pathogenesis, but all of them obligatory threaten patientsĺ life and require urgent interventions including surgical ones. It is natural that scientific interests appeal to not only an assessment of outcomes of emergency care provided but also to the causes of mortality after treating this pathology. The particular targets of the present study were the reasons of lethal cases. To provide the study, the analysis of lethal outcomes in patients with digestive organ diseases was carried out in dynamics in hospitals of the Russian Federation, the North Caucasian Federal District, and Stavropol territory. Data for the analysis have been taken from the corresponding forms of the Federal Statistical Supervision across the Russian Federation, Stavropol territory and Stavropol-city for 2001-2010, and the North Caucasian Federal District for 2006-2010.

From 2001 to 2010, the comparative analysis of disease dynamics was carried out in the territories of the Russian Federation and Stavropol territory separately.

The total number of patients died during 10 years in surgical hospitals in Russia was 46837, in Stavropol territory - 771. Among the reasons of lethal outcomes in the operated and not operated patients, the following reasons were registered most often in surgical hospitals of the Russian Federation: perforating gastric and duodenal ulcers (8,2 %), acute ileac passion (5,1 %), gastroenteric bleedings (5,3 %). Patientsĺ lethal cases caused by entrapment of a hernia (3.2 %) and acute pancreatitis (3,5 %) are less often. Lethal outcomes caused by those diseases were lower in Stavropol territory than in Russia. The research provided in dynamics for 10 years has revealed no essential positive tendency in mortality caused by digestive organ diseases in the Russian Federation. Moreover, there was registered a growth in mortality caused by perforating gastric and duodenal ulcers by 2,1 %, gastroenteric bleedings by 2,3 %, and acute pancreatitis by 27,5 %. In Stavropol territory mortality caused by perforating gastric and duodenal ulcers has decreased by 24,3 %, the number of gastroenteric bleeding cases has decreased in 2 times. The defining factor for outcomes of treating diseases, which require emergency surgical care, is the term of patientĺs delivery to a hospital.

With delivery to a surgical hospital later than 24 hours after acute condition (gastric ulcer perforation, gastroenteric bleeding), the probability of a lethal outcome increases in 2,1 - 7,5 times.

Comparison between the data obtained and the probability calculated for patients delivered to a hospital with the diagnosis of perforating gastric and duodenal ulcers shows that the probability of lethal outcome is 41,8 % (i.e. almost half died) if a patient is delivered to a hospital during the first day of disease, i.e., the earlier patient is delivered to a hospital the more favorably is an outcome. It is important to note that medical errors in 80-85 % of cases are also the reasons of disease complications, which often lead to heavy clinical outcomes. Thus, monitoring of quality of medical care together with a work to prevent medical errors should take the central place in health care process.

Keywords. Reasons for lethal outcomes, digestive organ diseases, surgical hospitals, urgent conditions.


  1. Arkhipov V.V., Bagnenko S.F., Ozerov V.F. Sovremennye printsipy organizatsii ekstrennoy khirurgicheskoy pomoshchi v usloviyakh krupnogo goroda [Modern foundations for organizing urgent surgical treatment under conditions of a large town]. Vestnik khirurgii 2003(6):89-91.
  2. Vyalkov A.I., Kucherenko V.Z. Klinicheskiy menedzhment [Clinical management]. M.: Meditsina; 2006. 304 p.
  3. Zatevakhin I.I., Shchegolev A.A., Titkov B.E. Novye tekhnologii v lechenii yazvennykh gastroduodenalnykh krovotecheniy [New technological approaches to management of ulcerous gastroduodenal bleeding]. M., 2001. 146 p.
  4. Kakorina E.P. Rogovina A.G. Khirurgicheskaya aktivnost v 1993-2002 gg. [The scope of surgical charging in 1993-2002]. Problemy sotsialnoy gigieny, zdravookhraneniya i istorii meditsiny 2005;(2):25-31.
  5. Lebedev L.V., Sedov V.M. Sostoyanie i puti uluchsheniya angiokhirurgicheskoy pomoshchi v Sankt-Peterburge [Current level and ways for improving of angiosurgical treatment in Saint-Petersburg]. In: Problemy otsenki kachestva meditsinskoy pomoshchi. Collection of Scientific Papers. SPb., 1996. P. 146-149.
  6. Martynov A.A., Berezaeva E.A. Diagnostika i terapiya neotlozhnykh sostoyaniy [Diagnosis-making and therapies for urgent conditions of patients]. Petrozavodsk:. źIzdatelstvo źIntelTek╗; 2000. 372 p.
  7. Milonov O.B., Toskin K.D., Zhebrovskiy V.V. Posleoperatsionnye oslozhneniya i opasnosti v abdominalnoy khirurgii [Postoperative complications and other burdens in abdominal surgery]. M., 1990. 558 p.
  8. Rusakov V.I. Nekotorye obshchie problemy khirurgii [Certain general problems of surgery]. Vestnik khirurgii 2000;(4):99-101.
  9. Struchkov Yu.V. Gorbacheva I.V. Otsenka tyazhesti techeniya posleoperatsionnogo peritonita [Assessment of the severness of the course of postoperatively emerging peritonitis]. Khirurgiya 2007;(7):12-15.
  10. Shayn M. Zdravyy smysl v neotlozhnoy abdominalnoy khirurgii [Common sense in urgent abdominal surgery]. M., 2003. 163 p.
  11. Shulutko A.M., Ovchinnikov A.V., Vetshev P.S. źRabochiy diagnoz╗ v trudnykh khirurgicheskikh situatsiyakh [Ad-hoc diagnosis in difficult surgical situations]. M.: Meditsina; 2003. 256 p.
  12. Shurkalin B.K., Faller A.P., Gorskiy V.A. Khirurgicheskie aspekty lecheniya rasprostranennogo peritonita [Surgical aspects of management of expanding peritonitis]. Khirurgiya 2007;(2):24-28.
  13. Shchepin V.O., Kupeeva I.A. Analiz sostoyaniya i dinamiki kadrovykh resursov zdravookhraneniya subektov Rossiyskoy Federatsii v 1990-2004 gg. [Analysis of current state and changes in the resources of staff at the level of a Region/Land/Autonomous Republic in the Russian Federation in 1990-2004]. Problemy sotsialnoy gigieny, zdravookhraneniya i istorii meditsiny 2007;(1):3-6.
  14. Anaya, D.A. Risk factors for severe sepsis in secondary peritonitis. Surg. Infect. 2003;4(4):335-362.
  15. Fru, D.E. Basic aspects of general problems in surgical infections. Surg. Infect. 2001;2 suppl. 1:3-11.
  16. Livermore DM, Sefton AM, Scott GM. Properties and potential of ertapenem. J. Antimicr. Chemot. 2005;52:331-344.

Views: 25265

Be first to comment this article

Write Comment
  • Please keep the topic of messages relevant to the subject of the article.
  • Personal verbal attacks will be deleted.
  • Please don't use comments to plug your web site. Such material will be removed.
  • Just ensure to *Refresh* your browser for a new security code to be displayed prior to clicking on the 'Send' button.
  • Keep in mind that the above process only applies if you simply entered the wrong security code.

Code:* Code

Last Updated ( Wednesday, 26 October 2011 )
< Prev   Next >
home contact search contact search