Skip to main content
Log in

Age, microbiology and prognostic scores help to differentiate between secondary and tertiary peritonitis

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background and aims

Tertiary peritonitis is a severe persisting intra-abdominal infection and associated with high mortality. The aim was to find significant risk factors for mortality and tertiary peritonitis including the Mannheim Peritonitis Index (MPI), the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score, and a sumscore of both.

Materials and methods

In this retrospective single-center cohort study, 122 patients were treated at the Surgical Department of a University Hospital.

Results

Sixty-nine patients (56.6%) developed tertiary peritonitis. Nineteen patients (27.5%), who suffered from tertiary peritonitis, died in contrast to eight patients (15.1%) with secondary peritonitis (P = 0.101). Patients with tertiary peritonitis had significantly higher APACHE II (P < 0.001), MPI (P = 0.035), and combined APACHE II and MPI scores (P < 0.001) than patients with secondary peritonitis. Age (P = 0.035), fungal infections (P = 0.025), and infections with more than one microbial organism (P = 0.047) were predictive for tertiary peritonitis. Combined APACHE II and MPI scores detected tertiary peritonitis better than the MPI (P = 0.014). Detection of mortality was comparable in all evaluated prognostic scores.

Conclusion

Prognostic scores besides age and fungal infections are risk factors for mortality and help to differentiate between secondary and tertiary peritonitis. The combination of prognostic scores is comparable to the APACHE II and superior compared to the MPI in regard to detection of tertiary peritonitis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Barie PS, Hydo LJ, Eachempati SR (2004) Longitudinal outcomes of intra-abdominal infection complicated by critical illness. Surg Infect 5:365–373

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Buijk SE, Bruining HA (2002) Future directions in the management of tertiary peritonitis. Intensive Care Med 28:1024–1029

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Rivers E, Nguyen B, Havstad S, Ressler J, Muzzin A, Knoblich B, Peterson E, Tomlanovich M (2001) Early goal-directed therapy in the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock. N Engl J Med 345:1368–1377

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Moore FA, Feliciano DV, Andrassy RJ, McArdle AH, Booth FV, Morgenstein-Wagner TB, Kellum JM, Welling RE, Moore EE (1992) Early enteral feeding, compared with parenteral, reduces postoperative septic complications. The results of a meta-analysis. Ann Surg 216:172–183

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Orozco H, Arch J, Medina-Franco H, Pantoja JP, Gonzalez QH, Vilatoba M, Hinojosa C, Vargas-Vorackova F, Sifuentes-Osornio J (2006) Molgramostim (GM-CSF) associated with antibiotic treatment in nontraumatic abdominal sepsis: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial. Arch Surg 141:150–153

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Barie PS (1999) Management of complicated intra-abdominal infections. J Chemoth 11:464–477

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Nathens AB, Rotstein OD, Marshall JC (1998) Tertiary peritonitis: clinical features of a complex nosocomial infection. World J Surg 22:158–163

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Billing A, Frohlich D, Schildberg FW (1994) Prediction of outcome using the Mannheim peritonitis index in 2003 patients. Br J Surg 81:209–213

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Bosscha K, Rejinders K, Hulstaert F, Algra A, Van der Werken C (1997) Prognostic scoring systems to predict outcome in peritonitis and intraabdominal sepsis. Br J Surg 84:1532–1534

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Fugger R, Rogy M, Herbst F, Schemper M, Schulz F (1988) Validation study of the Mannheim Peritonitis Index. Chirurg 59:598–601

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Rogy M, Fugger R, Schemper M, Koss G, Schulz F (1990) The value of 2 distinct prognosis scores in patients with peritonitis. The Mannheim Peritonitis Index versus the Apache II score. Chirurg 61:297–300

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Biondo S, Ramos E, Fraccalvieri D, Kreisler E, Martí Ragué J, Jaurrieta E (2006) Comparative study of left colonic Peritonitis Severity Score and Mannheim Peritonitis Index. Br J Surg 93:616–622

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Linder MM, Wacha H, Feldmann U, Wesch G, Streifensand RA, Grundlach E (1987) The Mannheim peritonitis index. An instrument for the intraoperative prognosis of peritonitis. Chirurg 58:84–92

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Knaus WA, Draper EA, Wagner DP, Zimmerman JE (1985) APACHE II: a severity of disease classification system. Crit Care Med 13:818–829

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Bohnen J, Mustard RA, Oxholm SE, Schouten D (1988) APACHE II score and abdominal infection. Arch Surg 123:225–229

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Ohmann C, Wittmann DH, Wacha H (1993) Prospective evaluation of prognostic scoring systems in peritonitis. Peritonitis Study Group. Eur J Surg 159:267–274

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Götzinger P, Wamser P, Barlan M, Sautner T, Jakesz R, Függer R (2000) The surgical concepts of planned and on-demand reoperation in the treatment of diffuse intra-abdominal infection. Eur Surg 32:1–4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Lamme B, Boermeester MA, Belt EJ, van Till JW, Gouma DJ, Obertop H (2004) Mortality and morbidity of planned relaparotomy versus relaparotomy on demand for secondary peritonitis. Br J Surg 91:1046–1054

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Weiss G, Meyer F, Lippert H (2006) Infectiological diagnostic problems in tertiary peritonitis. Langenbecks Arch Surg 391:473–482

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Evans HL, Raymond DP, Pelletier SJ, Crabtree TD, Pruett TL, Sawyer RG (2001) Tertiary peritonitis (recurrent diffuse or localized disease) is not an independent predictor of mortality in surgical patients with intraabdominal infection. Surg Infect 2:255–263

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Klingler A (2004) Statistical methods in surgical research—a practical guide. Eur Surg 36:80–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Panhofer P, Riedl M, Izay B, Ferenc V, Ploder M, Jakesz R, Götzinger P (2007) Clinical outcome and microbial flora in patients with secondary and tertiary peritonitis. Eur Surg 39:259–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Malangoni MA (2000) Evaluation and management of tertiary peritonitis. Am Surg 66:157–161

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Evans HL, Raymond DP, Pelletier SJ, Crabtree TD, Pruett TL, Sawyer RG (2001) Diagnosis of intra-abdominal infection in the critically ill patient. Curr Opin Crit Care 7:117–121

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Marshall JC, Innes M (2003) Intensive care unit management of intra-abdominal infection. Crit Care Med 31:2228–2237

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Butler JA, Huang J, Wilson SE (1987) Repeated laparotomy for postoperative intra-abdominal sepsis. An analysis of outcome predictors. Arch Surg 122:702–706

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Marshall JC, Christou NV, Horn R, Meakins JL (1988) The microbiology of multiple organ failure. Arch Surg 123:309–315

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Barie PS, Hydo LJ, Fischer E (1996) Development of multiple organ dysfunction syndrome in critically ill patients with perforated viscus. Arch Surg 123:225–229

    Google Scholar 

  29. Christou NV, Barie PS, Dellinger EP, Waymack JP, Stone HH (1993) Surgical Infection Society intra-abdominal infection study. Prospective evaluation of management techniques and outcome. Arch Surg 128:193–198

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Koperna T, Schulz F (1996) Prognosis and treatment of peritonitis. Do we need new scoring systems? Arch Surg 131:180–186

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Cerra FB, Negro F, Abrams J (1990) APACHE II score does not predict multiple organ failure or mortality in postoperative surgical patients. Arch Surg 125:519–522

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Goris RJA, te Boekhorst TPA, Nuytinck JKS, Gimbrare JSF (1995) Multiple-organ failure: generalized autodestructive inflammation? Arch Surg 44:937–946

    Google Scholar 

  33. Sautner T, Götzinger P, Redl-Wenzl EM, Dittrich K, Felfernig M, Sporn P, Roth E, Függer R (1997) Does reoperation for abdominal sepsis enhance the inflammatory host response? Arch Surg 132:250–255

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter Panhofer.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Panhofer, P., Izay, B., Riedl, M. et al. Age, microbiology and prognostic scores help to differentiate between secondary and tertiary peritonitis. Langenbecks Arch Surg 394, 265–271 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-008-0301-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-008-0301-y

Keywords

Navigation