Sepsis Following Vaginal Hysterectomy
A 45-year-old woman presented to the ED complaining of lower abdominal pain, which she described as gradual, aching, and intermittent. The patient stated that she had undergone a vaginal hysterectomy a few days prior and that the pain started less than 24 hours after discharge from the hospital. She denied fever or chills, nausea, or vomiting, and said that she had a bowel movement earlier that day. She also denied any urinary symptoms. Her medical history was significant only for hypothyroidism, for which she was taking levothyroxine. The patient denied cigarette smoking or alcohol consumption. She said she had been taking acetaminophen-hydrocodone for postoperative pain, but that it did not provide any relief. |
The patient’s vital signs were: temperature, 98.6˚F; blood pressure, 112/65 mm Hg; heart rate, 98 beats/minute; and respiratory rate, 20 breaths/minute. The head, eyes, ears, nose, and throat examination was normal, as were the heart and lung examinations. The patient’s abdomen was soft, with mild diffuse lower abdominal tenderness. There was no guarding, rebound, or mass present. A gross nonspeculum examination of the vaginal area did not reveal any discharge or erythema; a rectal examination was not performed.
The EP ordered a complete blood count (CBC), lipase evaluation, and urinalysis. All test results were normal. The emergency physician (EP) then contacted the obstetrician-gynecologist (OB/GYN) who had performed the hysterectomy. The OB/GYN recommended the EP change the analgesic agent to acetaminophen-oxycodone and to encourage the patient to keep her follow-up postoperative appointment in 1 week. The EP followed these instructions and discharged the patient home with a prescription for the new analgesic.
Three days later, however, the patient presented back to the same ED complaining of increased and now generalized abdominal pain, nausea, and vomiting. She was noted to be febrile, tachycardic, and hypotensive. On physical examination, her abdomen was diffusely tender with guarding and rebound. She was given a 2-L bolus of intravenous (IV) normal saline and started on broad spectrum IV antibiotics. After another consultation with the patient’s OB/GYN surgeon, the patient was taken immediately to the operating room. On exploration, she was found to have a segment of perforated bowel and peritonitis. A portion of the bowel was resected, but her postoperative course was complicated by sepsis. After a 1-month stay in the hospital, she was discharged home.
The patient sued the EP—but not her OB/GYN—for failure to obtain a CT scan of the abdomen/pelvis on her initial ED visit, or at least to admit her to the hospital for observation. The EP argued that even if a computed tomography (CT) scan had been performed on the initial visit, it probably would have been normal, since the bowel had not yet perforated. After trial, a defense verdict was returned.
Discussion
This case illustrates two important points. First, not every patient with abdominal pain requires a CT scan of the abdomen/pelvis. So many malpractice cases against EPs involve the failure to perform advanced imaging. Unfortunately, that is usually only through the benefit of hindsight. For a patient with mild abdominal pain, only minimal tenderness on examination, and a negative laboratory workup, it can be perfectly appropriate to treat him or her symptomatically with close follow-up and specific instructions to return to the ED if his or her condition worsens (as was the case with this patient).
The second important point is to not over-rely on a consultant(s), especially if she or he has not independently examined the patient. When calling a consultant, it is best to have a specific question (ie, “Can you see the patient in the morning?”) or action (ie, “I would like to admit the patient to your service”). In general, the EP should not rely on the consultant to give “permission” to discharge the patient. As the physician seeing the patient, the EP is the most well-equipped to work up the patient and determine the needed disposition. Rare is the consultant that can arrive at a better disposition than the EP who performed the history and physical examination on the patient.
Regarding the patient’s GYN surgery, vaginal hysterectomy (VH) is preferred over abdominal hysterectomy (AH) for benign disease as it is associated with reduced infective morbidity and earlier return to normal activities.1 With respect to postoperative events, clinicians typically employ the Clavien-Dindo grading system for the classification of surgical complications.2 The system consists of five grades, ranging from Grade I (any deviation from normal postoperative course, without the need for pharmacological intervention) to Grade V (death).
Following hysterectomy, postoperative urinary or pelvic infections are not uncommon, with an incidence of 15% to 20%.1 In the Clavien-Dindo system, these complications would typically be considered Grade II (pharmacological treatment other than what is considered an acceptable therapeutic regimen), requiring antibiotics and no surgical intervention. Grade III complications, however, usually involve postoperative issues that require surgical, endoscopic, or radiological intervention, which in VH would include ureteral, bladder, or bowel injury.1 In a study by Gendy et al,1 the incidence of such complications posthysterectomy, ranged from 1.7% to 5.7%. So while not extremely common, serious complications can occur postoperatively.