Published in PLOS One on 2026-05-29, this study is presented as an attributed evidence briefing. The excerpts below are the original researchers’ words, reproduced under their Creative Commons Attribution licence. Health Signal has selected the abstract and, where needed, opening background paragraphs; the complete methods, results, limitations and references remain in the linked paper.
Original authors: Kumlachew Geta, Amsalu Molla, Yonas Kassaw, Simegnew Kibret, Metages Hunie, Kaletsidk Dessalegn, Diriba Teshome, Belayneh Dessie, Keder Essa, Efrem Fenta
Source: PLOS One • DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0335304
Read the complete primary study ↗ · Creative Commons Attribution licence
From the researchers
Abstract
Re-laparotomy is one of the causes of morbidity and mortality among patients who have had abdominal surgery. Due to the unavailability of laparoscopic surgery in the region, laparotomy remains the standard treatment. As a result, re-laparotomy is commonly performed, significantly increasing the labor load, financial costs, and the risks of morbidity and mortality for patients. The aim of this study is to evaluate the prevalence and factors associated with re-laparotomy procedures, in order to better understand their impact on patient health and healthcare resources.
A retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted on patients who underwent gastrointestinal procedures in a hospital in Ethiopia between September 2020 and August 2022. The association between independent variables with re-laparotomy (dependent variable) was analyzed using bi-variate and multivariate logistic regression. Those variables that had a p-value of less than 0.2 were put into a multivariate analysis. The strength of the association was displayed using crude and adjusted odds ratios with a 95% confidence interval. P-values less than 0.05 were used to determine statistical significance.
A total of 1276 charts were reviewed, and 127 (10%) of those were found to have re-laparotomy. A greater proportion of re-laparotomy was associated with the occurrence of prior abdominal surgery (AOR = 67.94, 95% CI: 39.07, 118.13), the existence of ischemic bowel during surgery (AOR = 4.36, 95% CI: 2.10, 9.02), and the intraoperative use of inotropic/vasopressor medications (AOR = 7.03, 95% CI: 2.52, 19.59).
The prevalence of re-laparotomy was found to be 10% which is higher compared with some previous reports. Prior abdominal surgery, ischemic bowel presence during surgery, and the use of inotropic/vasopressor drugs intra-operatively were all found to be risk factors for re-laparotomy.
Introduction
Re-laparotomy is a re-abdominal operation performed within 60 days of the first surgery [1]. According to studies from various regions of the world, it represents between 1.5 and 27% of patients undergoing abdominal surgery [2–5]. The rate of re-laparotomy following gastrointestinal surgery is a significant surgical workload both globally and in the Ethiopian context. Internationally, the rate of re-laparotomy ranges from 1.5% to 27% [6], the Ethiopian figure of 6.8% [7] being a significant percentage of the surgical workload in the developing world. The most frequent reasons for reoperation are intra-abdominal collection and anastomotic leakage are worldwide [8], although their prevalence and outcome are remarkably variable worldwide. Peritonitis, hemorrhage, abscess, wound dehiscence, necrotizing pancreatitis, intestinal necrosis, bowel obstruction, and evisceration are some of the common causes of re-laparotomy [9–11].
Patients who have re-laparotomies experience higher medical expenses [12,13] who suffer from higher morbidity (surgical site infection, wound dehiscence, hospital-acquired infections, etc.) and increased mortality [14–16].
Reading this evidence
Use the full paper to check the study design, participant selection, comparator and outcome definitions before drawing a practical conclusion. An association does not by itself show cause and effect. A reported performance measure needs its denominator and uncertainty. A finding from a particular facility, sample or time period should retain that scope when it is discussed elsewhere.
This briefing makes the source accessible within the wider hospital systems desk. It does not assess an individual patient or certify a product. When considering relevance to another health system, examine the original authors’ account of context and limitations, then seek local implementation evidence. The related reporting below provides other studies to read alongside this one; it is a topic connection, rather than a claim that their results are directly comparable.
© 2026 Kumlachew Geta, Amsalu Molla, Yonas Kassaw, Simegnew Kibret, Metages Hunie, Kaletsidk Dessalegn, Diriba Teshome, Belayneh Dessie, Keder Essa, Efrem Fenta. Excerpts reproduced under CC BY. Selection, formatting and contextual notes by Health Signal. The researchers are the authors of the source study, not members of Health Signal’s staff.
Explore connected evidence
- Evidence brief: Cancer surgical outcome study in Ethiopia: A 7-day multicenter prospective observational cohort study
- Evidence brief: Postoperative renal dysfunction and associated perioperative factors among patients undergoing major vascular surgery at Tikur Anbessa Specialized Hospital, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
- Evidence brief: Adverse neonatal outcomes and associated factors among births through operative vaginal delivery at the University of Gondar Comprehensive Specialized Hospital, Northwest Ethiopia: A facility-based retrospective cross-sectional study
