|
1
|
Panin SI, Nechay TV, Sazhin IV, Melnikov-Makarchuk KY, Sazhin AV, Puzikova AV, Akinchits AN, Bykov AV. Laparoscopic suture repair for perforated peptic ulcer disease: a meta-review and trial sequential analysis. Front Surg 2025; 12:1496192. [PMID: 40012543 PMCID: PMC11861353 DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2025.1496192] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/13/2024] [Accepted: 01/20/2025] [Indexed: 02/28/2025] Open
Abstract
Background The number of systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses in surgery is growing exponentially. Meta-epidemiology, as a form of evidence synthesis, allows for the pooling of data and assessment of the diversity present in multiple and overlapping SRs. Aim of the research This study aimed to summarize evidence from systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials and reanalyze outcome data on laparoscopic suture repair of perforated peptic ulcers using trial sequential analysis (TSA). Materials and methods The Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, eLibrary, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched before 1 June 2024. A meta-epidemiological approach and TSA were used. Results In total, 16 relevant Cochrane and non-Cochrane SRs that addressed laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcers (PPUs) were identified and critically appraised. Three overlapping reviews of RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Their pooled results showed a lower postoperative pain score after laparoscopic repair compared with open closure on postoperative day 1 as the only significant outcome. There were no significant differences in other clinical outcomes. The re-analyses of meta-analytic findings and adjustments of sample size by TSA confirmed that laparoscopic repair was associated with less postoperative pain [100% of the diversity-adjusted required information size (DARIS) was reached]. The calculated DARIS for operative time and hospital stay were 40.1% and 14.6%, respectively, and the TSA showed neither significant benefit nor harm of laparoscopic surgery in the attained information size in the meta-analysis. Further trials with regard to mortality, surgical site infection, and intra-abdominal abscess are not very promising because the DARIS did not exceed 5% after combining the results of eight RCTs. Conclusion Summarization of evidence from systematic reviews and reanalysis using TSA confirmed sufficient evidence for only one outcome, namely, that laparoscopic suture repair of PPUs is accompanied by lower pain scores at 24-72 h. Regarding the issues of postoperative complications and mortality, achieving DARIS through additional studies seems unpromising.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S. I. Panin
- Volgograd State Medical University, Volgograd, Russia
| | - T. V. Nechay
- Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University, Moscow, Russia
| | - I. V. Sazhin
- Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University, Moscow, Russia
| | | | - A. V. Sazhin
- Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University, Moscow, Russia
| | | | | | - A. V. Bykov
- Volgograd State Medical University, Volgograd, Russia
| |
Collapse
|
|
2
|
Panin SI, Sazhin VP. Improvement of Russian clinical guidelines and reduction of mortality in perforated ulcers. Khirurgiia (Mosk) 2024:5-13. [PMID: 38344955 DOI: 10.17116/hirurgia20240215] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/15/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To analyze the results of laparoscopic surgery in patients with perforated ulcers using evidence-based medicine approaches. MATERIAL AND METHODS We compared the efficacy and effectiveness of laparoscopic and open surgeries in patients with perforated ulcers. Meta-analysis of mortality after laparoscopic surgeries (randomized controlled trials) and trial sequential analysis were carried out. RESULTS We clarified the differences between the efficacy and effectiveness of laparoscopic surgeries regarding postoperative mortality. In the Russian Federation, mortality after laparoscopic surgery is 9-11 times lower compared to open procedures. According to evidence-based researches (efficacy of laparoscopic interventions in 10 meta-analyses), these differences are less obvious (1.4-3.0 times) and not significant. The diversity-adjusted required information size to draw reasonable conclusions about differences in mortality in trial sequential analysis was 68 181 participants. Meta-analyses of RCTs also demonstrate lower incidence of wound complications (1.8-5.0% after laparoscopic surgery and 6.3-13.3% after laparotomy), shorter hospital-stay (mean difference from -0.13 to -2.84) and less severe pain syndrome (mean difference in VAS score from -2.08 to -2.45) after laparoscopic technologies. CONCLUSION The obvious advantage of laparoscopic surgery in patients with perforated ulcers is fast-truck recovery following shorter hospital-stay, mild pain and rarer wound complications. Comparison of postoperative mortality regarding efficacy and effectiveness is difficult due to insufficient introduction of laparoscopic technologies in clinical practice and diversity-adjusted required information size.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S I Panin
- Volgograd State Medical University, Volgograd, Russia
| | - V P Sazhin
- Vishnevsky National Medical Research Center of Surgery, Moscow, Russia
- Ryazan State Medical University, Ryazan, Russia
| |
Collapse
|
|
3
|
Xie D, Lu PL, Xu W, You JY, Bi XG, Xian Y. Correlation of serum albumin level on postoperative day 2 with hospital length of stay in patients undergoing emergency surgery for perforated peptic ulcer. World J Gastrointest Surg 2023; 15:1434-1441. [PMID: 37555103 PMCID: PMC10405103 DOI: 10.4240/wjgs.v15.i7.1434] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/19/2023] [Revised: 05/18/2023] [Accepted: 06/02/2023] [Indexed: 07/21/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) is a common emergency surgical condition and a significant cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. While advances in surgical techniques have improved outcomes for patients with PPU, many factors still affect postoperative hospital stay and overall prognosis. One potential factor is the serum albumin (SA) level, a widely utilized marker of nutritional status that has been associated with length of stay and complications in various surgical procedures. AIM To clarify the correlation of SA level on postoperative day 2 with hospital length of stay (HLOS) in patients undergoing emergency surgery for perforated peptic ulcer (PPU). METHODS We retrospectively collected and analyzed clinical baseline data, including blood routine and SA levels, of patients who underwent emergency PPU surgery and postoperative treatment at the Lingnan Hospital, the Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University between December 2012 and September 2021. Patients were grouped according to HLOS with 7 d as the cut-off value, and relevant indicators were analyzed using SPSS 26.0. RESULTS Of the 37 patients undergoing emergency surgery for PPU referred to our department, 33 had gastric and 4 had duodenal ulcer perforation. The median HLOS was 10 d. There were 8 patients in the ≤ 7-d group (median HLOS: 7 d) and 29 patients in the > 7-d group (median HLOS: 10 d). The ≤ 7-d group had markedly higher SA on postoperative day 2 than the > 7-d group (37.7 g/L vs 32.6g/L; P < 0.05). The SA level on postoperative day 2 was a protective factor for patients with HLOS > 7 d (Odds ratio = 0.629, P = 0.015). The cut-off of SA on postoperative day 2 was 30.6g/L, with an area under the curve of 0.86 and a negative predictive value of 100% for the prediction of HLOS ≤ 7 d. CONCLUSION The SA level on postoperative day 2 was associated with the HLOS in patients undergoing emergency surgery for PPU. The pre- and post-operative albumin levels should be monitored, and infusion of human SA should be considered in a timely manner.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dan Xie
- Department of General Intensive Care Unit, Lingnan Hospital, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510530, Guangdong Province, China
| | - Ping-Lan Lu
- Department of Surgical Intensive Care Unit, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510000, Guangdong Province, China
| | - Wen Xu
- Department of General Intensive Care Unit, Lingnan Hospital, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510530, Guangdong Province, China
| | - Jing-Ya You
- Department of General Intensive Care Unit, Lingnan Hospital, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510530, Guangdong Province, China
| | - Xiao-Gang Bi
- Department of General Intensive Care Unit, Lingnan Hospital, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510530, Guangdong Province, China
| | - Ying Xian
- Department of General Intensive Care Unit, Lingnan Hospital, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510530, Guangdong Province, China
| |
Collapse
|
|
4
|
Muacevic A, Adler JR. Laparoscopic Repair Modality of Perforated Peptic Ulcer: Less Is More? Cureus 2022; 14:e30926. [PMID: 36337818 PMCID: PMC9621601 DOI: 10.7759/cureus.30926] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 10/31/2022] [Indexed: 11/05/2022] Open
Abstract
Perforation, per se, presents the most serious complication of peptic ulcer disease with a mortality rate that cannot be underestimated. Surgery is the only treatment option, which can be performed laparoscopically or via conventional laparotomy. The present study aimed to compare the short-term outcomes of laparoscopy and laparotomy techniques in the surgical treatment of peptic ulcer perforation. A retrospective study design was structured to compare the perioperative and short-term postoperative outcomes of 102 patients who had undergone laparoscopic and conventional repair of the perforated peptic ulcer over a six-year interval (January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2021). Of these, 44 (43.1%) had undergone laparoscopic repair while 58 (56.9%) had surgical repair via conventional laparotomy. The operative time and length of hospital stay were comparable in both subgroups (p=0.984 and p =0.585). Nevertheless, 30-day postoperative morbidity was significantly higher in the open surgery subgroup (75.9% vs. 59.1%, p= 0.032). The risk of relaparotomy was similar in both study subgroups; however, suture dehiscence as a reason for surgical revision was significantly more frequent in the laparoscopic subgroup (13.6% vs 3.4%). Of note, the mortality rate in the laparoscopic group of patients was 13.6%, and in the laparotomy group 41.4%. The laparoscopic approach to peptic ulcer perforation is the procedure of choice for low-risk patients. Conventional surgery seems to be associated with a significantly higher incidence of severe postoperative complications and mortality. However, the higher mortality in these patients is probably related to their worse initial clinical condition.
Collapse
|
|
5
|
Yang X, Cheng Y, Cheng N, Gong J, Bai L, Zhao L, Deng Y. Gases for establishing pneumoperitoneum during laparoscopic abdominal surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2022; 3:CD009569. [PMID: 35288930 PMCID: PMC8921952 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd009569.pub4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/05/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND This is the second update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2013 and last updated in 2017. Laparoscopic surgery is now widely performed to treat various abdominal diseases. Currently, carbon dioxide is the most frequently used gas for insufflation of the abdominal cavity (pneumoperitoneum). Although carbon dioxide meets most of the requirements for pneumoperitoneum, the absorption of carbon dioxide may be associated with adverse events. Therefore, other gases have been introduced as alternatives to carbon dioxide for establishing pneumoperitoneum. OBJECTIVES To assess the safety, benefits, and harms of different gases (e.g. carbon dioxide, helium, argon, nitrogen, nitrous oxide, and room air) used for establishing pneumoperitoneum in participants undergoing laparoscopic abdominal or gynaecological pelvic surgery. SEARCH METHODS We searched CENTRAL, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, four other databases, and three trials registers on 15 October 2021 together with reference checking, citation searching, and contact with study authors to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different gases for establishing pneumoperitoneum in participants (irrespective of age, sex, or race) undergoing laparoscopic abdominal or gynaecological pelvic surgery under general anaesthesia. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS We included 10 RCTs, randomising 583 participants, comparing different gases for establishing pneumoperitoneum: nitrous oxide (four trials), helium (five trials), or room air (one trial) was compared to carbon dioxide. All the RCTs were single-centre studies. Four RCTs were conducted in the USA; two in Australia; one in China; one in Finland; one in Iran; and one in the Netherlands. The mean age of the participants ranged from 27.6 years to 49.0 years. Four trials randomised participants to nitrous oxide pneumoperitoneum (132 participants) or carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum (128 participants). None of the trials was at low risk of bias. The evidence is very uncertain about the effects of nitrous oxide pneumoperitoneum compared to carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum on cardiopulmonary complications (Peto odds ratio (OR) 2.62, 95% CI 0.78 to 8.85; 3 studies, 204 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or surgical morbidity (Peto OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.14 to 7.31; 3 studies, 207 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There were no serious adverse events related to either nitrous oxide or carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum (4 studies, 260 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Four trials randomised participants to helium pneumoperitoneum (69 participants) or carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum (75 participants) and one trial involving 33 participants did not state the number of participants in each group. None of the trials was at low risk of bias. The evidence is very uncertain about the effects of helium pneumoperitoneum compared to carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum on cardiopulmonary complications (Peto OR 1.66, 95% CI 0.28 to 9.72; 3 studies, 128 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or surgical morbidity (5 studies, 177 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There were three serious adverse events (subcutaneous emphysema) related to helium pneumoperitoneum (3 studies, 128 participants; very low-certainty evidence). One trial randomised participants to room air pneumoperitoneum (70 participants) or carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum (76 participants). The trial was at high risk of bias. There were no cardiopulmonary complications, serious adverse events, or deaths observed related to either room air or carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence is very uncertain about the effects of nitrous oxide, helium, and room air pneumoperitoneum compared to carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum on any of the primary outcomes, including cardiopulmonary complications, surgical morbidity, and serious adverse events. The safety of nitrous oxide, helium, and room air pneumoperitoneum has yet to be established, especially in people with high anaesthetic risk.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xudong Yang
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China
| | - Yao Cheng
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
| | - Nansheng Cheng
- Department of Bile Duct Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
| | - Jianping Gong
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
| | - Lian Bai
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Yongchuan Hospital, Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
| | - Longshuan Zhao
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China
| | - Yilei Deng
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China
| |
Collapse
|
|
6
|
Sartelli M, Coccolini F, Kluger Y, Agastra E, Abu-Zidan FM, Abbas AES, Ansaloni L, Adesunkanmi AK, Atanasov B, Augustin G, Bala M, Baraket O, Baral S, Biffl WL, Boermeester MA, Ceresoli M, Cerutti E, Chiara O, Cicuttin E, Chiarugi M, Coimbra R, Colak E, Corsi D, Cortese F, Cui Y, Damaskos D, de’ Angelis N, Delibegovic S, Demetrashvili Z, De Simone B, de Jonge SW, Dhingra S, Di Bella S, Di Marzo F, Di Saverio S, Dogjani A, Duane TM, Enani MA, Fugazzola P, Galante JM, Gachabayov M, Ghnnam W, Gkiokas G, Gomes CA, Griffiths EA, Hardcastle TC, Hecker A, Herzog T, Kabir SMU, Karamarkovic A, Khokha V, Kim PK, Kim JI, Kirkpatrick AW, Kong V, Koshy RM, Kryvoruchko IA, Inaba K, Isik A, Iskandar K, Ivatury R, Labricciosa FM, Lee YY, Leppäniemi A, Litvin A, Luppi D, Machain GM, Maier RV, Marinis A, Marmorale C, Marwah S, Mesina C, Moore EE, Moore FA, Negoi I, Olaoye I, Ordoñez CA, Ouadii M, Peitzman AB, Perrone G, Pikoulis M, Pintar T, Pipitone G, Podda M, Raşa K, Ribeiro J, Rodrigues G, Rubio-Perez I, Sall I, Sato N, Sawyer RG, Segovia Lohse H, Sganga G, Shelat VG, Stephens I, Sugrue M, Tarasconi A, Tochie JN, Tolonen M, Tomadze G, Ulrych J, Vereczkei A, Viaggi B, Gurioli C, Casella C, Pagani L, Baiocchi GL, Catena F. WSES/GAIS/SIS-E/WSIS/AAST global clinical pathways for patients with intra-abdominal infections. World J Emerg Surg 2021; 16:49. [PMID: 34563232 PMCID: PMC8467193 DOI: 10.1186/s13017-021-00387-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 70] [Impact Index Per Article: 17.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/05/2021] [Accepted: 08/05/2021] [Indexed: 02/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Intra-abdominal infections (IAIs) are common surgical emergencies and have been reported as major contributors to non-trauma deaths in hospitals worldwide. The cornerstones of effective treatment of IAIs include early recognition, adequate source control, appropriate antimicrobial therapy, and prompt physiologic stabilization using a critical care environment, combined with an optimal surgical approach. Together, the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), the Global Alliance for Infections in Surgery (GAIS), the Surgical Infection Society-Europe (SIS-E), the World Surgical Infection Society (WSIS), and the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) have jointly completed an international multi-society document in order to facilitate clinical management of patients with IAIs worldwide building evidence-based clinical pathways for the most common IAIs. An extensive non-systematic review was conducted using the PubMed and MEDLINE databases, limited to the English language. The resulting information was shared by an international task force from 46 countries with different clinical backgrounds. The aim of the document is to promote global standards of care in IAIs providing guidance to clinicians by describing reasonable approaches to the management of IAIs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Massimo Sartelli
- Department of Surgery Department of Surgery, Macerata Hospital, Macerata, Italy
| | - Federico Coccolini
- grid.144189.10000 0004 1756 8209Department of General, Emergency and Trauma Surgery, Pisa University Hospital, Pisa, Italy
| | - Yoram Kluger
- grid.413731.30000 0000 9950 8111Department of General Surgery, Rambam Health Care Campus, Haifa, Israel
| | - Ervis Agastra
- General Surgery Department, Regional Hospital of Durres, Durres, Albania
| | - Fikri M. Abu-Zidan
- grid.43519.3a0000 0001 2193 6666Department of Surgery, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, UAE University, Al-Ain, United Arab Emirates
| | - Ashraf El Sayed Abbas
- grid.469958.fDepartment of General and Emergency Surgery Faculty of Medicine, Mansoura University Hospital, Mansoura, Egypt
| | - Luca Ansaloni
- grid.8982.b0000 0004 1762 5736Department of Surgery, Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy
| | - Abdulrashid Kayode Adesunkanmi
- grid.10824.3f0000 0001 2183 9444Department of Surgery, Faculty of Clinical Sciences, College of Health Sciences, Obafemi Awolowo University, Osun State, Ile-Ife, Nigeria
| | - Boyko Atanasov
- grid.35371.330000 0001 0726 0380Department of General Surgery, Medical University of Plovdiv, UMHAT Eurohospital, Plovdiv, Bulgaria
| | - Goran Augustin
- grid.412688.10000 0004 0397 9648Department of Surgery, University Hospital Centre Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia
| | - Miklosh Bala
- grid.17788.310000 0001 2221 2926Trauma and Acute Care Surgery Unit, Hadassah Hebrew University Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel
| | - Oussama Baraket
- grid.12574.350000000122959819Department of general surgery Bizerte hospital, Faculty of Medicine of Tunis, University Tunis El Manar, Tunis, Tunisia
| | - Suman Baral
- Department of Surgery, Lumbini Medical College and Teaching Hospital Ltd., Palpa, Tansen, Nepal
| | - Walter L. Biffl
- grid.415401.5Division of Trauma/Acute Care Surgery, Scripps Clinic Medical Group, La Jolla, CA USA
| | - Marja A. Boermeester
- grid.509540.d0000 0004 6880 3010Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, location AMC, Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology Metabolism Research Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marco Ceresoli
- grid.7563.70000 0001 2174 1754Emergency and General Surgery Department, University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy
| | - Elisabetta Cerutti
- grid.415845.9Anesthesia and Transplant Surgical Intensive Care Unit, Ospedali Riuniti, Ancona, Italy
| | - Osvaldo Chiara
- grid.416200.1Emergency Department, Niguarda Ca’Granda Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - Enrico Cicuttin
- grid.144189.10000 0004 1756 8209Department of General, Emergency and Trauma Surgery, Pisa University Hospital, Pisa, Italy
| | - Massimo Chiarugi
- grid.144189.10000 0004 1756 8209Department of General, Emergency and Trauma Surgery, Pisa University Hospital, Pisa, Italy
| | - Raul Coimbra
- grid.43582.380000 0000 9852 649XRiverside University Health System, CECORC Research Center, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, USA
| | - Elif Colak
- Department of General Surgery, Health Sciences University, Samsun Training and Research Hospital, Samsun, Turkey
| | - Daniela Corsi
- General Direction, Area Vasta 3, ASUR Marche, Macerata, Italy
| | | | - Yunfeng Cui
- grid.265021.20000 0000 9792 1228Department of Surgery, Tianjin Nankai Hospital, Nankai Clinical School of Medicine, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, China
| | - Dimitris Damaskos
- grid.418716.d0000 0001 0709 1919Department of Surgery, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Nicola de’ Angelis
- Minimally Invasive and Robotic Digestive Surgery Unit, Regional General Hospital F. Miulli, Bari, Italy
- grid.410511.00000 0001 2149 7878Université Paris Est, UPEC, Creteil, France
| | - Samir Delibegovic
- grid.412410.20000 0001 0682 9061Department of Surgery, University Clinical Center of Tuzla, Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina
| | - Zaza Demetrashvili
- Department General Surgery, Kipshidze Central University Hospital, Tbilisi, Georgia
| | - Belinda De Simone
- grid.418056.e0000 0004 1765 2558Department of general, Digestive and Metabolic Minimally Invasive Surgery, Centre Hospitalier Intercommunal De Poissy/St Germain en Laye, Poissy, France
| | - Stijn W. de Jonge
- grid.415401.5Division of Trauma/Acute Care Surgery, Scripps Clinic Medical Group, La Jolla, CA USA
| | - Sameer Dhingra
- grid.464629.b0000 0004 1775 2698Department of Pharmacy Practice, National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research (NIPER), Hajipur, Bihar India
| | - Stefano Di Bella
- grid.5133.40000 0001 1941 4308Clinical Department of Medical, Surgical and Health sciences, Trieste University, Trieste, Italy
| | | | - Salomone Di Saverio
- grid.412972.bDepartment of General Surgery, University of Insubria, University Hospital of Varese, ASST Sette Laghi, Regione Lombardia, Varese, Italy
| | - Agron Dogjani
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital of Trauma, Tirana, Albania
| | - Therese M. Duane
- grid.429044.f0000 0004 0402 1407Department of Surgery, Texas Health Resources, Fort Worth, TX USA
| | - Mushira Abdulaziz Enani
- grid.415277.20000 0004 0593 1832Department of Medicine, Infectious Disease Division, King Fahad Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Paola Fugazzola
- grid.8982.b0000 0004 1762 5736Department of Surgery, Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy
| | - Joseph M. Galante
- grid.27860.3b0000 0004 1936 9684Division of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA USA
| | - Mahir Gachabayov
- Department of Abdominal Surgery, Vladimir City Clinical Hospital of Emergency Medicine, Vladimir, Russia
| | - Wagih Ghnnam
- grid.10251.370000000103426662Department of General Surgery, Mansoura Faculty of Medicine, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt
| | - George Gkiokas
- grid.5216.00000 0001 2155 0800Second Department of Surgery, Aretaieion University Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
| | - Carlos Augusto Gomes
- Department of Surgery, Hospital Universitário Terezinha de Jesus, Faculdade de Ciências Médicas e da Saúde de Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, Brazil
| | - Ewen A. Griffiths
- grid.412563.70000 0004 0376 6589Department of Upper GI Surgery, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK
| | - Timothy C. Hardcastle
- Trauma Service, Inkosi Albert Luthuli Central Hospital and Department of Surgery, Nelson R Mandela School of Clinical Medicine, Durban, South Africa
| | - Andreas Hecker
- grid.411067.50000 0000 8584 9230Department of General and Thoracic Surgery, University Hospital Giessen, Giessen, Germany
| | - Torsten Herzog
- grid.5570.70000 0004 0490 981XDepartment of Surgery, St. Josef Hospital, Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany
| | - Syed Mohammad Umar Kabir
- grid.415900.90000 0004 0617 6488Donegal Clinical Research Academy Emergency Surgery Outcome Project, Letterkenny University Hospital, Donegal, Ireland
| | - Aleksandar Karamarkovic
- grid.7149.b0000 0001 2166 9385Surgical Clinic “Nikola Spasic”, Faculty of Medicine, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia
| | - Vladimir Khokha
- Department of Emergency Surgery, City Hospital, Mozyr, Belarus
| | - Peter K. Kim
- grid.251993.50000000121791997Department of Surgery, Jacobi Medical Center, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY USA
| | - Jae Il Kim
- grid.411612.10000 0004 0470 5112Department of Surgery, Ilsan Paik Hospital, Inje University College of Medicine, Goyang, Republic of Korea
| | - Andrew W. Kirkpatrick
- grid.414959.40000 0004 0469 2139General, Acute Care, Abdominal Wall Reconstruction, and Trauma Surgery, Foothills Medical Centre, Calgary, AB Canada
| | - Victor Kong
- grid.414386.c0000 0004 0576 7753Department of Surgery, Edendale Hospital, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa
| | - Renol M. Koshy
- grid.412570.50000 0004 0400 5079Department of General Surgery, University Hospital of Coventry & Warwickshire, Coventry, UK
| | - Igor A. Kryvoruchko
- grid.412081.eDepartment of Surgery #2, National Medical University, Kharkiv, Ukraine
| | - Kenji Inaba
- grid.42505.360000 0001 2156 6853Division of Trauma and Surgical Critical Care, Department of Surgery, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA USA
| | - Arda Isik
- grid.411776.20000 0004 0454 921XDepartment of General Surgery, School of Medicine, Istanbul Medeniyet University, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Katia Iskandar
- grid.444421.30000 0004 0417 6142Department of Pharmacy, Lebanese International University, Beirut, Lebanon
| | - Rao Ivatury
- grid.224260.00000 0004 0458 8737Department of Surgery, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, VA USA
| | | | - Yeong Yeh Lee
- grid.11875.3a0000 0001 2294 3534School of Medical Sciences, Universitiy Sains Malaysia, Kota Bharu, Kelantan Malaysia
| | - Ari Leppäniemi
- grid.15485.3d0000 0000 9950 5666Abdominal Center, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Andrey Litvin
- grid.410686.d0000 0001 1018 9204Department of Surgical Disciplines, Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University, Regional Clinical Hospital, Kaliningrad, Russia
| | - Davide Luppi
- Department of General and Emergency Surgery, ASMN, Reggio Emilia, Italy
| | - Gustavo M. Machain
- grid.412213.70000 0001 2289 5077Department of Surgery, Universidad Nacional de Asuncion, Asuncion, Paraguay
| | - Ronald V. Maier
- grid.34477.330000000122986657Department of Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA USA
| | - Athanasios Marinis
- grid.417374.2First Department of Surgery, Tzaneion General Hospital, Piraeus, Greece
| | - Cristina Marmorale
- grid.7010.60000 0001 1017 3210Department of Surgery, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Ancona, Italy
| | - Sanjay Marwah
- grid.412572.70000 0004 1771 1642Department of Surgery, Post-Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Rohtak, India
| | - Cristian Mesina
- Second Surgical Clinic, Emergency Hospital of Craiova, Craiova, Romania
| | - Ernest E. Moore
- grid.239638.50000 0001 0369 638XErnest E Moore Shock Trauma Center at Denver Health, Denver, USA
| | - Frederick A. Moore
- grid.15276.370000 0004 1936 8091Department of Surgery, Division of Acute Care Surgery, and Center for Sepsis and Critical Illness Research, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL USA
| | - Ionut Negoi
- Department of Surgery, Emergency Hospital of Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania
| | - Iyiade Olaoye
- grid.412975.c0000 0000 8878 5287Department of Surgery, University of Ilorin Teaching Hospital, Ilorin, Nigeria
| | - Carlos A. Ordoñez
- grid.477264.4Division of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, Fundacion Valle del Lili, Cali, Colombia
- grid.8271.c0000 0001 2295 7397Department of Surgery, Universidad del Valle, Cali, Colombia
| | - Mouaqit Ouadii
- grid.412817.9Department of Surgery, Hassan II University Hospital, Medical School of Fez, Sidi Mohamed Benabdellah University, Fez, Morocco
| | - Andrew B. Peitzman
- grid.21925.3d0000 0004 1936 9000Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, UPMC-Presbyterian, Pittsburgh, USA
| | - Gennaro Perrone
- Department of Emergency Surgery, Parma Maggiore Hospital, Parma, Italy
| | - Manos Pikoulis
- grid.5216.00000 0001 2155 08003rd Department of Surgery, Attiko Hospital, MSc “Global Health-Disaster Medicine”, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens (NKUA), Athens, Greece
| | - Tadeja Pintar
- grid.29524.380000 0004 0571 7705Department of Surgery, UMC Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
| | - Giuseppe Pipitone
- National Institute for Infectious Diseases - INMI - Lazzaro Spallanzani IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Mauro Podda
- grid.7763.50000 0004 1755 3242Department of General and Emergency Surgery, Cagliari University Hospital, Cagliari, Italy
| | - Kemal Raşa
- Department of Surgery, Anadolu Medical Center, Kocaeli, Turkey
| | - Julival Ribeiro
- grid.414433.5Infection Control, Hospital de Base, Brasília, DF Brazil
| | - Gabriel Rodrigues
- grid.411639.80000 0001 0571 5193Department of General Surgery, Kasturba Medical College & Hospital, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India
| | - Ines Rubio-Perez
- grid.81821.320000 0000 8970 9163General Surgery Department, Colorectal Surgery Unit, La Paz University Hospital, Madrid, Spain
| | - Ibrahima Sall
- General Surgery Department, Military Teaching Hospital, Dakar, Senegal
| | - Norio Sato
- grid.255464.40000 0001 1011 3808Department of Aeromedical Services for Emergency and Trauma Care, Ehime University Graduate School of Medicine, Ehime, Japan
| | - Robert G. Sawyer
- grid.268187.20000 0001 0672 1122Department of Surgery, Western Michigan University School of Medicine, Kalamazoo, MI USA
| | - Helmut Segovia Lohse
- grid.412213.70000 0001 2289 5077Department of Surgery, Universidad Nacional de Asuncion, Asuncion, Paraguay
| | - Gabriele Sganga
- grid.414603.4Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, Emergency Surgery & Trauma, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Vishal G. Shelat
- grid.240988.fDepartment of General Surgery, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Ian Stephens
- grid.415900.90000 0004 0617 6488Donegal Clinical Research Academy Emergency Surgery Outcome Project, Letterkenny University Hospital, Donegal, Ireland
| | - Michael Sugrue
- grid.415900.90000 0004 0617 6488Donegal Clinical Research Academy Emergency Surgery Outcome Project, Letterkenny University Hospital, Donegal, Ireland
| | - Antonio Tarasconi
- Department of Emergency Surgery, Parma Maggiore Hospital, Parma, Italy
| | - Joel Noutakdie Tochie
- grid.412661.60000 0001 2173 8504Department of Emergency medicine, Anesthesiology and critical care, Faculty of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University of Yaoundé I, Yaoundé, Cameroon
| | - Matti Tolonen
- grid.15485.3d0000 0000 9950 5666Abdominal Center, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Gia Tomadze
- grid.412274.60000 0004 0428 8304Surgery Department, Tbilisi State Medical University, Tbilisi, Georgia
| | - Jan Ulrych
- grid.411798.20000 0000 9100 9940First Department of Surgery, Department of Abdominal, Thoracic Surgery and Traumatology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and General University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Andras Vereczkei
- grid.9679.10000 0001 0663 9479Department of Surgery, Clinical Center University of Pecs, Pecs, Hungary
| | - Bruno Viaggi
- grid.24704.350000 0004 1759 9494Department of Anesthesiology, Neuro Intensive Care Unit, Florence Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy
| | - Chiara Gurioli
- Department of Surgery, Camerino Hospital, Macerata, Italy
| | - Claudio Casella
- grid.7637.50000000417571846Department of Molecular and Translational Medicine, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy
| | - Leonardo Pagani
- Department of Infectious Diseases, Bolzano Hospital, Bolzano, Italy
| | - Gian Luca Baiocchi
- Department of Surgery, AAST Cremona, Cremona, Italy
- grid.7637.50000000417571846Department of Clinical and Experimental Sciences, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy
| | - Fausto Catena
- Department of Emergency Surgery, Parma Maggiore Hospital, Parma, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
|
7
|
Laparoscopy in Emergency: Why Not? Advantages of Laparoscopy in Major Emergency: A Review. Life (Basel) 2021; 11:life11090917. [PMID: 34575066 PMCID: PMC8470929 DOI: 10.3390/life11090917] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/26/2021] [Revised: 08/24/2021] [Accepted: 08/30/2021] [Indexed: 01/09/2023] Open
Abstract
A laparoscopic approach is suggested with the highest grade of recommendation for acute cholecystitis, perforated gastroduodenal ulcers, acute appendicitis, gynaecological disorders, and non-specific abdominal pain (NSAP). To date, the main qualities of laparoscopy for these acute surgical scenarios are clearly stated: quicker surgery, faster recovery and shorter hospital stay. For the remaining surgical emergencies, as well as for abdominal trauma, the role of laparoscopy is still a matter of debate. Patients might benefit from a laparoscopic approach only if performed by experienced teams and surgeons which guarantee a high standard of care. More precisely, laparoscopy can limit damage to the tissue and could be effective for the reduction of the overall amount of cell debris, which is a result of the intensity with which the immune system reacts to the injury and the following symptomatology. In fact, these fragments act as damage-associated molecular patterns (DAMPs). DAMPs, as well as pathogen associated molecular patterns (PAMPs), are recognised by both surface and intracellular receptors of the immune cells and activate the cascade which, in critically ill surgical patients, is responsible for a deranged response. This may result in the development of progressive and multiple organ dysfunctions, manifesting with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), coagulopathy, liver dysfunction and renal failure. In conclusion, none of the emergency surgical scenarios preclude laparoscopy, provided that the surgical tactic could ensure sufficient cleaning of the abdomen in addition to resolving the initial tissue damage caused by the “trauma”.
Collapse
|
|
8
|
Jayaraman SS, Allen R, Feather C, Turcotte J, Klune JR. Outcomes of Laparoscopic vs Open Repair of Perforated Peptic Ulcers: An ACS-NSQIP Study. J Surg Res 2021; 265:13-20. [PMID: 33866049 DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2021.02.030] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/02/2020] [Revised: 01/12/2021] [Accepted: 02/27/2021] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) is a surgical emergency needing swift operative resolution. While laparoscopic and open approaches are viable options, it remains unclear whether laparoscopic repair has significantly improved outcomes. We use a national surgical database to compare perioperative and 30-d postoperative (30POP) outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS The 2016-2018 ACS-NSQIP database was used to create the patient cohort, using ICD-10 and CPT codes. An unmatched analysis identified factors that likely contributed to the laparoscopic versus open treatment allocation. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to identify outcomes that were not explained by underlying differences in the patient cohorts. RESULTS A total of 3475 patients were included: 3135 in open group (OG), 340 (~10%) in laparoscopic group (LG). After PSM to control for comorbidities and illness severity that differed between groups on univariate analysis, 288 patients remained in each group. Analysis of the matched cohorts revealed no statistically significant difference in mortality (5.9% OG versus 3.8% LG, P = 0.245). The LG had significantly longer operative times (92 versus 79 min, P = 0.003), shorter hospital stays (8.2 versus 9.4 d, P = 0.044) and higher probability of being discharged home (81% versus 73%, P = 0.017). 30POP outcomes were largely equivalent, except that OG had higher risk for bleeding (14.6% versus 8%, P = 0.012) and pneumonia (8.7% versus 4.5%, P = 0.044). CONCLUSIONS While laparoscopic repairs take longer, they lead to shorter hospital stays and higher likelihood of discharge home. Further study to identify patients that are candidates for this technique is warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | - John R Klune
- Anne Arundel Medical Center, Annapolis, Maryland.
| |
Collapse
|
|
9
|
Abstract
Gastroduodenal perforation may be spontaneous or traumatic and the majority of spontaneous perforation is due to peptic ulcer disease. Improved medical management of peptic ulceration has reduced the incidence of perforation, but still remains a common cause of peritonitis. The classic sub-diaphragmatic air on chest x-ray may be absent and computed tomography scan is a more sensitive investigation in the stable patient. The management of perforated peptic ulcer disease is still a subject of debate. The majority of perforated peptic ulcers are caused by Helicobacter pylori, so definitive surgery is not usually required. Perforated peptic ulcer is an indication for operation in nearly all cases except when the patient is asymptomatic or unfit for surgery. However, non-operative management has a significant incidence of intra-abdominal abscesses and sepsis. Primary closure is achievable in traumatic perforation, but the management follows the Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS) principles.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elroy Patrick Weledji
- Department of Surgery, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Buea, Buea, Cameroon
| |
Collapse
|
|
10
|
Manco G, Caramaschi S, Rolando G, Malagoli M, Zanelli G, Reggiani Bonetti L, Rossi A. Primary laparoscopic approach to repair perforated peptic ulcer. A retrospective cohort study. MINERVA CHIR 2020; 75:436-441. [PMID: 32456394 DOI: 10.23736/s0026-4733.20.08287-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Perforated peptic ulcer is a serious complication of peptic ulcer disease and carries high risk for morbidity and mortality. Although the incidence of peptic ulcer disease has decreased in recent decades, the percentage of patients with perforated peptic ulcer requiring emergency surgery remains constant. The use of laparoscopic management as a first choice for the treatment of the perforation is growing but is not routine in many centers. METHODS Clinical and surgical data on 42 patients underwent surgical treatment for perforated peptic ulcer from January 2012 to December 2016 were collected. Laparoscopic repair of the perforation with a three-port technique was made in all cases. The Boey scoring system was used to predict the prognosis. RESULTS All patients underwent suture-closure of the ulcer, and omental patch through laparoscopy without conversion to open surgery. Duodenal leakages occurred in 3 patients (7.1%), then treated with a conservative approach and resolved on the 10th postoperative day. Two patients (4.7%) had deep space infections in the first week after surgery, therefore subdiaphragmatic and pelvic abscess were drained by ultrasound guidance. Four patients (9.5%) died up to 30-day post-surgery due to progression of multisystem organ failure in absence of leakages or infections. All these patients were American Society of Anesthesiologists Classification >III and Boey Score 3. CONCLUSIONS Our data show that a primary laparoscopic approach in patients with peptic ulcer perforation is associated with postoperative advantages and acceptable rates of morbidity and mortality, essentially related to high Boey Score. Therefore, we suggest that the surgical repair of PPU could be always started laparoscopically.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gianrocco Manco
- Department of Surgery, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, University Hospital of Modena, Modena, Italy
| | - Stefania Caramaschi
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences for Children and Adults, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, University Hospital of Modena, Modena, Italy -
| | - Giovanni Rolando
- Department of Surgery, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, University Hospital of Modena, Modena, Italy
| | - Marzio Malagoli
- Department of Surgery, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, University Hospital of Modena, Modena, Italy
| | - Giuliana Zanelli
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences for Children and Adults, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, University Hospital of Modena, Modena, Italy
| | - Luca Reggiani Bonetti
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences for Children and Adults, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, University Hospital of Modena, Modena, Italy
| | - Aldo Rossi
- Department of Surgery, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, University Hospital of Modena, Modena, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
|
11
|
Sazhin AV, Ivakhov GB, Stradymov EA, Petukhov VA, Titkova SM. [Comparison of laparoscopic and open suturing of perforated peptic ulcer complicated by advanced peritonitis]. Khirurgiia (Mosk) 2020:13-21. [PMID: 32271732 DOI: 10.17116/hirurgia202003113] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Abstract
AIM To compare the results of open and laparoscopic interventions for PGDU complicated by advanced peritonitis. MATERIAL AND METHODS A retrospective analysis enrolled 172 patients with PGDU who underwent surgery for the period 2014-2016. The research was performed at the bases of the Department of Faculty-Based Surgery No. 1 of the Medical Faculty of the Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University. Further analysis enrolled 138 patients in accordance with inclusion and exclusion criteria (laparoscopic intervention - 116 patients, open surgery - 22). Propensity score matching (pseudorandomization) was applied after comparative analysis of patients' characteristics and treatment outcomes in order to ensure maximum comparability of both groups. RESULTS Length of hospital-stay (7.1 vs. 9.8 days), incidence of extra-abdominal complications (6.3%. vs. 41.2%) and adverse events Clavien-Dindo grade II (6.3% vs. 35.3%) were significantly lower after minimally invasive surgery (p<0.05). CONCLUSION Analysis of comparable groups of patients with PGDU complicated by peritonitis revealed that laparoscopic surgery is accompanied by significantly lower incidence of extra-abdominal postoperative complications and shorter hospital-stay compared with open surgery. Mortality and incidence of intra-abdominal postoperative complications were similar in both groups.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A V Sazhin
- Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University of the Ministry of Health of Russia, Moscow, Russia
| | - G B Ivakhov
- Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University of the Ministry of Health of Russia, Moscow, Russia
| | - E A Stradymov
- Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University of the Ministry of Health of Russia, Moscow, Russia
| | - V A Petukhov
- Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University of the Ministry of Health of Russia, Moscow, Russia
| | - S M Titkova
- Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University of the Ministry of Health of Russia, Moscow, Russia
| |
Collapse
|
|
12
|
Zogovic S, Bojesen AB, Andos S, Mortensen FV. Laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer is not prognostic factor for 30-day mortality (a nationwide prospective cohort study). Int J Surg 2019; 72:47-54. [PMID: 31639454 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2019.10.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/08/2019] [Revised: 10/03/2019] [Accepted: 10/17/2019] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Laparoscopic surgery has become increasingly popular in treating perforated peptic ulcer (PPU). However, currently it is not recognized as a prognostic factor for mortality within this group of patients. The aim of this study was to investigate whether laparoscopic surgery was an independent mortality risk factor in patients treated surgically for perforated peptic ulcer. MATERIALS AND METHODS This was a Danish nationwide cohort study based on prospectively collected data of 1008 patients treated surgically for PPU between September 2011 and December 2015. A propensity score matching analysis, considering most of the known prognostic factors for mortality and baseline characteristics, was used to adjust mortality estimates in patients treated with open and laparoscopic surgery. The primary outcome was postoperative 30-day mortality. RESULTS The study population comprised 1008 patients; 507 were treated laparoscopically and 501 by open surgery. There was significantly higher mean age, and higher ASA scores, as well as other mortality risk factors in the open surgery group. The unadjusted 30-day mortality was significantly lower in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery compared to open surgery (HR = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.36-0.65). After matching and weighting controls, the adjusted difference in mortality was reduced and was not significant (HR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.59-1.15). The 30-day mortality was 13.1% for laparoscopy and 14.7% for the matched controls in the open surgery group. CONCLUSIONS Compared to open surgery, laparoscopic surgery in patients with PPU does not reduce short term mortality. More well powered randomized clinical trials are needed to investigate the role of laparoscopic surgery in treatment of patients with PPU.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sergej Zogovic
- Surgical Department, Hospital of Southern Jutland, Aabenraa, Denmark.
| | | | - Shadi Andos
- Surgical Department, Hospital of Southern Jutland, Aabenraa, Denmark.
| | | |
Collapse
|
|
13
|
Minimally invasive surgical management of spontaneous esophageal perforation (Boerhaave's syndrome). Surg Endosc 2019; 33:3494-3502. [PMID: 31144123 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-019-06863-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/09/2018] [Accepted: 05/18/2019] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Spontaneous esophageal perforation (Boerhaave's syndrome) is a highly morbid condition traditionally associated with poor outcomes. The Pittsburgh perforation severity score (PSS) accurately predicts risk of morbidity, length of stay (LOS) and mortality. Operative management is indicated among patients with medium (3-5) or high (> 5) PSS; however, the role of minimally invasive surgery remains uncertain. METHODS Consecutive patients presenting with Boerhaave's syndrome with intermediate or high PSS managed via a thoracoscopic and laparoscopic approach from 2012 to 2018 were reviewed. Demographics, clinical presentation, management, and outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS Ten patients (80% male) with a mean age of 61.3 years (range 37-81) were included. Two patients had intermediate and eight had high PSS (7.9 ± 2.8, range 4-12). The mean time from onset of symptoms to diagnosis was 27 ± 12 h and APACHE II score was 13.6 ± 4.9. Thoracoscopic debridement and primary repair was performed in eight cases, with two perforations repaired primarily over a T-tube. Laparoscopic feeding jejunostomy was performed in all patients. Critical care LOS was 8.7 ± 6.8 days (range 3-26), while inpatient LOS was 23.1 ± 12.5 days (range 14-46). Mean comprehensive complications index was 42.1 ± 26.2, with grade IIIa and IV morbidity in 60% and 10%, respectively. One patient developed dehiscence at the primary repair, which was managed non-operatively. In-hospital and 90-day mortality was 10%. CONCLUSION Minimally invasive surgical management of spontaneous esophageal perforation with medium to high perforation severity scores is feasible and safe, with outcomes which compare favorably to the published literature.
Collapse
|
|
14
|
Laparoscopic Single Figure of Eight Suturing Omentopexy for the Treatment of a Perforated Duodenal Ulcer. THE JOURNAL OF MINIMALLY INVASIVE SURGERY 2019; 22:23-28. [PMID: 35601707 PMCID: PMC8979847 DOI: 10.7602/jmis.2019.22.1.23] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/04/2018] [Revised: 07/26/2018] [Accepted: 08/01/2018] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
Purpose Safe and effective surgical treatment of peptic ulcer perforations is fundamental to achieve favorable outcomes. We present laparoscopic single figure of eight suturing omentopexy for perforated duodenal ulcer and review associated clinical outcomes. This is a new formulaic surgical technique for laparoscopic omentopexy. Methods Laparoscopic single figure of eight suturing omentopexies for perforated duodenal ulcer were completed in 15 consecutive patients between April 2008 and November 2017 at Kangbuk Samsung Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. Using prospectively collected data, we performed an observational study on an intention-to-treat basis. Results The mean age of the 15 patients who underwent laparoscopic repair was 41.7±13.9 years. The perforation site was the anterior duodenal bulb in all patients. The median perforation size was 5 mm (range: 3~8 mm). The mean operation time was 66.7±19.6 minutes. There was no evidence of leakage from the omentopexy site clinically or in the postoperative upper gastrointestinal series. One patient (6.7%) experienced the postoperative complication of pneumothorax. There were no cases of postoperative mortality or reoperation within 30 days after surgery. The median time to tolerance of regular diet was 6 (range: 4~9) days. The median postoperative hospital stay was 7 days (range: 5~11 days). Conclusion Laparoscopic single figure of eight suturing omentopexy can be a viable option in the surgical management of perforated duodenal ulcer in selected patients without surgical risk factors. Laparoscopic single figure of eight suturing omentopexy is safe and easy to perform, and may therefore reduce operation time.
Collapse
|
|
15
|
Vakayil V, Bauman B, Joppru K, Mallick R, Tignanelli C, Connett J, Ikramuddin S, Harmon JV. Surgical repair of perforated peptic ulcers: laparoscopic versus open approach. Surg Endosc 2019; 33:281-292. [PMID: 30043169 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-018-6366-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/14/2018] [Accepted: 07/20/2018] [Indexed: 01/21/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Perforated peptic ulcers are a surgical emergency that can be repaired using either laparoscopic surgery (LS) or open surgery (OS). No consensus has been reached on the comparative outcomes and safety of each approach. METHODS Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database, we conducted a 12-year retrospective review (2005-2016) and identified 6260 adult patients who underwent either LS (n = 616) or OS (n = 5644) to repair perforated peptic ulcers. To mitigate selection bias and adjust for the inherent heterogeneity between groups, we used propensity-score matching with a case (LS):control (OS) ratio of 1:3. We then compared intraoperative outcomes such as operative time, and 30-day postoperative outcomes including infectious and non-infectious complications, and mortality. RESULTS Propensity-score matching created a total of 2462 matched pairs (616 in the LS group, 1846 in the OS group). Univariate analysis demonstrated successful matching of patient characteristics and baseline clinical variables. We found that OS was associated with a shorter operative time (67.0 ± 28.6 min, OS versus 86.9 ± 57.5 min, LS; P < 0.001) but a longer hospital stay (8.6 ± 6.2 days, OS versus 7.8 ± 5.9 days, LS; P = 0.001). LS was associated with a lower rate of superficial surgical site infections (1.5%, LS versus 4.2%, OS; P = 0.032), wound dehiscence (0.3%, LS versus 1.6%, OS; P = 0.030), and mortality (3.2%, LS versus 5.4%, OS; P = 0.009). CONCLUSION Fewer than 10% of patients with perforated peptic ulcers underwent LS, which was associated with reduced length of stay, lower rate of superficial surgical site infections, wound dehiscence, and mortality. Given our results, a greater emphasis should be provided to a minimally invasive approach for the surgical repair of perforated peptic ulcers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Victor Vakayil
- Department of Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA. .,School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA. .,Critical Care and Acute Care Surgery, University of Minnesota, 420 Delaware St SE, MMC 195, Minneapolis, MN, 55455, USA.
| | - Brent Bauman
- Department of Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA
| | - Keaton Joppru
- University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, USA
| | - Reema Mallick
- Department of Surgery, University of Alabama-Birmingham, Birmingham, USA
| | | | - John Connett
- Division of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA
| | | | - James V Harmon
- Department of Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA
| |
Collapse
|
|
16
|
Jamal MH, Karam A, Alsharqawi N, Buhamra A, AlBader I, Al-Abbad J, Dashti M, Abulhasan YB, Almahmeed H, AlSabah S. Laparoscopy in Acute Care Surgery: Repair of Perforated Duodenal Ulcer. Med Princ Pract 2019; 28:442-448. [PMID: 30995637 PMCID: PMC6771047 DOI: 10.1159/000500107] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/25/2018] [Accepted: 04/03/2019] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The use of laparoscopic management as a first choice for the treatment of duodenal perforation is gaining ground but is not routine in many centers. In this report, we aim to report our experience with laparoscopy as the first approach for the repair of duodenal perforation. MATERIALS AND METHODS This is a retrospective review of patients during our initial experience with the use of laparoscopy for the treatment of duodenal perforation between 2009 and 2013. RESULTS A total of 100 patients underwent management of duodenal perforation. Laparoscopy was attempted initially in 76 patients (76%) and completed in 64 patients (64%). The length of hospital stay was shorter in the laparoscopic group (mean 2.6) than in the open group (mean 3.1) (p = 0.008). Complications developed in 14 patients (20%). There was a tendency towards fewer admissions to intensive care, less acute kidney injuries, and less acute respiratory distress syndrome in the laparoscopic group. In patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery, the chances of uneventful recovery were 4.3 times higher than in those patients who underwent open surgery (95% CI 1.3-13.5, p = 0.014). CONCLUSIONS Laparoscopy in the treatment of perforated duodenal ulcer is safe and can be utilized as a routine approach for the treatment of this pathology.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Abdulazeez Karam
- Department of Surgery, McGill University Health Center, McGill University, Montreal, Québec, Canada
| | - Nourah Alsharqawi
- Department of Surgery, McGill University Health Center, McGill University, Montreal, Québec, Canada
| | - Abdulla Buhamra
- Department of Surgery, Kuwait University, Kuwait City, Kuwait
| | - Ibtesam AlBader
- Department of Surgery, Kuwait University, Kuwait City, Kuwait
| | - Jasem Al-Abbad
- Department of Surgery, Kuwait University, Kuwait City, Kuwait
| | - Mohammad Dashti
- Department of Surgery, Kuwait University, Kuwait City, Kuwait
| | | | - Husain Almahmeed
- Department of Surgery, McGill University Health Center, McGill University, Montreal, Québec, Canada
| | - Salman AlSabah
- Department of Surgery, Kuwait University, Kuwait City, Kuwait
| |
Collapse
|
|
17
|
Abstract
Despite the significant development and advancement in antibiotic therapy, life-threatening complication of infective diseases cause hundreds of thousands of deaths world. This paper updates some of the issues regarding the etiology and treatment of abdominal sepsis and summaries the latest guidelines as recommended by the Intra-abdominal Infection (IAI) Consensus (2017). Prognostic scores are currently used to assess the course of peritonitis. Irrespective of the initial cause, there are several measures universally accepted as contributing to an improved survival rate, with the early recognition of IAI being the critical matter in this respect. Immediate correction of fluid balance should be undertaken with the use of vasoactive agents being prescribed, if necessary, to augment and assist fluid resuscitation. The WISS study showed that mortality was significantly affected by sepsis irrespective of any medical and surgical measures. A significant issue is the prevalence of extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Enterobacteriaceae in the clinical setting, and the reported prevalence of ESBLs intra-abdominal infections has steadily increased in Asia. Europe, Latin America, Middle East, North America, and South Pacific. Abdominal cavity pathology is second only to sepsis occurring in a pulmonary site. Following IAI (2017) guidelines, antibiotic therapy should be initiated as soon as possible after a diagnosis has been verified.
Collapse
|
|
18
|
Sakamoto Y, Iwatsuki M, Sakata K, Toyama E, Takata N, Yoshinaka I, Harada K, Baba H. Laparoscopic omental filling with intraoperative endoscopy for a perforated duodenal ulcer. Surg Today 2018; 48:1031-1034. [PMID: 29869066 DOI: 10.1007/s00595-018-1681-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/16/2018] [Accepted: 05/27/2018] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
As a surgical treatment for a perforated duodenal ulcer, duodenal omental filling is effective. However, filling the perforation site with a sufficient amount of omentum is difficult in some situations. We herein report that we successfully filled a perforated duodenal ulcer with a sufficient amount of omentum using intraoperative endoscopy. The operation was performed with three ports, the operation time was 110 min, and the estimated blood loss was small. The postoperative course was good. No stenosis of deformity of the duodenum was observed on follow-up endoscopy. Laparoscopic surgery has a shorter operation time, shorter postoperative hospital stay, and less postoperative pain than open surgery. The combined use of intraoperative endoscopy with laparoscopic surgery is effective for a large perforation, and it can be expected to reduce the rate of conversion to open surgery. This combined procedure is considered useful as a laparoscopic omental filling operation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yuki Sakamoto
- Department of Surgery, Amakusa Medical Center, Kumamoto, Japan.,Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kumamoto University, 1-1-1 Honjo, Chuo-Ku, Kumamoto, 860-8556, Japan
| | - Masaaki Iwatsuki
- Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kumamoto University, 1-1-1 Honjo, Chuo-Ku, Kumamoto, 860-8556, Japan
| | - Kazuya Sakata
- Department of Surgery, Amakusa Medical Center, Kumamoto, Japan
| | - Eiichiro Toyama
- Department of Surgery, Amakusa Medical Center, Kumamoto, Japan
| | - Noboru Takata
- Department of Surgery, Amakusa Medical Center, Kumamoto, Japan
| | | | - Kazunori Harada
- Department of Surgery, Amakusa Medical Center, Kumamoto, Japan
| | - Hideo Baba
- Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kumamoto University, 1-1-1 Honjo, Chuo-Ku, Kumamoto, 860-8556, Japan.
| |
Collapse
|
|
19
|
Kim TH, Park JH, Jeong SH, Lee JK, Kwag SJ, Kim JY, Lee W, Woo JW, Jang JY, Song EJ, Park T, Jeong CY, Ju YT, Jung EJ, Hong SC, Choi SK, Ha WS, Lee YJ. Feasibility of a novel laparoscopic technique with unidirectional knotless barbed sutures for the primary closure of duodenal ulcer perforation. Surg Endosc 2018; 32:3667-3674. [PMID: 29470633 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-018-6099-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/11/2017] [Accepted: 02/07/2018] [Indexed: 01/01/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Laparoscopic primary repair is one of the main procedures used for perforated gastric ulcers, and this technique requires reproducible and secure suturing. The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of a novel continuous suture method with barbed sutures during laparoscopic repair for perforated peptic ulcers. PATIENTS AND METHODS Clinical data from 116 consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic repair for perforated peptic ulcers were collected between November 2009 and October 2015. Continuous suturing with 15-cm-long unidirectional absorbable barbed sutures was used for laparoscopic repair in the study group, termed group V (n = 51). Patients who underwent laparoscopic repair with conventional interrupted sutures were defined as group C (n = 65). The complication and operative data were compared between groups. RESULTS Although there was no difference between group V and group C in the overall complication rate (15.7% vs. 24.6%; p = 0.259), the complication rate related to suturing was lower (3.9% vs. 15.4%; p = 0.04) in group V. Group V showed rates of 0% for leakage, 2% for intra-abdominal fluid collection, and 2% for stricture; the corresponding rates in group C were 3.1, 7.7, and 4.6%, respectively. Regarding operative data, the total operation time (V vs. C, 87.7 min vs. 131.2 min), total suture time (7.1 min vs. 25.3 min), and suture time per stitch (1.2 min vs. 6.2 min) were significantly shorter in group V than in group C (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION The use of a continuous suture technique with unidirectional barbed sutures is as safe as the conventional suture technique and allows easier and faster suturing in the repair of perforated peptic ulcers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tae-Han Kim
- Department of Surgery, Gyeongsang National University Hospital, Gyeongsang National University Postgraduate School of Medicine, 79 Gangnam-ro, Jinju, 52727, Republic of Korea
| | - Ji-Ho Park
- Department of Surgery, Gyeongsang National University Hospital, Gyeongsang National University Postgraduate School of Medicine, 79 Gangnam-ro, Jinju, 52727, Republic of Korea
| | - Sang-Ho Jeong
- Department of Surgery, Gyeongsang National University Hospital, Gyeongsang National University Postgraduate School of Medicine, 79 Gangnam-ro, Jinju, 52727, Republic of Korea
| | - Jin-Kwon Lee
- Department of Surgery, Gyeongsang National University Hospital, Gyeongsang National University Postgraduate School of Medicine, 79 Gangnam-ro, Jinju, 52727, Republic of Korea
| | - Seung-Jin Kwag
- Department of Surgery, Gyeongsang National University Hospital, Gyeongsang National University Postgraduate School of Medicine, 79 Gangnam-ro, Jinju, 52727, Republic of Korea
| | - Ju-Yeon Kim
- Department of Surgery, Gyeongsang National University Hospital, Gyeongsang National University Postgraduate School of Medicine, 79 Gangnam-ro, Jinju, 52727, Republic of Korea
| | - Woohyung Lee
- Department of Surgery, Gyeongsang National University Hospital, Gyeongsang National University Postgraduate School of Medicine, 79 Gangnam-ro, Jinju, 52727, Republic of Korea
| | - Jung-Woo Woo
- Department of Surgery, Gyeongsang National University Hospital, Gyeongsang National University Postgraduate School of Medicine, 79 Gangnam-ro, Jinju, 52727, Republic of Korea
| | - Jae Yool Jang
- Department of Surgery, Gyeongsang National University Hospital, Gyeongsang National University Postgraduate School of Medicine, 79 Gangnam-ro, Jinju, 52727, Republic of Korea
| | - Eun-Jin Song
- Department of Surgery, Gyeongsang National University Hospital, Gyeongsang National University Postgraduate School of Medicine, 79 Gangnam-ro, Jinju, 52727, Republic of Korea
| | - Taejin Park
- Department of Surgery, Gyeongsang National University Hospital, Gyeongsang National University Postgraduate School of Medicine, 79 Gangnam-ro, Jinju, 52727, Republic of Korea
| | - Chi-Young Jeong
- Department of Surgery, Gyeongsang National University Hospital, Gyeongsang National University Postgraduate School of Medicine, 79 Gangnam-ro, Jinju, 52727, Republic of Korea
| | - Young-Tae Ju
- Department of Surgery, Gyeongsang National University Hospital, Gyeongsang National University Postgraduate School of Medicine, 79 Gangnam-ro, Jinju, 52727, Republic of Korea
| | - Eun-Jung Jung
- Department of Surgery, Gyeongsang National University Hospital, Gyeongsang National University Postgraduate School of Medicine, 79 Gangnam-ro, Jinju, 52727, Republic of Korea
| | - Soon-Chan Hong
- Department of Surgery, Gyeongsang National University Hospital, Gyeongsang National University Postgraduate School of Medicine, 79 Gangnam-ro, Jinju, 52727, Republic of Korea
| | - Sang-Kyung Choi
- Department of Surgery, Gyeongsang National University Hospital, Gyeongsang National University Postgraduate School of Medicine, 79 Gangnam-ro, Jinju, 52727, Republic of Korea
| | - Woo-Song Ha
- Department of Surgery, Gyeongsang National University Hospital, Gyeongsang National University Postgraduate School of Medicine, 79 Gangnam-ro, Jinju, 52727, Republic of Korea
| | - Young-Joon Lee
- Department of Surgery, Gyeongsang National University Hospital, Gyeongsang National University Postgraduate School of Medicine, 79 Gangnam-ro, Jinju, 52727, Republic of Korea.
| |
Collapse
|
|
20
|
Beburishvili AG, Panin SI, Mikhailov DV, Postolov MP. [Perforated duodenal ulcer in high risk patients]. Khirurgiia (Mosk) 2018:39-43. [PMID: 30531752 DOI: 10.17116/hirurgia201811139] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/09/2023]
Abstract
AIM To improve the outcomes in patients with perforated duodenal ulcers. MATERIAL AND METHODS Cohort study included 456 patients with perforated duodenal ulcer. High risk of mortality was determined in 9% of patients (n=40) considering Boey diagnostic criteria (1982, 1987). There were 19 women and 21 men aged 59±2.8 years. RESULTS Perforated duodenal ulcer was followed by overall mortality near 3.8%. In high risk group this value was 17.5% (7 out of 40 patients) while expected mortality was 45.5-100% in these patients in view of Boey criteria. The main causes of death were multiple organ failure, pulmonary embolism and acute myocardial infarction. CONCLUSION Minimally invasive surgery including step-by-step procedures (mini-laparotomy, laparoscopy and navigation) are the key to improve the outcomes in patients with perforated duodenal ulcer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A G Beburishvili
- Chair of Faculty-Based Surgery of the Volgograd State Medical University, Volgograd, Russia
| | - S I Panin
- Chair of Faculty-Based Surgery of the Volgograd State Medical University, Volgograd, Russia
| | - D V Mikhailov
- Chair of Faculty-Based Surgery of the Volgograd State Medical University, Volgograd, Russia
| | - M P Postolov
- Chair of Faculty-Based Surgery of the Volgograd State Medical University, Volgograd, Russia
| |
Collapse
|
|
21
|
Negoi I, Beuran M, Ciubotaru C, Cruceru A, Hostiuc S, Sartelli M, Hernandez M, Vartic M. The laparoscopic approach in emergency surgery: A review of the literature. JOURNAL OF ACUTE DISEASE 2018. [DOI: 10.4103/2221-6189.228873] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/04/2022] Open
|
|
22
|
Vărcuş F, Beuran M, Lica I, Turculet C, Cotarlet AV, Georgescu S, Vintila D, Sabău D, Sabau A, Ciuce C, Bintintan V, Georgescu E, Popescu R, Tarta C, Surlin V. Laparoscopic Repair for Perforated Peptic Ulcer: A Retrospective Study. World J Surg 2017; 41:948-953. [PMID: 27882415 DOI: 10.1007/s00268-016-3821-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/15/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUNDS The incidence of patients presenting with perforated peptic ulcers (PPU) has decreased during the last decades. At the same time, a laparoscopic approach to this condition has been adopted by increased number of surgeons. The aim of this study was to evaluate the early postoperative results of the laparoscopic treatment of perforated peptic ulcer performed in eight Romanian surgical centers with extensive experience in laparoscopic surgery. METHODS Between 2009 and 2013, 297 patients with perforated peptic ulcer were operated in the eight centers participating in this retrospective study. The patients' charts were reviewed for demographics, surgical procedure, complications and short-term outcomes. RESULTS Boey score of 0 was found in 122 patients (41.1%), Boey 1 in 169 (56.9%), Boey 3 in 6 (2.0%). For 145 (48.8%) patients, primary suture repair was performed, in 146 (49.2%) primary suture repair with omentopexy. There were 6 (2.0%) conversions to open surgery. The operative time was between 25 and 120 min, with a mean of 68 min. Two (0.7%) deaths were noted. Mean hospital stay was 5.5 days, ranges 3-25 days. Postoperative complications included: 7 (2.4%) superficial surgical site infections, 5 (1.6%) cardiovascular, 3 (1.0%) pulmonary, 2 (0.7%) duodenal leakages, 3 (1.0%) deep space infections and 1 (0.3%) upper digestive hemorrhage. CONCLUSIONS This study shows that the laparoscopic approach for PPU is feasible; the procedure is safe, with no increased risk of duodenal fistulae or residual intraperitoneal abscesses. We now consider the laparoscopic approach for PPU as the "gold standard" in patients with Boey score 0 or 1.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Flore Vărcuş
- Surgical Clinic 2, Clinical Emergency County Hospital, Victor Babes University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Str. I. Bulbuca, No. 10, Timisoara, Romania.
| | - Mircea Beuran
- Surgical Clinic 2, Clinical Emergency Hospital, Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Bucharest, Romania
| | - Ioan Lica
- Surgical Clinic 2, Clinical Emergency Hospital, Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Bucharest, Romania
| | - Claudiu Turculet
- Surgical Clinic 2, Clinical Emergency Hospital, Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Bucharest, Romania
| | | | - Stefan Georgescu
- Surgical Clinic 2, County Emergency Hospital "Sf. Spiridon", Grigore T. Popa University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Iasi, Romania
| | - Dan Vintila
- Surgical Clinic 2, County Emergency Hospital "Sf. Spiridon", Grigore T. Popa University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Iasi, Romania
| | - Dan Sabău
- Surgical Clinic 2, Emergency County Hospital, Victor Papilian Faculty of Medicine, Sibiu, Romania
| | - Alexandru Sabau
- Surgical Clinic 2, Victor Papilian Faculty of Medicine, Sibiu, Romania
| | - Constantin Ciuce
- Surgical Clinic 1, Emergency County Hospital, Iuliu Hatieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cluj-Napoca, Romania
| | - Vasile Bintintan
- Surgical Clinic 1, Emergency County Hospital, Iuliu Hatieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cluj-Napoca, Romania
| | - Eugen Georgescu
- Surgical Clinic 1, County Emergency Hospital, University of Medicine and Pharmacy Craiova, Craiova, Romania
| | - Razvan Popescu
- Surgical Clinic 2, Emergency County Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Ovidius University, Constanţa, Romania
| | - Cristi Tarta
- Surgical Clinic 2, Clinical Emergency County Hospital, Victor Babes University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Str. I. Bulbuca, No. 10, Timisoara, Romania
| | - Valeriu Surlin
- Surgical Clinic 1, County Emergency Hospital, University of Medicine and Pharmacy Craiova, Craiova, Romania
| |
Collapse
|
|
23
|
Yu T, Cheng Y, Wang X, Tu B, Cheng N, Gong J, Bai L. Gases for establishing pneumoperitoneum during laparoscopic abdominal surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017; 6:CD009569. [PMID: 28635028 PMCID: PMC6481852 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd009569.pub3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND This is an update of the review published in 2013.Laparoscopic surgery is now widely performed to treat various abdominal diseases. Currently, carbon dioxide is the most frequently used gas for insufflation of the abdominal cavity (pneumoperitoneum). Although carbon dioxide meets most of the requirements for pneumoperitoneum, the absorption of carbon dioxide may be associated with adverse events. People with high anaesthetic risk are more likely to experience cardiopulmonary complications and adverse events, for example hypercapnia and acidosis, which has to be avoided by hyperventilation. Therefore, other gases have been introduced as alternatives to carbon dioxide for establishing pneumoperitoneum. OBJECTIVES To assess the safety, benefits, and harms of different gases (i.e. carbon dioxide, helium, argon, nitrogen, nitrous oxide, and room air) used for establishing pneumoperitoneum in participants undergoing laparoscopic general abdominal or gynaecological pelvic surgery. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, 2016, Issue 9), Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to September 2016), Ovid Embase (1974 to September 2016), Science Citation Index Expanded (1970 to September 2016), Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM) (1978 to September 2016), ClinicalTrials.gov (September 2016), and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (September 2016). SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different gases for establishing pneumoperitoneum in participants (irrespective of age, sex, or race) undergoing laparoscopic abdominal or gynaecological pelvic surgery under general anaesthesia. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors identified the trials for inclusion, collected the data, and assessed the risk of bias independently. We performed the meta-analyses using Review Manager 5. We calculated risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes (or Peto odds ratio for very rare outcomes), and mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) for continuous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used GRADE to rate the quality of evidence, MAIN RESULTS: We included nine RCTs, randomising 519 participants, comparing different gases for establishing pneumoperitoneum: nitrous oxide (three trials), helium (five trials), or room air (one trial) was compared to carbon dioxide. Three trials randomised participants to nitrous oxide pneumoperitoneum (100 participants) or carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum (96 participants). None of the trials was at low risk of bias. There was insufficient evidence to determine the effects of nitrous oxide and carbon dioxide on cardiopulmonary complications (RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.38 to 10.43; two studies; 140 participants; very low quality of evidence), or surgical morbidity (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.18 to 5.71; two studies; 143 participants; very low quality of evidence). There were no serious adverse events related to either nitrous oxide or carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum (three studies; 196 participants; very low quality of evidence). We could not combine data from two trials (140 participants) which individually showed lower pain scores (a difference of about one visual analogue score on a scale of 1 to 10 with lower numbers indicating less pain) with nitrous oxide pneumoperitoneum at various time points on the first postoperative day, and this was rated asvery low quality .Four trials randomised participants to helium pneumoperitoneum (69 participants) or carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum (75 participants) and one trial involving 33 participants did not state the number of participants in each group. None of the trials was at low risk of bias. There was insufficient evidence to determine the effects of helium or carbon dioxide on cardiopulmonary complications (RR 1.46, 95% CI 0.35 to 6.12; three studies; 128 participants; very low quality of evidence) or pain scores (visual analogue score on a scale of 1 to 10 with lower numbers indicating less pain; MD 0.49 cm, 95% CI -0.28 to 1.26; two studies; 108 participants; very low quality of evidence). There were three serious adverse events (subcutaneous emphysema) related to helium pneumoperitoneum (three studies; 128 participants; very low quality of evidence).One trial randomised participants to room air pneumoperitoneum (70 participants) or carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum (76 participants). The trial was at unclear risk of bias. There were no cardiopulmonary complications or serious adverse events observed related to either room air or carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum (both outcomes very low quality of evidence). The evidence of lower hospital costs and reduced pain during the first postoperative day with room air pneumoperitoneum compared with carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum (a difference of about one visual analogue score on a scale of 1 to 10 with lower numbers indicating less pain, was rated as very low quality of evidence. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS The quality of the current evidence is very low. The effects of nitrous oxide and helium pneumoperitoneum compared with carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum are uncertain. Evidence from one trial of small sample size suggests that room air pneumoperitoneum may decrease hospital costs in people undergoing laparoscopic abdominal surgery. The safety of nitrous oxide, helium, and room air pneumoperitoneum has yet to be established.Further trials on this topic are needed, and should compare various gases (i.e. nitrous oxide, helium, argon, nitrogen, and room air) with carbon dioxide under standard pressure pneumoperitoneum with cold gas insufflation for people with high anaesthetic risk. Future trials should include outcomes such as complications, serious adverse events, quality of life, and pain.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tianwu Yu
- Yongchuan Hospital, Chongqing Medical UniversityDepartment of Hepatobiliary SurgeryNo. 439, Quxuanhua RoadChongqingChina402160
| | - Yao Cheng
- The Second Affiliated Hospital, Chongqing Medical UniversityDepartment of Hepatobiliary SurgeryChongqingChina
| | - Xiaomei Wang
- The Second Affiliated Hospital, Chongqing Medical UniversityDepartment of Hepatobiliary SurgeryChongqingChina
| | - Bing Tu
- The Second Affiliated Hospital, Chongqing Medical UniversityDepartment of Hepatobiliary SurgeryChongqingChina
| | - Nansheng Cheng
- West China Hospital, Sichuan UniversityDepartment of Bile Duct SurgeryNo. 37, Guo Xue XiangChengduSichuanChina610041
| | - Jianping Gong
- The Second Affiliated Hospital, Chongqing Medical UniversityDepartment of Hepatobiliary SurgeryChongqingChina
| | - Lian Bai
- Yongchuan Hospital, Chongqing Medical UniversityDepartment of Gastrointestinal SurgeryNo. 439, Quxuanhua RoadChongqingChina402160
| | | |
Collapse
|
|
24
|
Sartelli M, Catena F, Abu-Zidan FM, Ansaloni L, Biffl WL, Boermeester MA, Ceresoli M, Chiara O, Coccolini F, De Waele JJ, Di Saverio S, Eckmann C, Fraga GP, Giannella M, Girardis M, Griffiths EA, Kashuk J, Kirkpatrick AW, Khokha V, Kluger Y, Labricciosa FM, Leppaniemi A, Maier RV, May AK, Malangoni M, Martin-Loeches I, Mazuski J, Montravers P, Peitzman A, Pereira BM, Reis T, Sakakushev B, Sganga G, Soreide K, Sugrue M, Ulrych J, Vincent JL, Viale P, Moore EE. Management of intra-abdominal infections: recommendations by the WSES 2016 consensus conference. World J Emerg Surg 2017; 12:22. [PMID: 28484510 PMCID: PMC5418731 DOI: 10.1186/s13017-017-0132-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 101] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/10/2017] [Accepted: 04/25/2017] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
This paper reports on the consensus conference on the management of intra-abdominal infections (IAIs) which was held on July 23, 2016, in Dublin, Ireland, as a part of the annual World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) meeting. This document covers all aspects of the management of IAIs. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation recommendation is used, and this document represents the executive summary of the consensus conference findings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Fausto Catena
- Department of Emergency Surgery, Maggiore Hospital, Parma, Italy
| | - Fikri M Abu-Zidan
- Department of Surgery, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, UAE University, Al-Ain, United Arab Emirates
| | - Luca Ansaloni
- General Surgery Department, Papa Giovanni XXIII Hospital, Bergamo, Italy
| | - Walter L Biffl
- Acute Care Surgery, The Queen's Medical Center, Honolulu, HI USA
| | | | - Marco Ceresoli
- Department of Surgery, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, UAE University, Al-Ain, United Arab Emirates
| | - Osvaldo Chiara
- Emergency Department, Trauma Center, Niguarda Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - Federico Coccolini
- Department of Surgery, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, UAE University, Al-Ain, United Arab Emirates
| | - Jan J De Waele
- Department of Critical Care Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | | | - Christian Eckmann
- Department of General, Visceral, and Thoracic Surgery, Klinikum Peine, Academic Hospital of Medical University Hannover, Hannover, Germany
| | - Gustavo P Fraga
- Division of Trauma Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medical Sciences, University of Campinas, Campinas, Brazil
| | - Maddalena Giannella
- Infectious Diseases Unit, Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, Sant'Orsola Hospital, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | | | - Ewen A Griffiths
- General and Upper GI Surgery, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, UK
| | - Jeffry Kashuk
- Department of Surgery, Assia Medical Group, Tel Aviv University Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Andrew W Kirkpatrick
- Departments of Surgery, Critical Care Medicine, and the Regional Trauma Service, Foothills Medical Centre, Calgary, AB Canada
| | - Vladimir Khokha
- Department of Emergency Surgery, Mozyr City Hospital, Mozyr, Belarus
| | - Yoram Kluger
- Department of General Surgery, Division of Surgery, Rambam Health Care Campus, Haifa, Israel
| | - Francesco M Labricciosa
- Department of Biomedical Sciences and Public Health, Unit of Hygiene, Preventive Medicine and Public Health, UNIVPM, Ancona, Italy
| | - Ari Leppaniemi
- Abdominal Center, University Hospital Meilahti, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Ronald V Maier
- Department of Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA USA
| | - Addison K May
- Departments of Surgery and Anesthesiology, Division of Trauma and Surgical Critical Care, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN USA
| | | | - Ignacio Martin-Loeches
- Multidisciplinary Intensive Care Research Organization (MICRO), Wellcome Trust-HRB Clinical Research, Department of Clinical Medicine, Trinity Centre for Health Sciences, St James's University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
| | - John Mazuski
- Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Washington University in Saint Louis, St. Louis, MO USA
| | - Philippe Montravers
- Département d'Anesthésie-Réanimation, CHU Bichat Claude-Bernard-HUPNVS, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, University Denis Diderot, Paris, France
| | - Andrew Peitzman
- Department of Surgery, UPMC, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA USA
| | - Bruno M Pereira
- Division of Trauma Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medical Sciences, University of Campinas, Campinas, Brazil
| | - Tarcisio Reis
- Emergency post-operative Department, Otavio De Freitas Hospital and Osvaldo Cruz Hospital Recife, Recife, Brazil
| | - Boris Sakakushev
- General Surgery Department, Medical University, University Hospital St George, Plovdiv, Bulgaria
| | - Gabriele Sganga
- Department of Surgery, Catholic University of Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy
| | - Kjetil Soreide
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Stavanger University Hospital, Stavanger, Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
| | - Michael Sugrue
- Letterkenny University Hospital and Donegal Clinical Research Academy, Letterkenny, Ireland
| | - Jan Ulrych
- 1st Department of Surgery, Department of Abdominal, Thoracic Surgery and Traumatology, General University Hospital, Praha, Czech Republic
| | - Jean-Louis Vincent
- Department of Intensive Care, Erasme Hospital, Université libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Pierluigi Viale
- Infectious Diseases Unit, Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, Sant'Orsola Hospital, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Ernest E Moore
- Department of Surgery, University of Colorado, Denver, CO USA
| |
Collapse
|
|
25
|
Komolafe O, Pereira SP, Davidson BR, Gurusamy KS. Serum C-reactive protein, procalcitonin, and lactate dehydrogenase for the diagnosis of pancreatic necrosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017; 4:CD012645. [PMID: 28431197 PMCID: PMC6478063 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd012645] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/30/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The treatment of people with pancreatic necrosis differs from that of people with oedematous pancreatitis. It is important to know the diagnostic accuracy of serum C-reactive protein (CRP), serum procalcitonin, and serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) as a triage test for the detection of pancreatic necrosis in people with acute pancreatitis, so that an informed decision can be made as to whether the person with pancreatic necrosis needs further investigations such as computed tomography (CT) scan or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan and treatment for pancreatic necrosis started. There is currently no standard clinical practice, although CRP, particularly an increasing trend of CRP, is often used as a triage test to determine whether the person requires further imaging. There is also currently no systematic review of the diagnostic test accuracy of CRP, procalcitonin, and LDH for the diagnosis of pancreatic necrosis in people with acute pancreatitis. OBJECTIVES To compare the diagnostic accuracy of CRP, procalcitonin, or LDH (index test), either alone or in combination, in the diagnosis of necrotising pancreatitis in people with acute pancreatitis and without organ failure. SEARCH METHODS We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, National Institute for Health Research (NIHR HTA and DARE), and other databases until March 2017. We searched the references of the included studies to identify additional studies. We did not restrict studies based on language or publication status, or whether data were collected prospectively or retrospectively. We also performed a 'related search' and 'citing reference' search in MEDLINE and Embase. SELECTION CRITERIA We included all studies that evaluated the diagnostic test accuracy of CRP, procalcitonin, and LDH for the diagnosis of pancreatic necrosis in people with acute pancreatitis using the following reference standards, either alone or in combination: radiological features of pancreatic necrosis (contrast-enhanced CT or MRI), surgeon's judgement of pancreatic necrosis during surgery, or histological confirmation of pancreatic necrosis. Had we found case-control studies, we planned to exclude them because they are prone to bias; however, we did not locate any. Two review authors independently identified the relevant studies from the retrieved references. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently extracted data, including methodological quality assessment, from the included studies. As the included studies reported CRP, procalcitonin, and LDH on different days of admission and measured at different cut-off levels, it was not possible to perform a meta-analysis using the bivariate model as planned. We have reported the sensitivity, specificity, post-test probability of a positive and negative index test along with 95% confidence interval (CI) on each of the different days of admission and measured at different cut-off levels. MAIN RESULTS A total of three studies including 242 participants met the inclusion criteria for this review. One study reported the diagnostic performance of CRP for two threshold levels (> 200 mg/L and > 279 mg/L) without stating the day on which the CRP was measured. One study reported the diagnostic performance of procalcitonin on day 1 (1 day after admission) using a threshold level of 0.5 ng/mL. One study reported the diagnostic performance of CRP on day 3 (3 days after admission) using a threshold level of 140 mg/L and LDH on day 5 (5 days after admission) using a threshold level of 290 U/L. The sensitivities and specificities varied: the point estimate of the sensitivities ranged from 0.72 to 0.88, while the point estimate of the specificities ranged from 0.75 to 1.00 for the different index tests on different days of hospital admission. However, the confidence intervals were wide: confidence intervals of sensitivities ranged from 0.51 to 0.97, while those of specificities ranged from 0.18 to 1.00 for the different tests on different days of hospital admission. Overall, none of the tests assessed in this review were sufficiently accurate to suggest that they could be useful in clinical practice. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS The paucity of data and methodological deficiencies in the studies meant that it was not possible to arrive at any conclusions regarding the diagnostic test accuracy of the index test because of the uncertainty of the results. Further well-designed diagnostic test accuracy studies with prespecified index test thresholds of CRP, procalcitonin, LDH; appropriate follow-up (for at least two weeks to ensure that the person does not have pancreatic necrosis, as early scans may not indicate pancreatic necrosis); and clearly defined reference standards (of surgical or radiological confirmation of pancreatic necrosis) are important to reliably determine the diagnostic accuracy of CRP, procalcitonin, and LDH.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Stephen P Pereira
- Royal Free Hospital CampusUCL Institute for Liver and Digestive HealthUpper 3rd FloorLondonUKNW3 2PF
| | - Brian R Davidson
- Royal Free Campus, UCL Medical SchoolDepartment of SurgeryPond StreetLondonUKNW3 2QG
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
26
|
Rompianesi G, Hann A, Komolafe O, Pereira SP, Davidson BR, Gurusamy KS. Serum amylase and lipase and urinary trypsinogen and amylase for diagnosis of acute pancreatitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017; 4:CD012010. [PMID: 28431198 PMCID: PMC6478262 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd012010.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 34] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The treatment of people with acute abdominal pain differs if they have acute pancreatitis. It is important to know the diagnostic accuracy of serum amylase, serum lipase, urinary trypsinogen-2, and urinary amylase for the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis, so that an informed decision can be made as to whether the person with abdominal pain has acute pancreatitis. There is currently no Cochrane review of the diagnostic test accuracy of serum amylase, serum lipase, urinary trypsinogen-2, and urinary amylase for the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis. OBJECTIVES To compare the diagnostic accuracy of serum amylase, serum lipase, urinary trypsinogen-2, and urinary amylase, either alone or in combination, in the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis in people with acute onset of a persistent, severe epigastric pain or diffuse abdominal pain. SEARCH METHODS We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, National Institute for Health Research (NIHR HTA and DARE), and other databases until March 2017. We searched the references of the included studies to identify additional studies. We did not restrict studies based on language or publication status, or whether data were collected prospectively or retrospectively. We also performed a 'related search' and 'citing reference' search in MEDLINE and Embase. SELECTION CRITERIA We included all studies that evaluated the diagnostic test accuracy of serum amylase, serum lipase, urinary trypsinogen-2, and urinary amylase for the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis. We excluded case-control studies because these studies are prone to bias. We accepted any of the following reference standards: biopsy, consensus conference definition, radiological features of acute pancreatitis, diagnosis of acute pancreatitis during laparotomy or autopsy, and organ failure. At least two review authors independently searched and screened the references located by the search to identify relevant studies. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently extracted data from the included studies. The thresholds used for the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis varied in the trials, resulting in sparse data for each index test. Because of sparse data, we used -2 log likelihood values to determine which model to use for meta-analysis. We calculated and reported the sensitivity, specificity, post-test probability of a positive and negative index test along with 95% confidence interval (CI) for each cutoff, but have reported only the results of the recommended cutoff of three times normal for serum amylase and serum lipase, and the manufacturer-recommended cutoff of 50 mg/mL for urinary trypsinogen-2 in the abstract. MAIN RESULTS Ten studies including 5056 participants met the inclusion criteria for this review and assessed the diagnostic accuracy of the index tests in people presenting to the emergency department with acute abdominal pain. The risk of bias was unclear or high for all of the included studies. The study that contributed approximately two-thirds of the participants included in this review was excluded from the results of the analysis presented below due to major concerns about the participants included in the study. We have presented only the results where at least two studies were included in the analysis.Serum amylase, serum lipase, and urinary trypsinogen-2 at the standard threshold levels of more than three times normal for serum amylase and serum lipase, and a threshold of 50 ng/mL for urinary trypsinogen-2 appear to have similar sensitivities (0.72 (95% CI 0.59 to 0.82); 0.79 (95% CI 0.54 to 0.92); and 0.72 (95% CI 0.56 to 0.84), respectively) and specificities (0.93 (95% CI 0.66 to 0.99); 0.89 (95% CI 0.46 to 0.99); and 0.90 (95% CI 0.85 to 0.93), respectively). At the median prevalence of 22.6% of acute pancreatitis in the studies, out of 100 people with positive test, serum amylase (more than three times normal), serum lipase (more than three times normal), and urinary trypsinogen (more than 50 ng/mL), 74 (95% CI 33 to 94); 68 (95% CI 21 to 94); and 67 (95% CI 57 to 76) people have acute pancreatitis, respectively; out of 100 people with negative test, serum amylase (more than three times normal), serum lipase (more than three times normal), and urinary trypsinogen (more than 50 ng/mL), 8 (95% CI 5 to 12); 7 (95% CI 3 to 15); and 8 (95% CI 5 to 13) people have acute pancreatitis, respectively. We were not able to compare these tests formally because of sparse data. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS As about a quarter of people with acute pancreatitis fail to be diagnosed as having acute pancreatitis with the evaluated tests, one should have a low threshold to admit the patient and treat them for acute pancreatitis if the symptoms are suggestive of acute pancreatitis, even if these tests are normal. About 1 in 10 patients without acute pancreatitis may be wrongly diagnosed as having acute pancreatitis with these tests, therefore it is important to consider other conditions that require urgent surgical intervention, such as perforated viscus, even if these tests are abnormal.The diagnostic performance of these tests decreases even further with the progression of time, and one should have an even lower threshold to perform additional investigations if the symptoms are suggestive of acute pancreatitis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gianluca Rompianesi
- University of Modena and Reggio EmiliaInternational Doctorate School in Clinical and Experimental MedicineModenaItaly
| | | | | | - Stephen P Pereira
- Royal Free Hospital CampusUCL Institute for Liver and Digestive HealthUpper 3rd FloorLondonUKNW3 2PF
| | - Brian R Davidson
- Royal Free Campus, UCL Medical SchoolDepartment of SurgeryPond StreetLondonUKNW3 2QG
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
27
|
Daniel VT, Wiseman JT, Flahive J, Santry HP. Predictors of mortality in the elderly after open repair for perforated peptic ulcer disease. J Surg Res 2017; 215:108-113. [PMID: 28688634 DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2017.03.052] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/04/2016] [Revised: 03/08/2017] [Accepted: 03/29/2017] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND As the U.S. population ages and the number of emergent surgical repairs for perforated peptic ulcer disease (PUD) rise, contemporary national data evaluating operative outcomes for open surgical repair for perforated PUD among the elderly are lacking. MATERIALS AND METHODS The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (2007-2014) was queried for patients ≥65 y who underwent open surgical repair for perforated PUD. The primary outcome was 30-d mortality. Secondary outcomes included 30-d postoperative complications. Univariate and multivariable regression analyses were performed. RESULTS Overall, 2131 patients underwent open surgical repair for perforated PUD. Among those who died, more used steroids preoperatively (15% versus 9%, P = 0.001) and fewer were independent preoperatively (55% versus 83%, P < 0.0001) compared to those who were alive 30-d postoperatively. Common postoperative complications were septic shock (15%) and pneumonia (12%). The overall 30-d mortality rate was 17.7%, with more deaths in subsequent decades of life (65-75 y 13% versus 75-84 y 18% versus >85 y 24%, P < 0.0001). After adjustment for other factors, mortality was significantly associated with older age (85+ versus 65-74 y) (odds ratio [OR], 1.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8, 1.7), dependent functional status preoperatively ([OR], 0.2; 95% CI, 0.2, 0.3), and American Society of Anesthesiologist classification ≥4 (OR, 3.2; 95% CI, 2.4, 4.3). CONCLUSIONS At U.S. hospitals, open surgical repair, the accepted treatment of perforated PUD, among the elderly is associated with significant 30-d morbidity and mortality rates that are unacceptably high in our contemporary era. Furthermore, mortality rates are associated with older age. Therefore, as the elderly population continues to increase in the United States, preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative measures must be taken to reduce this high morbidity and mortality rates.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vijaya T Daniel
- Department of Surgery, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts.
| | - Jason T Wiseman
- Department of Surgery, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts
| | - Julie Flahive
- Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts
| | - Heena P Santry
- Department of Surgery, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts; Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts
| |
Collapse
|
|
28
|
Methodological overview of systematic reviews to establish the evidence base for emergency general surgery. Br J Surg 2017; 104:513-524. [PMID: 28295254 PMCID: PMC5363346 DOI: 10.1002/bjs.10476] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/08/2016] [Revised: 08/23/2016] [Accepted: 11/30/2016] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The evidence for treatment decision-making in emergency general surgery has not been summarized previously. The aim of this overview was to review the quantity and quality of systematic review evidence for the most common emergency surgical conditions. METHODS Systematic reviews of the most common conditions requiring unplanned admission and treatment managed by general surgeons were eligible for inclusion. The Centre for Reviews and Dissemination databases were searched to April 2014. The number and type (randomized or non-randomized) of included studies and patients were extracted and summarized. The total number of unique studies was recorded for each condition. The nature of the interventions (surgical, non-surgical invasive or non-invasive) was documented. The quality of reviews was assessed using the AMSTAR checklist. RESULTS The 106 included reviews focused mainly on bowel conditions (42), appendicitis (40) and gallstone disease (17). Fifty-one (48·1 per cent) included RCTs alone, 79 (74·5 per cent) included at least one RCT and 25 (23·6 per cent) summarized non-randomized evidence alone. Reviews included 727 unique studies, of which 30·3 per cent were RCTs. Sixty-five reviews compared different types of surgical intervention and 27 summarized trials of surgical versus non-surgical interventions. Fifty-seven reviews (53·8 per cent) were rated as low risk of bias. CONCLUSION This overview of reviews highlights the need for more and better research in this field.
Collapse
|
|
29
|
Chung KT, Shelat VG. Perforated peptic ulcer - an update. World J Gastrointest Surg 2017; 9:1-12. [PMID: 28138363 PMCID: PMC5237817 DOI: 10.4240/wjgs.v9.i1.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 136] [Impact Index Per Article: 17.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/19/2016] [Revised: 11/04/2016] [Accepted: 11/29/2016] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Peptic ulcer disease (PUD) affects 4 million people worldwide annually. The incidence of PUD has been estimated at around 1.5% to 3%. Perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) is a serious complication of PUD and patients with PPU often present with acute abdomen that carries high risk for morbidity and mortality. The lifetime prevalence of perforation in patients with PUD is about 5%. PPU carries a mortality ranging from 1.3% to 20%. Thirty-day mortality rate reaching 20% and 90-d mortality rate of up to 30% have been reported. In this review we have summarized the current evidence on PPU to update readers. This literature review includes the most updated information such as common causes, clinical features, diagnostic methods, non-operative and operative management, post-operative complications and different scoring systems of PPU. With the advancement of medical technology, PUD can now be treated with medications instead of elective surgery. The classic triad of sudden onset of abdominal pain, tachycardia and abdominal rigidity is the hallmark of PPU. Erect chest radiograph may miss 15% of cases with air under the diaphragm in patients with bowel perforation. Early diagnosis, prompt resuscitation and urgent surgical intervention are essential to improve outcomes. Exploratory laparotomy and omental patch repair remains the gold standard. Laparoscopic surgery should be considered when expertise is available. Gastrectomy is recommended in patients with large or malignant ulcer.
Collapse
|
|
30
|
Sartelli M, Chichom-Mefire A, Labricciosa FM, Hardcastle T, Abu-Zidan FM, Adesunkanmi AK, Ansaloni L, Bala M, Balogh ZJ, Beltrán MA, Ben-Ishay O, Biffl WL, Birindelli A, Cainzos MA, Catalini G, Ceresoli M, Che Jusoh A, Chiara O, Coccolini F, Coimbra R, Cortese F, Demetrashvili Z, Di Saverio S, Diaz JJ, Egiev VN, Ferrada P, Fraga GP, Ghnnam WM, Lee JG, Gomes CA, Hecker A, Herzog T, Kim JI, Inaba K, Isik A, Karamarkovic A, Kashuk J, Khokha V, Kirkpatrick AW, Kluger Y, Koike K, Kong VY, Leppaniemi A, Machain GM, Maier RV, Marwah S, McFarlane ME, Montori G, Moore EE, Negoi I, Olaoye I, Omari AH, Ordonez CA, Pereira BM, Pereira Júnior GA, Pupelis G, Reis T, Sakakhushev B, Sato N, Segovia Lohse HA, Shelat VG, Søreide K, Uhl W, Ulrych J, Van Goor H, Velmahos GC, Yuan KC, Wani I, Weber DG, Zachariah SK, Catena F. The management of intra-abdominal infections from a global perspective: 2017 WSES guidelines for management of intra-abdominal infections. World J Emerg Surg 2017; 12:29. [PMID: 28702076 PMCID: PMC5504840 DOI: 10.1186/s13017-017-0141-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 242] [Impact Index Per Article: 30.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/17/2017] [Accepted: 06/20/2017] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Intra-abdominal infections (IAIs) are common surgical emergencies and have been reported as major contributors to non-trauma deaths in the emergency departments worldwide. The cornerstones of effective treatment of IAIs are early recognition, adequate source control, and appropriate antimicrobial therapy. Prompt resuscitation of patients with ongoing sepsis is of utmost important. In hospitals worldwide, non-acceptance of, or lack of access to, accessible evidence-based practices and guidelines result in overall poorer outcome of patients suffering IAIs. The aim of this paper is to promote global standards of care in IAIs and update the 2013 WSES guidelines for management of intra-abdominal infections.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Alain Chichom-Mefire
- Department of Surgery and Obstetrics/Gynaecology, Regional Hospital, Limbe, Cameroon
| | - Francesco M. Labricciosa
- 0000 0001 1017 3210grid.7010.6Department of Biomedical Sciences and Public Health, Unit of Hygiene, Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Ancona, Italy
| | - Timothy Hardcastle
- Trauma Service, Inkosi Albert Luthuli Central Hospital and Department of Surgery, Nelson R Mandela School of Clinical Medicine, Durban, South Africa
| | - Fikri M. Abu-Zidan
- 0000 0001 2193 6666grid.43519.3aDepartment of Surgery, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, UAE University, Al-Ain, United Arab Emirates
| | - Abdulrashid K. Adesunkanmi
- 0000 0001 2183 9444grid.10824.3fDepartment of Surgery, College of Health Sciences, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria
| | - Luca Ansaloni
- 0000 0004 1757 8431grid.460094.fGeneral Surgery Department, Papa Giovanni XXIII Hospital, Bergamo, Italy
| | - Miklosh Bala
- 0000 0001 2221 2926grid.17788.31Trauma and Acute Care Surgery Unit, Hadassah Hebrew University Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel
| | - Zsolt J. Balogh
- 0000 0004 0577 6676grid.414724.0Department of Traumatology, John Hunter Hospital and University of Newcastle, Newcastle, New South Wales Australia
| | - Marcelo A. Beltrán
- Department of General Surgery, Hospital San Juan de Dios de La Serena, La Serena, Chile
| | - Offir Ben-Ishay
- 0000 0000 9950 8111grid.413731.3Department of General Surgery, Rambam Health Care Campus, Haifa, Israel
| | - Walter L. Biffl
- 0000 0001 1482 1895grid.162346.4Acute Care Surgery at The Queen’s Medical Center, John A. Burns School of Medicine, University of Hawai‘i, Honolulu, USA
| | - Arianna Birindelli
- 0000 0004 1759 7093grid.416290.8Department of Surgery, Maggiore Hospital, Bologna, Italy
| | - Miguel A. Cainzos
- 0000 0000 8816 6945grid.411048.8Department of Surgery, Hospital Clínico Universitario, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
| | | | - Marco Ceresoli
- 0000 0004 1757 8431grid.460094.fGeneral Surgery Department, Papa Giovanni XXIII Hospital, Bergamo, Italy
| | - Asri Che Jusoh
- Department of General Surgery, Kuala Krai Hospital, Kuala Krai, Kelantan Malaysia
| | - Osvaldo Chiara
- grid.416200.1Emergency Department, Niguarda Ca’ Granda Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - Federico Coccolini
- 0000 0004 1757 8431grid.460094.fGeneral Surgery Department, Papa Giovanni XXIII Hospital, Bergamo, Italy
| | - Raul Coimbra
- 0000 0001 2107 4242grid.266100.3Department of Surgery, UC San Diego Medical Center, San Diego, USA
| | | | - Zaza Demetrashvili
- 0000 0004 0428 8304grid.412274.6Department of Surgery, Tbilisi State Medical University, Kipshidze Central University Hospital, T’bilisi, Georgia
| | - Salomone Di Saverio
- 0000 0004 1759 7093grid.416290.8Department of Surgery, Maggiore Hospital, Bologna, Italy
| | - Jose J. Diaz
- 0000 0001 2175 4264grid.411024.2Shock Trauma Center, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, USA
| | - Valery N. Egiev
- 0000 0000 9559 0613grid.78028.35Department of Surgery, Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University, Moscow, Russian Federation
| | - Paula Ferrada
- 0000 0004 0458 8737grid.224260.0Department of Surgery, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA USA
| | - Gustavo P. Fraga
- 0000 0001 0723 2494grid.411087.bDivision of Trauma Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medical Sciences, University of Campinas (Unicamp), Campinas, SP Brazil
| | - Wagih M. Ghnnam
- 0000000103426662grid.10251.37Department of General Surgery, Mansoura Faculty of Medicine, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt
| | - Jae Gil Lee
- 0000 0004 0470 5454grid.15444.30Department of Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Carlos A. Gomes
- Department of Surgery, Hospital Universitário Terezinha de Jesus, Faculdade de Ciências Médicas e da Saúde de Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, Brazil
| | - Andreas Hecker
- 0000 0000 8584 9230grid.411067.5Department of General and Thoracic Surgery, University Hospital Giessen, Giessen, Germany
| | - Torsten Herzog
- 0000 0004 0490 981Xgrid.5570.7Department of Surgery, St. Josef Hospital, Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany
| | - Jae Il Kim
- 0000 0004 0470 5112grid.411612.1Department of Surgery, Ilsan Paik Hospital, Inje University College of Medicine, Goyang, Republic of Korea
| | - Kenji Inaba
- 0000 0001 2156 6853grid.42505.36Division of Acute Care Surgery and Surgical Critical Care, Department of Surgery, Los Angeles County and University of Southern California Medical Center, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA USA
| | - Arda Isik
- 0000 0001 1498 7262grid.412176.7Department of General Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Erzincan University, Erzincan, Turkey
| | - Aleksandar Karamarkovic
- 0000 0001 2166 9385grid.7149.bClinic for Emergency Surgery, Medical Faculty University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia
| | - Jeffry Kashuk
- 0000 0004 1937 0546grid.12136.37Department of Surgery, Assia Medical Group, Tel Aviv University Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Vladimir Khokha
- Department of Emergency Surgery, Mozyr City Hospital, Mozyr, Belarus
| | - Andrew W. Kirkpatrick
- 0000 0004 0469 2139grid.414959.4Departments of Surgery, Critical Care Medicine, and the Regional Trauma Service, Foothills Medical Centre, Calgary, Alberta Canada
| | - Yoram Kluger
- 0000 0000 9950 8111grid.413731.3Department of General Surgery, Division of Surgery, Rambam Health Care Campus, Haifa, Israel
| | - Kaoru Koike
- 0000 0004 0372 2033grid.258799.8Department of Primary Care and Emergency Medicine, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan
| | - Victor Y. Kong
- 0000 0004 0576 7753grid.414386.cDepartment of Surgery, Edendale Hospital, Pietermaritzburg, Republic of South Africa
| | - Ari Leppaniemi
- Abdominal Center, University Hospital Meilahti, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Gustavo M. Machain
- 0000 0001 2289 5077grid.412213.7II Cátedra de Clínica Quirúrgica, Hospital de Clínicas, Facultad de Ciencias Medicas, Universidad Nacional de Asuncion, Asuncion, Paraguay
| | - Ronald V. Maier
- 0000000122986657grid.34477.33Department of Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA USA
| | - Sanjay Marwah
- 0000 0004 1771 1642grid.412572.7Department of Surgery, Pt BDS Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Rohtak, India
| | - Michael E. McFarlane
- 0000 0004 0500 5353grid.412963.bDepartment of Surgery, Radiology, University Hospital of the West Indies, Kingston, Jamaica
| | - Giulia Montori
- 0000 0004 1757 8431grid.460094.fGeneral Surgery Department, Papa Giovanni XXIII Hospital, Bergamo, Italy
| | - Ernest E. Moore
- Department of Surgery, University of Colorado, Denver Health Medical Center, Denver, CO USA
| | - Ionut Negoi
- Department of Surgery, Emergency Hospital of Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania
| | - Iyiade Olaoye
- 0000 0000 8878 5287grid.412975.cDepartment of Surgery, University of Ilorin, Teaching Hospital, Ilorin, Nigeria
| | - Abdelkarim H. Omari
- 0000 0004 0411 3985grid.460946.9Department of Surgery, King Abdullah University Hospital, Irbid, Jordan
| | - Carlos A. Ordonez
- 0000 0001 2295 7397grid.8271.cDepartment of Surgery and Critical Care, Universidad del Valle, Fundación Valle del Lili, Cali, Colombia
| | - Bruno M. Pereira
- 0000 0001 0723 2494grid.411087.bDivision of Trauma Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medical Sciences, University of Campinas (Unicamp), Campinas, SP Brazil
| | | | - Guntars Pupelis
- Department of General and Emergency Surgery, Riga East University Hospital ‘Gailezers’, Riga, Latvia
| | - Tarcisio Reis
- Emergency Post-operative Department, Otavio de Freitas Hospital and Hosvaldo Cruz Hospital, Recife, Brazil
| | - Boris Sakakhushev
- General Surgery Department, Medical University, University Hospital St George, Plovdiv, Bulgaria
| | - Norio Sato
- 0000 0001 1011 3808grid.255464.4Department of Aeromedical Services for Emergency and Trauma Care, Ehime University Graduate School of Medicine, Ehime, Japan
| | - Helmut A. Segovia Lohse
- 0000 0001 2289 5077grid.412213.7II Cátedra de Clínica Quirúrgica, Hospital de Clínicas, Facultad de Ciencias Medicas, Universidad Nacional de Asuncion, Asuncion, Paraguay
| | - Vishal G. Shelat
- grid.240988.fDepartment of General Surgery, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Tan Tock Seng, Singapore
| | - Kjetil Søreide
- 0000 0004 0627 2891grid.412835.9Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Stavanger University Hospital, Stravenger, Norway
- 0000 0004 1936 7443grid.7914.bDepartment of Clinical Medicine, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
| | - Waldemar Uhl
- 0000 0004 0490 981Xgrid.5570.7Department of Surgery, St. Josef Hospital, Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany
| | - Jan Ulrych
- 0000 0000 9100 9940grid.411798.2First Department of Surgery - Department of Abdominal, Thoracic Surgery and Traumatology, General University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Harry Van Goor
- 0000 0004 0444 9382grid.10417.33Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - George C. Velmahos
- 0000 0004 0386 9924grid.32224.35Trauma, Emergency Surgery, and Surgical Critical Care Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, USA
| | - Kuo-Ching Yuan
- 0000 0004 1756 1461grid.454210.6Trauma and Emergency Surgery Department, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan City, Taiwan
| | - Imtiaz Wani
- 0000 0001 0174 2901grid.414739.cDepartment of Surgery, Sheri-Kashmir Institute of Medical Sciences, Srinagar, India
| | - Dieter G. Weber
- 0000 0004 0453 3875grid.416195.eDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Royal Perth Hospital, Perth, Australia
| | - Sanoop K. Zachariah
- 0000 0004 1766 361Xgrid.464618.9Department of Surgery, Mosc Medical College, Kolenchery, Cochin, India
| | - Fausto Catena
- Department of Emergency Surgery, Maggiore Hospital, Parma, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
|
31
|
Montravers P, Blot S, Dimopoulos G, Eckmann C, Eggimann P, Guirao X, Paiva JA, Sganga G, De Waele J. Therapeutic management of peritonitis: a comprehensive guide for intensivists. Intensive Care Med 2016; 42:1234-47. [PMID: 26984317 DOI: 10.1007/s00134-016-4307-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 54] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/27/2016] [Accepted: 03/04/2016] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE The management of peritonitis in critically ill patients is becoming increasingly complex due to their changing characteristics and the growing prevalence of multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacteria. METHODS A multidisciplinary panel summarizes the latest advances in the therapeutic management of these critically ill patients. RESULTS Appendicitis, cholecystitis and bowel perforation represent the majority of all community-acquired infections, while most cases of healthcare-associated infections occur following suture leaks and/or bowel perforation. The micro-organisms involved include a spectrum of Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria, as well as anaerobes and fungi. Healthcare-associated infections are associated with an increased likelihood of MDR pathogens. The key elements for success are early and optimal source control and adequate surgery and appropriate antibiotic therapy. Drainage, debridement, abdominal cleansing, irrigation, and control of the source of contamination are the major steps to ensure source control. In life-threatening situations, a "damage control" approach is the safest way to gain time and achieve stability. The initial empirical antiinfective therapy should be prescribed rapidly and must target all of the micro-organisms likely to be involved, including MDR bacteria and fungi, on the basis of the suspected risk factors. Dosage adjustment needs to be based on pharmacokinetic parameters. Supportive care includes pain management, optimization of ventilation, haemodynamic and fluid monitoring, improvement of renal function, nutrition and anticoagulation. CONCLUSIONS The majority of patients with peritonitis develop complications, including worsening of pre-existing organ dysfunction, surgical complications and healthcare-associated infections. The probability of postoperative complications must be taken into account in the decision-making process prior to surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- P Montravers
- APHP, CHU Bichat-Claude Bernard, Département d'Anesthésie Réanimation, Université Denis Diderot, PRESS Sorbonne Cité, Paris, France.
| | - S Blot
- Department of Internal Medicine, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
- Burns, Trauma and Critical Care Research Centre, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
| | - G Dimopoulos
- Department of Critical Care, University Hospital Attikon, Medical School, University of Athens, Athens, Greece
| | - C Eckmann
- Department of General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, Klinikum Peine, Peine, Germany
| | - P Eggimann
- Department of Intensive Care Medicine and Burn Center, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - X Guirao
- Department of Endocrine and Head and Neck Surgery, Corporació Sanitaria del Parc Tauli, University Hospital, Sabadell, Barcelona, Spain
| | - J A Paiva
- Emergency and Intensive Care Department, Centro Hospitalar S. João EPE, Porto, Portugal
- Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal
| | - G Sganga
- Department of Surgery, Catholic University of Sacred Heart, Policlinico A Gemelli, Rome, Italy
| | - J De Waele
- Department of Critical Care Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
|
32
|
Mandrioli M, Inaba K, Piccinini A, Biscardi A, Sartelli M, Agresta F, Catena F, Cirocchi R, Jovine E, Tugnoli G, Di Saverio S. Advances in laparoscopy for acute care surgery and trauma. World J Gastroenterol 2016; 22:668-680. [PMID: 26811616 PMCID: PMC4716068 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v22.i2.668] [Citation(s) in RCA: 76] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/28/2015] [Revised: 09/10/2015] [Accepted: 11/19/2015] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
The greatest advantages of laparoscopy when compared to open surgery include the faster recovery times, shorter hospital stays, decreased postoperative pain, earlier return to work and resumption of normal daily activity as well as cosmetic benefits. Laparoscopy today is considered the gold standard of care in the treatment of cholecystitis and appendicitis worldwide. Laparoscopy has even been adopted in colorectal surgery with good results. The technological improvements in this surgical field along with the development of modern techniques and the acquisition of specific laparoscopic skills have allowed for its utilization in operations with fully intracorporeal anastomoses. Further progress in laparoscopy has included single-incision laparoscopic surgery and natural orifice trans-luminal endoscopic surgery. Nevertheless, laparoscopy for emergency surgery is still considered challenging and is usually not recommended due to the lack of adequate experience in this area. The technical difficulties of operating in the presence of diffuse peritonitis or large purulent collections and diffuse adhesions are also given as reasons. However, the potential advantages of laparoscopy, both in terms of diagnosis and therapy, are clear. Major advantages may be observed in cases with diffuse peritonitis secondary to perforated peptic ulcers, for example, where laparoscopy allows the confirmation of the diagnosis, the identification of the position of the ulcer and a laparoscopic repair with effective peritoneal washout. Laparoscopy has also revolutionized the approach to complicated diverticulitis even when intestinal perforation is present. Many other emergency conditions can be effectively managed laparoscopically, including trauma in select hemodynamically-stable patients. We have therefore reviewed the most recent scientific literature on advances in laparoscopy for acute care surgery and trauma in order to demonstrate the current indications and outcomes associated with a laparoscopic approach to the treatment of the most common emergency surgical conditions.
Collapse
|
|
33
|
Lee DJK, Ye M, Sun KH, Shelat VG, Koura A. Laparoscopic versus Open Omental Patch Repair for Early Presentation of Perforated Peptic Ulcer: Matched Retrospective Cohort Study. Surg Res Pract 2016; 2016:8605039. [PMID: 27722200 PMCID: PMC5046012 DOI: 10.1155/2016/8605039] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/05/2016] [Revised: 08/02/2016] [Accepted: 08/15/2016] [Indexed: 02/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Introduction. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes between laparoscopic and open omental patch repair (LOPR versus OR) in patients with similar presentation of perforated peptic ulcer (PPU). The secondary aim was to evaluate the outcomes according to the severity of peritonitis. Methods. All patients who underwent omental patch repair at two university-affiliated institutes between January 2010 and December 2014 were reviewed. Matched cohort between LOPR and OR groups was achieved by only including patients that had ulcer perforation <2 cm in size and symptoms occurring <48 hours. Outcome measures were defined in accordance with length of stay (LOS), postoperative complications, and mortality. Results. 148 patients met the predefined inclusion criteria with LOPR performed in 40 patients. Outcome measures consistently support laparoscopic approach but only length of hospital stay (LOS) achieved statistical significance (LOPR 4 days versus OR 5 days, p < 0.01). In a subgroup analysis of patients with MPI score >21, LOPR is also shown to benefit, particularly resulting in significant shorter LOS (4 days versus 11 days, p < 0.01). Conclusion. LOPR offers improved short-term outcomes in patients who present within 48 hours and with perforation size <2 cm. LOPR also proved to be more beneficial in high MPI cases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel Jin Keat Lee
- 1Department of Surgery, Khoo Teck Puat Hospital, 90 Yishun Central, Singapore 768828
- *Daniel Jin Keat Lee:
| | - MaDong Ye
- 1Department of Surgery, Khoo Teck Puat Hospital, 90 Yishun Central, Singapore 768828
| | - Keith Haozhe Sun
- 2Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai 200032, China
| | - Vishalkumar G. Shelat
- 3Department of Surgery, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, 11 Jalan Tan Tock Seng, Singapore 308433
| | - Aaryan Koura
- 3Department of Surgery, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, 11 Jalan Tan Tock Seng, Singapore 308433
| |
Collapse
|
|
34
|
Changing patterns in the surgical treatment of perforated duodenal ulcer - single centre experience. Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne 2015; 10:430-6. [PMID: 26649091 PMCID: PMC4653256 DOI: 10.5114/wiitm.2015.54057] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/26/2015] [Revised: 03/18/2015] [Accepted: 04/08/2015] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction Although the surgical treatment of patients with perforated duodenal ulcer is the method of choice, the introduction of effective pharmacotherapy has changed the surgical strategy. Nowadays less extensive procedures are chosen more frequently. The introduction of laparoscopic procedures had a significant impact on treatment results. Aim To present our experience in the treatment of perforated duodenal ulcer in two periods, by comparing open radical anti-ulcer procedures with laparoscopic ulcer repair. Material and methods The analysis covered patients operated on for perforated duodenal ulcer. Two groups of patients were compared. Group 1 included 245 patients operated on in the period 1980–1994 with a traditional method (pyloroplasty + vagotomy) before introduction of proton pump inhibitors (PPI). Group 2 included 106 patients treated in the period 2000–2014 with the laparoscopic technique supplemented with PPI therapy. Groups were compared in terms of patients’ demographic structure, operative time, complication rate and mortality. Results The mean operative time in group 1 was shorter than in group 2 (p < 0.0001). Complications were noted in 57 (23.3%) patients in group 1 and 14 (13.5%) patients in group 2 (p = 0.0312). Reoperation was necessary in 13 (5.3%) cases in group 1 and in 5 cases in group 2 (p = 0.8179). The mortality rate in group 1 was significantly higher than in group 2 (10.2% vs. 2.8%, p = 0.0192). In group 1, median length of hospital stay was 9 days and differed significantly from group 2 (6 days, p < 0.0001). Conclusions Within the last 30 years, significant changes in treatment of perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) have occurred, mainly related to abandoning routine radical anti-ulcer procedures and replacing the open technique with minimally invasive surgery. Thus it was possible to improve treatment results by reducing complication and mortality rates, and shortening the length of hospital stay. Although the laparoscopic operation is longer, it improves outcomes. In the authors’ opinion, in each patient with suspected peptic ulcer perforation, laparoscopy should be the method of choice.
Collapse
|
|
35
|
Teoh AYB, Chiu PWY, Kok ASY, Wong SKH, Ng EKW. The selective use of laparoscopic repair is safe in high-risk patients suffering from perforated peptic ulcer. World J Surg 2015; 39:740-5. [PMID: 25371298 DOI: 10.1007/s00268-014-2851-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The use of laparoscopic repair for perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) was shown to be safe and recommended in low-risk patients. However, whether the approach is safe to apply to high-risk patients is uncertain. STUDY DESIGN This was a retrospective study of all patients with PPU admitted between January 2002 and December 2012. The laparoscopy-first approach (LFA) was adopted as a routine for all patients. The outcomes of LFA for PPU were reviewed and assessed to determine if the approach was safe in high-risk patients. RESULTS Three hundred and seventy three patients that suffered from PPU were included into the study and 50.9% received laparoscopic repair. There was a significant increase in the number of operations performed yearly by the LFA (P < 0.001). 25.2% of the patients had a Boey score of ≥2. High-risk patients that received LFA suffered from larger ulcers (P < 0.001) with more severe contamination (P = 0.006) that required conversion (P = 0.002) when compared to the low-risk patients. When compared to open surgery, more high-risk patients in the open group had ASA grade ≥3 (P = 0.007) and suffered from mortality (P = 0.001). The only significant predictor to mortality in high-risk patients was ASA grade ≥3 (P = 0.014). CONCLUSIONS The adoption of LFA in patients suffering from PPU was associated with acceptable rates of mortality and morbidity. The approach could also be selectively adopted in patients with Boey score ≥2 provided their ASA grading is low and hemodynamically stable.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anthony Yuen Bun Teoh
- Department of Surgery, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, 30-32, Ngan Shing Street, Shatin, New Territories, Hong Kong,
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
36
|
Abstract
Perforated peptic ulcer is a common emergency condition worldwide, with associated mortality rates of up to 30%. A scarcity of high-quality studies about the condition limits the knowledge base for clinical decision making, but a few published randomised trials are available. Although Helicobacter pylori and use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are common causes, demographic differences in age, sex, perforation location, and underlying causes exist between countries, and mortality rates also vary. Clinical prediction rules are used, but accuracy varies with study population. Early surgery, either by laparoscopic or open repair, and proper sepsis management are essential for good outcome. Selected patients can be managed non-operatively or with novel endoscopic approaches, but validation of such methods in trials is needed. Quality of care, sepsis care bundles, and postoperative monitoring need further assessment. Adequate trials with low risk of bias are urgently needed to provide better evidence. We summarise the evidence for perforated peptic ulcer management and identify directions for future clinical research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kjetil Søreide
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Stavanger University Hospital, Stavanger, Norway; Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
| | - Kenneth Thorsen
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Stavanger University Hospital, Stavanger, Norway
| | - Ewen M Harrison
- MRC Centre for Inflammation Research, University of Edinburgh, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| | | | - Morten H Møller
- Department of Intensive Care 4131, Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Michael Ohene-Yeboah
- Department of Surgery, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana
| | - Jon Arne Søreide
- Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway; Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
|
37
|
Coccolini F, Tranà C, Sartelli M, Catena F, Saverio SD, Manfredi R, Montori G, Ceresoli M, Falcone C, Ansaloni L. Laparoscopic management of intra-abdominal infections: Systematic review of the literature. World J Gastrointest Surg 2015; 7:160-169. [PMID: 26328036 PMCID: PMC4550843 DOI: 10.4240/wjgs.v7.i8.160] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/03/2015] [Revised: 04/24/2015] [Accepted: 07/08/2015] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
AIM: To investigate the role of laparoscopy in diagnosis and treatment of intra abdominal infections.
METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was performed including studies where intra abdominal infections were treated laparoscopically.
RESULTS: Early laparoscopic approaches have become the standard surgical technique for treating acute cholecystitis. The laparoscopic appendectomy has been demonstrated to be superior to open surgery in acute appendicitis. In the event of diverticulitis, laparoscopic resections have proven to be safe and effective procedures for experienced laparoscopic surgeons and may be performed without adversely affecting morbidity and mortality rates. However laparoscopic resection has not been accepted by the medical community as the primary treatment of choice. In high-risk patients, laparoscopic approach may be used for exploration or peritoneal lavage and drainage. The successful laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcers for experienced surgeons, is demonstrated to be safe and effective. Regarding small bowel perforations, comparative studies contrasting open and laparoscopic surgeries have not yet been conducted. Successful laparoscopic resections addressing iatrogenic colonic perforation have been reported despite a lack of literature-based evidence supporting such procedures. In post-operative infections, laparoscopic approaches may be useful in preventing diagnostic delay and controlling the source.
CONCLUSION: Laparoscopy has a good diagnostic accuracy and enables to better identify the causative pathology; laparoscopy may be recommended for the treatment of many intra-abdominal infections.
Collapse
|
|
38
|
Gupta A, Habib K, Harikrishnan A, Khetan N. Laparoscopic Surgery in Luminal Gastrointestinal Emergencies-a Review of Current Status. Indian J Surg 2015; 76:436-43. [PMID: 25614718 DOI: 10.1007/s12262-014-1081-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/12/2014] [Accepted: 04/23/2014] [Indexed: 11/28/2022] Open
Abstract
Laparoscopy has already established itself as the preferred surgical approach in a variety of elective surgical conditions. Along with its usual advantages of less tissue trauma and faster recovery, its diagnostic as well as therapeutic role is making it an attractive option in emergency surgery. In this paper, we have reviewed the current status of laparoscopic surgery in luminal gastrointestinal emergencies. Relevant papers were selected using Medline database from 2007 to the present. These were reviewed, and outcomes were stated under the headings of appendicitis, perforated peptic ulcer, colorectal emergencies and small bowel obstruction. The laparoscopic intervention was found to be of clear benefit in most of the patients with appendicitis. Its role, however, is not absolutely clear in managing perforated peptic ulcers. Laparoscopic lavage and drainage have been recommended in diverticular perforation with limited contamination. Small case series and studies have shown benefits of laparoscopic surgery in iatrogenic colonic perforations, colonic obstruction, emergency colectomy and small bowel obstruction. Laparoscopic surgery can be recommended in appendicitis and low-risk cases of perforated peptic ulcers. Its definitive role in other conditions needs more evidence. The surgeon's experience and careful patient selection are very important to improve the outcome.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ajay Gupta
- General Surgery, Doncaster Royal Infirmary, Doncaster, South Yorkshire UK
| | - Khalid Habib
- Colorectal and Laparoscopic Surgery, Doncaster Royal Infirmary, Doncaster, South Yorkshire UK
| | - Athur Harikrishnan
- Colorectal and Laparoscopic Surgery, Doncaster Royal Infirmary, Doncaster, South Yorkshire UK
| | - Niraj Khetan
- Colorectal and Laparoscopic Surgery, Doncaster Royal Infirmary, Doncaster, South Yorkshire UK
| |
Collapse
|
|
39
|
|
|
40
|
Diagnosis and treatment of perforated or bleeding peptic ulcers: 2013 WSES position paper. World J Emerg Surg 2014; 9:45. [PMID: 25114715 PMCID: PMC4127969 DOI: 10.1186/1749-7922-9-45] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/04/2014] [Accepted: 06/26/2014] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
|
|
41
|
Di Saverio S, Bassi M, Smerieri N, Masetti M, Ferrara F, Fabbri C, Ansaloni L, Ghersi S, Serenari M, Coccolini F, Naidoo N, Sartelli M, Tugnoli G, Catena F, Cennamo V, Jovine E. Diagnosis and treatment of perforated or bleeding peptic ulcers: 2013 WSES position paper. World J Emerg Surg 2014. [PMID: 25114715 DOI: 10.1186/1749-7922-9-451749] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Salomone Di Saverio
- Emergency and General Surgery Dept, Maggiore Hospital- Bologna Local Health District, Bologna, Italy
| | - Marco Bassi
- Department of Gastroenterology and Operative Endoscopy, Maggiore Hospital- Bologna Local Health District, Bologna, Italy
| | - Nazareno Smerieri
- Emergency and General Surgery Dept, Maggiore Hospital- Bologna Local Health District, Bologna, Italy.,Liver and Multivisceral Transplantation Unit, University of Modena&Reggio Emilia - Policlinico Hospital, Modena, Italy
| | - Michele Masetti
- Emergency and General Surgery Dept, Maggiore Hospital- Bologna Local Health District, Bologna, Italy
| | - Francesco Ferrara
- Department of Gastroenterology and Operative Endoscopy, Maggiore Hospital- Bologna Local Health District, Bologna, Italy
| | - Carlo Fabbri
- Department of Gastroenterology and Operative Endoscopy, Maggiore Hospital- Bologna Local Health District, Bologna, Italy
| | - Luca Ansaloni
- General and Emergency and Trauma Surgery, I unit, Ospedali Riuniti, Bergamo, Italy
| | - Stefania Ghersi
- Department of Gastroenterology and Operative Endoscopy, Maggiore Hospital- Bologna Local Health District, Bologna, Italy
| | - Matteo Serenari
- Emergency and General Surgery Dept, Maggiore Hospital- Bologna Local Health District, Bologna, Italy
| | - Federico Coccolini
- General and Emergency and Trauma Surgery, I unit, Ospedali Riuniti, Bergamo, Italy
| | - Noel Naidoo
- Port Shepstone Regional Hospital, Port Shepstone, South Africa - Nelson R Mandela School of Medicine, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa
| | | | - Gregorio Tugnoli
- Emergency and General Surgery Dept, Maggiore Hospital- Bologna Local Health District, Bologna, Italy
| | - Fausto Catena
- Emergency and Trauma Surgery Dept., Maggiore Hospital of Parma, Parma, Italy
| | - Vincenzo Cennamo
- Department of Gastroenterology and Operative Endoscopy, Maggiore Hospital- Bologna Local Health District, Bologna, Italy
| | - Elio Jovine
- Emergency and General Surgery Dept, Maggiore Hospital- Bologna Local Health District, Bologna, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
|
42
|
Çelik MF, Dural AC, Akarsu C, Ünsal MG, Gök İ, Köneş O, Gönenç M, Alış H. The growing role of laparoscopic repair in patients with early diagnosed peptic ulcer perforation. Turk J Surg 2014; 30:120-4. [PMID: 25931911 DOI: 10.5152/ucd.2014.2640] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/05/2014] [Accepted: 03/28/2014] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Laparoscopy is gaining more importance in emergency abdominal surgery. Peptic ulcer perforation (PUP) constitutes a significant portion of surgical emergencies. The aim of this study was to evaluate the methods and results of patients who underwent surgery due to PUP in our department. MATERIAL AND METHODS Patients who were admitted to the hospital in the early period and received Graham-patch (GP) repair due to PUP from January 2009 to January 2013 were divided into two groups as laparoscopic (group L) or open (group O) surgery. Demographic data of the patients, duration of the operation, conversion to open surgery, length of hospital stay, secondary interventions, re-admissions, morbidity and mortality rates were retrospectively evaluated. Patients with conversion to open surgery were included in Group O. RESULTS Two hundred and nineteen patients were included in the study, 148 of which were in Group O (including the 47 patients with conversion), and 71 in group L. In patients with early admission, the rate of laparoscopically completed GP was 19.6% in the first year of the study, whereas this rate was 61.8% in the fourth year (p<0.001). The rate of conversion to open surgery was 50% in 2009, and 24.4% in 2012 (p=0.028). Length of hospital stay was shorter in group L (p=0.35). The complication rate was 4.2% in patients who had laparoscopic procedures, and was 6.1% in patients who underwent open surgery (p=0.57). Seventy-three percent (n=11) of re-hospitalized patients in the perioperative period (n=15) were treated conservatively. When costs related to secondary interventions and re-hospitalization were included, there was no significant difference between laparoscopic and open surgery groups in terms of cost (p=0.06). CONCLUSION Laparoscopic surgery for PUP is a reliable method and has been used increasingly over the years in our department. The operative time is longer, the length of hospital stay is shorter, the complication rates are less than open surgery, and the conversion rate is significantly reduced. Laparoscopic GP is feasible in early-admitted patients with PUP, due to the above-mentioned advantages. We believe the rate of conversion to open surgery decreases with increasing experience in laparoscopy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Muhammet Ferhat Çelik
- Department of General Surgery, Bakırköy Dr. Sadi Konuk Training and Research Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey
| | - Ahmet Cem Dural
- Department of General Surgery, Bakırköy Dr. Sadi Konuk Training and Research Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey
| | - Cevher Akarsu
- Department of General Surgery, Bakırköy Dr. Sadi Konuk Training and Research Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey
| | - Mustafa Gökhan Ünsal
- Department of General Surgery, Bakırköy Dr. Sadi Konuk Training and Research Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey
| | - İlhan Gök
- Department of General Surgery, Bakırköy Dr. Sadi Konuk Training and Research Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey
| | - Osman Köneş
- Department of General Surgery, Bakırköy Dr. Sadi Konuk Training and Research Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey
| | - Murat Gönenç
- Department of General Surgery, Bakırköy Dr. Sadi Konuk Training and Research Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey
| | - Halil Alış
- Department of General Surgery, Bakırköy Dr. Sadi Konuk Training and Research Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey
| |
Collapse
|
|
43
|
Treatment for perforated gastric ulcer: a multi-institutional retrospective review. J Gastrointest Surg 2013; 17:2074-81. [PMID: 24114679 DOI: 10.1007/s11605-013-2362-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/08/2013] [Accepted: 09/19/2013] [Indexed: 01/31/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The optimal treatment for patients with perforated gastric ulcer (PGU) remains controversial. This study therefore investigated the treatment status for this disease in clinical practice. METHODS We retrospectively reviewed 183 patients with PGU from 1998 to 2007 across 15 institutions, and analyzed patient characteristics and short- and long-term outcomes according to treatments received. RESULTS Of the 183 patients, 57 who were treated conservatively had less abdominal tenderness, lower levels of serum C-reactive protein, and shorter time to presentation than the 126 patients who underwent emergency surgery. There was no significant difference in baseline characteristics between the 41 successful patients and 16 failed patients in the conservative treatment group; however, the latter had a longer average hospital stay. Eighty-three of the emergency surgery patients who underwent gastrectomy had longer surgical times, greater blood loss, and shorter time to resumption of diet than the 57 patients undergoing stomach-preserving surgery; however, there was no significant difference in postoperative complications and hospital stay between these groups. Of 91 patients who received stomach-preserving treatment, only three had treatment failure in the long-term follow-up period. CONCLUSION Strictly selected patients should be initially considered for conservative treatment. The short-term outcomes of stomach-preserving surgery are comparable to gastrectomy; however, further evaluation of the long-term outcomes of stomach-preserving treatment is required.
Collapse
|
|
44
|
Bingener J, Ibrahim-zada I. Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery for intra-abdominal emergency conditions. Br J Surg 2013; 101:e80-9. [PMID: 24273005 DOI: 10.1002/bjs.9352] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 09/24/2013] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Patient benefits from natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) are of interest in acute-care surgery. This review provides an overview of the historical development of NOTES procedures, and addresses their current uses and limitations for intra-abdominal emergency conditions. METHODS A PubMed search was carried out for articles describing NOTES approaches for appendicectomy, percutaneous gastrostomy, hollow viscus perforation and pancreatic necrosectomy. Pertinent articles were reviewed and data on available outcomes synthesized. RESULTS Emergency conditions in surgery tax the patient's cardiovascular and respiratory systems, and fluid and electrolyte balance. The operative intervention itself leads to an inflammatory response and blood loss, thus adding to the physiological stress. NOTES provides a minimally invasive alternative access to the peritoneal cavity, avoiding abdominal wall incisions. A clear advantage to the patient is evident with the implementation of an endoscopic approach to deal with inadvertently displaced percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tubes and perforated gastroduodenal ulcer. The NOTES approach appears less invasive for patients with infected pancreatic necrosis, in whom it allows surgical debridement and avoidance of open necrosectomy. Transvaginal appendicectomy is the second most frequently performed NOTES procedure after cholecystectomy. The NOTES concept has provided a change in perspective for intramural and transmural endoscopic approaches to iatrogenic perforations during endoscopy. CONCLUSION NOTES approaches have been implemented in clinical practice over the past decade. Selected techniques offer reduced invasiveness for patients with intra-abdominal emergencies, and may improve outcomes. Steady future development and adoption of NOTES are likely to follow as technology improves and surgeons become comfortable with the approaches.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J Bingener
- Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
|
45
|
Abstract
Patients in the setting of the intensive care unit can develop intra-abdominal complications that may worsen outcome. Clinical suspicion of such complications coupled with early diagnosis and treatment may reduce morbidity and mortality associated with these processes. This article addresses the diagnosis and management of some of the common causes of intra-abdominal catastrophes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joao B Rezende-Neto
- Department of Surgery, St. Michael's Hospital, 30 Bond Street 16CC-044, Toronto, Ontario M5B1W8, Canada
| | | |
Collapse
|