The role of paracentesis in the management of infants with necrotizing enterocolitis.

IF 0.9 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY American Surgeon Pub Date : 1986-02-01
R R Ricketts
{"title":"The role of paracentesis in the management of infants with necrotizing enterocolitis.","authors":"R R Ricketts","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) is the single most common surgical emergency of the newborn. Yet the indications for surgery in NEC are still not clearly established. Pneumoperitoneum is an absolute indication for surgery. A paracentesis indicative of intestinal gangrene, prior to intestinal perforation, has also been proposed as an indication for surgery. A prospective study was conducted to answer two questions: 1) How accurate and safe is paracentesis in detecting bowel necrosis in neonates with NEC? and 2) Do infants with NEC who are operated on for a positive paracentesis have a decreased morbidity and mortality over those operated on for pneumoperitoneum? Between July 1980 through June 1984, 39 infants with definite NEC and without pneumoperitoneum underwent a paracentesis because of suspected bowel necrosis. There were no false \"positive\" taps. There were 34 \"positive\" taps in 36 infants who were proven to have bowel necrosis, for an accuracy of 94 per cent. There were two false \"negative\" taps (40%) and three true \"negative\" taps (60%). There were no complications related to the procedure. During this same time period, 68 infants with NEC were operated upon. The indication for surgery was pneumoperitoneum in 29, a \"positive\" paracentesis in 34, and other reasons in 5. A comparison was made between those operated upon for pneumoperitoneum and those operated upon for a \"positive\" paracentesis. There was no significant difference in survival between the two groups (76% versus 71%). The early and late complications and the causes of death in each group were similar. A positive paracentesis is a valid objective indication for operation in infants with NEC.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)</p>","PeriodicalId":7782,"journal":{"name":"American Surgeon","volume":"52 2","pages":"61-5"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"1986-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Surgeon","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) is the single most common surgical emergency of the newborn. Yet the indications for surgery in NEC are still not clearly established. Pneumoperitoneum is an absolute indication for surgery. A paracentesis indicative of intestinal gangrene, prior to intestinal perforation, has also been proposed as an indication for surgery. A prospective study was conducted to answer two questions: 1) How accurate and safe is paracentesis in detecting bowel necrosis in neonates with NEC? and 2) Do infants with NEC who are operated on for a positive paracentesis have a decreased morbidity and mortality over those operated on for pneumoperitoneum? Between July 1980 through June 1984, 39 infants with definite NEC and without pneumoperitoneum underwent a paracentesis because of suspected bowel necrosis. There were no false "positive" taps. There were 34 "positive" taps in 36 infants who were proven to have bowel necrosis, for an accuracy of 94 per cent. There were two false "negative" taps (40%) and three true "negative" taps (60%). There were no complications related to the procedure. During this same time period, 68 infants with NEC were operated upon. The indication for surgery was pneumoperitoneum in 29, a "positive" paracentesis in 34, and other reasons in 5. A comparison was made between those operated upon for pneumoperitoneum and those operated upon for a "positive" paracentesis. There was no significant difference in survival between the two groups (76% versus 71%). The early and late complications and the causes of death in each group were similar. A positive paracentesis is a valid objective indication for operation in infants with NEC.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
新生儿坏死性小肠结肠炎的穿刺治疗。
坏死性小肠结肠炎(NEC)是新生儿最常见的外科急诊。然而,NEC的手术适应症仍未明确确立。气腹是手术的绝对指征。在肠穿孔之前,肠坏疽的穿刺也被建议作为手术的指征。一项前瞻性研究旨在回答两个问题:1)穿刺检查NEC新生儿肠坏死的准确性和安全性如何?2)与因气腹手术的婴儿相比,因穿刺阳性手术的NEC婴儿的发病率和死亡率是否降低?1980年7月至1984年6月,39名确诊NEC且无气腹的婴儿因怀疑肠坏死而接受了穿刺。没有假的“阳性”窃听。在36名被证实患有肠坏死的婴儿中,有34次“阳性”检查,准确率为94%。有2次假“阴性”检查(40%)和3次真“阴性”检查(60%)。没有与手术相关的并发症。在同一时期,68名NEC患儿接受了手术。手术指征为气腹29例,穿刺“阳性”34例,其他原因5例。比较了气腹手术和“阳性”穿刺术的手术。两组患者的生存率无显著差异(76%对71%)。各组早、晚期并发症及死亡原因相似。穿刺阳性是NEC患儿手术的客观有效指征。(摘要删节250字)
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
American Surgeon
American Surgeon 医学-外科
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
623
期刊介绍: The American Surgeon is a monthly peer-reviewed publication published by the Southeastern Surgical Congress. Its area of concentration is clinical general surgery, as defined by the content areas of the American Board of Surgery: alimentary tract (including bariatric surgery), abdomen and its contents, breast, skin and soft tissue, endocrine system, solid organ transplantation, pediatric surgery, surgical critical care, surgical oncology (including head and neck surgery), trauma and emergency surgery, and vascular surgery.
期刊最新文献
Is It Possible to Prevent Nontherapeutic Laparotomies in Breast Cancer Patients With Isolated Adnexal Masses? Protocolized Gastrointestinal Fistula Management is Superior to Historic Data and National Averages: A Retrospective Review of an Enterocutaneous Fistula Registry. Comparing the Distressed Communities Index and Area Deprivation Index in Predicting Firearm-Related Emergency Department Visits. Pre-Trauma THC Use Is Associated With a Positive Posttraumatic Adjustment Scale Screening. Assessment of Online Patient Education Materials for Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1