World Journal of Emergency Surgery最新文献

Background: Surgical pancreatic necrosectomy (SPN) is an option for the management of infected pancreatic necrosis. The literature indicates that an escalating, combined endoscopic, interventional radiology and minimally invasive surgery "step-up" approach, such as video-assisted retroperitoneal debridement, may reduce the number of required SPNs and ICU complications, such as multiple organ failure. We hypothesized that complications for surgically treated severe necrotizing pancreatitis patients decreased during the period of adoption of the "step-up" approach.

Methods: The American college of surgeons national surgery quality improvement program database (ACS-NSQIP) was used to find SPN cases from 2007 to 2019 in ACS-NSQIP submitting hospitals. Mortality and Clavien-Dindo class 4 (CD4) ICU complications were collected. Predictors of outcomes were identified by univariate and multivariate analyses.

Results: There were 2457 SPN cases. SPN cases decreased from 0.09% in 2007 to 0.01% in 2019 of NSQIP operative cases (p < 0.001). Overall mortality was 8.5% and did not decrease with time. CD4 complications decreased from 40 to 27% (p < 0.001). There was a 65% reduction in SPN cases requiring a return to the operating room. Multivariate predictors of complications were emergency general surgery (EGS, p < 0.001), serum albumin (p < 0.0001) and modified frailty index (mFI) (p < 0.0001). Multivariate predictors of mortality were EGS (p < 0.0001), serum albumin (p < 0.0001), and mFI (p < 0.04). The mFI decreased after 2010 (p < 0.001).

Conclusion: SPNs decreased after 2010, with decreasing CD4 complications, decreasing reoperation rates and stable mortality rates, likely indicating broad adoption of a "step-up" approach. Larger, prospective studies to compare indications and outcomes for "step up" versus open SPN are warranted.

Objective: To confirm the safety and efficacy of outpatient management of laparoscopic appendectomy, with an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol, in adult patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy is feasible and secure in selected patients in observational studies. The benefits include reduced length of stay (LOS) and postoperative complications. This is the first randomized controlled trial of outpatient management following ERAS protocol.

Methods: Patients admitted from the emergency department with acute appendicitis were randomized into one of two groups: standard care within the hospital (HG) or the outpatient group (OG). An ERAS protocol was followed for both groups. Patients in the HG were admitted to the surgical ward. Patients in the OG were referred to the day-surgery unit. The primary endpoint was the length of stay.

Results: Ninety-seven patients were included: 49 in the OG and 48 in the HG. LOS was significantly shorter in the OG (mean 8.82 h) than in the HG (mean 43.53 h), p < 0.001. There was no difference in readmission rates (p = 0.320); we observed only one readmission in the OG. No further emergency consultations or complications were observed. The cost saving was $516.52/patient as a result of the intervention.

Conclusion: Outpatient management of appendectomy is safe and feasible procedure in selected patients. This approach could become the standard of care for patients with uncomplicated appendicitis, showing fewer complications, lower LOS and cost.

Trial registration: Registration: www.

Clinicaltrials: gov (NCT05401188) Clinical Trial ID: NCT05401188.

Introduction: Complications secondary to spilled gallstones can be classified in the category of disease of medical progress because prior to advent of laparoscopic cholecystectomy very few reports published on the topic. The aim of the present study was to investigate the predisposing factors and the complication rate of spilled gallstones during laparoscopic cholecystectomy over the past 21 years.

Methods: Embase, Pubmed, Medline, Google scholar and Cochrane library were systematically searched for pertinent literature.

Results: Seventy five out of 181 articles were selected including 85 patients; of those 38% were men and 62% women. The median age of the cohort was 64 years old and ranged between 33 and 87 years. Only 23(27%) of the authors reported the incident of spillage of the gallstones during the operation. Time of onset of symptoms varied widely from the second postoperative day to 15 years later. Ten of 85 patients were asymptomatic and diagnosed with spilled gallstones incidentally. The rest of the patients presented with complications of severe morbidity and almost, 87% of the patients needed to be treated with surgical intervention and 12% with US ± CT scan guidance drainage. Only one perioperative death reported.

Conclusions: Symptomatic patients with lost gallstones present with severe morbidity complications and required mostly major surgical procedures. Therefore, standardisation of the management of spilled gallstones is needed urgently. Hospitals need to review their policy with audits and recommendations and clinical guidelines are needed urgently.

Background: There is no sufficient overview of outcomes in right-sided and left-sided colonic diverticulitis (CD) following non-operative management. This systematic review was conducted to evaluate the recurrence/treatment failure in right-sided and left-sided CD.

Methods: A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library from inception to Dec 2021 were searched. The study characteristics, recurrence/treatment failure, and risk factors for recurrence/treatment failure were extracted. Proportional meta-analyses were performed to calculate the pooled recurrent/treatment failure rate of right-sided and left-sided CD using the random effect model. Logistic regression was applied for the factors associated with the recurrence/treatment failure.

Results: Thirty-eight studies with 10,129 patients were included, and only two studies comprised both sides of CD. None of the studies had a high risk of bias although significant heterogeneity existed. The pooled recurrence rate was 10% (95% CI 8-13%, I² = 86%, p < 0.01) in right-sided and 20% (95% CI 16-24%, I² = 92%, p < 0.01) in left-sided CD. For the uncomplicated CD, the pooled recurrence rate was 9% (95% CI 6-13%, I² = 77%, p < 0.01) in right-sided and 15% (95% CI 8-27%, I² = 97%, p < 0.01) in the left-sided. Age and gender were not associated with the recurrence of both sides. The treatment failure rate was 5% (95% CI 2-10%, I² = 84%, p < 0.01) in right-sided and 4% (95% CI 2-7%, I² = 80%, p < 0.01) in left-sided CD. The risk factors for recurrence and treatment failure were limited.

Conclusion: Non-operative management is effective with low rates of recurrence and treatment failure for both right-sided and left-sided CD although left-sided exhibits a higher recurrence. The recurrence rates did not differ between patients receiving antibiotics or not in uncomplicated CD. Age and sex were not associated with the recurrence although other risk factors were dispersing. Further risk factors for recurrence and treatment failure would be investigated for precise clinical decision-making and individualized strategy.

Introduction: Bariatric surgery revisions and emergencies are associated with higher morbidity and mortality compared to primary bariatric surgery. No formal outcome benchmarks exist that distinguish MBSAQIP-accredited centers in the community from unaccredited institutions.

Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted on 53 bariatric surgery revisions and 61 bariatric surgical emergencies by a single surgeon at a high-volume community hospital accredited program from 2018 to 2020. Primary outcomes were complications or deaths occurring within 30-days of the index procedure. Secondary outcomes included operative time, leaks, surgical site occurrences (SSOs), and deep surgical site infections.

Results: There were no significant differences in the demographic characteristics of the study groups. Mean operative time was significantly longer for revisions as compared to emergency operations (149.5 vs. 89.4 min). Emergencies had higher surgical site infection (5.7% vs. 21.3%, p < 0.05) and surgical site occurrence (SSO) (1.9% vs. 29.5%, p < 0.05) rates compared to revisions. Logistic regression analysis identified several factors to be predictive of increased risk of morbidity: pre-operative albumin < 3.5 g/dL (p < 0.05), recent bariatric procedure within the last 30 days (p < 0.05), prior revisional bariatric surgery (p < 0.05), prior duodenal switch (p < 0.05), and pre-operative COPD (p < 0.05).

Conclusion: Bariatric surgery revisions and emergencies have similar morbidity and mortality, far exceeding those of the primary operation. Outcomes comparable to those reported by urban academic centers can be achieved in community hospital MBSAQIP-accredited centers.

Acute mesenteric ischemia (AMI) is a group of diseases characterized by an interruption of the blood supply to varying portions of the intestine, leading to ischemia and secondary inflammatory changes. If untreated, this process may progress to life-threatening intestinal necrosis. The incidence is low, estimated at 0.09-0.2% of all acute surgical admissions, but increases with age. Although the entity is an uncommon cause of abdominal pain, diligence is required because if untreated, mortality remains in the range of 50%. Early diagnosis and timely surgical intervention are the cornerstones of modern treatment to reduce the high mortality associated with this entity. The advent of endovascular approaches in parallel with modern imaging techniques is evolving and provides new treatment options. Lastly, a focused multidisciplinary approach based on early diagnosis and individualized treatment is essential. Thus, we believe that updated guidelines from World Society of Emergency Surgery are warranted, in order to provide the most recent and practical recommendations for diagnosis and treatment of AMI.

Introduction: Laparoscopic colectomy is rarely performed for ischemic colitis. The aim of this propensity score-matched study was to compare preoperative characteristics, intraoperative details and short-term outcomes for emergent laparoscopic colectomy versus the traditional open approach for patients with ischemic colitis.

Methods: Retrospective review of 96 patients who underwent emergent colectomy for ischemic colitis between January 2011 and December 2020 (39 via laparoscopy, 57 via laparotomy) was performed. We compared short-term outcomes after using a one-to-one ratio and nearest-neighbor propensity score matching to obtain similar preoperative and intraoperative parameters in each group.

Results: Patients in the open group experienced more surgical site complications (52.6% vs. 23.0%, p = 0.004), more intra-abdominal abscesses (47.3% vs. 17.9%, p = 0.003), longer need for ventilator support (20 days vs. 0 days, p < 0.001), more major complications (77.2% vs. 43.5%, p = 0.001), higher mortality (49.1% vs. 20.5%, p = 0.004), and longer hospital stay (32 days vs. 19 days, p = 0.001). After propensity score matching (31 patients in each group), patients undergoing open (vs. laparoscopy) had more surgical site complications (45.1% vs. 19.4%, p = 0.030) and required longer ventilator support (14 vs. 3 days, p = 0.039). After multivariate analysis, Charlson Comorbidity Index (p = 0.024), APACHE II score (p = 0.001), and Favier's classification (p = 0.023) were independent predictors of mortality.

Conclusions: Laparoscopic emergent colectomy for ischemic colitis is feasible and is associated with fewer surgical site complications and better respiratory function, compared to the open approach.

Background: In 2017, the World Society of Emergency Surgery published its guidelines for the management of adult and pediatric patients with splenic trauma. Several issues regarding the follow-up of patients with splenic injuries treated with NOM remained unsolved.

Methods: Using a modified Delphi method, we sought to explore ongoing areas of controversy in the NOM of splenic trauma and reach a consensus among a group of 48 international experts from five continents (Africa, Europe, Asia, Oceania, America) concerning optimal follow-up strategies in patients with splenic injuries treated with NOM.

Results: Consensus was reached on eleven clinical research questions and 28 recommendations with an agreement rate ≥ 80%. Mobilization after 24 h in low-grade splenic trauma patients (WSES Class I, AAST Grades I-II) was suggested, while in patients with high-grade splenic injuries (WSES Classes II-III, AAST Grades III-V), if no other contraindications to early mobilization exist, safe mobilization of the patient when three successive hemoglobins 8 h apart after the first are within 10% of each other was considered safe according to the panel. The panel suggests adult patients to be admitted to hospital for 1 day (for low-grade splenic injuries-WSES Class I, AAST Grades I-II) to 3 days (for high-grade splenic injuries-WSES Classes II-III, AAST Grades III-V), with those with high-grade injuries requiring admission to a monitored setting. In the absence of specific complications, the panel suggests DVT and VTE prophylaxis with LMWH to be started within 48-72 h from hospital admission. The panel suggests splenic artery embolization (SAE) as the first-line intervention in patients with hemodynamic stability and arterial blush on CT scan, irrespective of injury grade. Regarding patients with WSES Class II blunt splenic injuries (AAST Grade III) without contrast extravasation, a low threshold for SAE has been suggested in the presence of risk factors for NOM failure. The panel also suggested angiography and eventual SAE in all hemodynamically stable adult patients with WSES Class III injuries (AAST Grades IV-V), even in the absence of CT blush, especially when concomitant surgery that requires change of position is needed. Follow-up imaging with contrast-enhanced ultrasound/CT scan in 48-72 h post-admission of trauma in splenic injuries WSES Class II (AAST Grade III) or higher treated with NOM was considered the best strategy for timely detection of vascular complications.

Conclusion: This consensus document could help guide future prospective studies aiming at validating the suggested strategies through the implementation of prospective trauma databases and the subsequent production of internationally endorsed guidelines on the issue.

Background: Patients presenting with acute abdominal pain that occurs after months or years following bariatric surgery may present for assessment and management in the local emergency units. Due to the large variety of surgical bariatric techniques, emergency surgeons have to be aware of the main functional outcomes and long-term surgical complications following the most performed bariatric surgical procedures. The purpose of these evidence-based guidelines is to present a consensus position from members of the WSES in collaboration with IFSO bariatric experienced surgeons, on the management of acute abdomen after bariatric surgery focusing on long-term complications in patients who have undergone laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.

Method: A working group of experienced general, acute care, and bariatric surgeons was created to carry out a systematic review of the literature following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) and to answer the PICO questions formulated after the Operative management in bariatric acute abdomen survey. The literature search was limited to late/long-term complications following laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.

Conclusions: The acute abdomen after bariatric surgery is a common cause of admission in emergency departments. Knowledge of the most common late/long-term complications (> 4 weeks after surgical procedure) following sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and their anatomy leads to a focused management in the emergency setting with good outcomes and decreased morbidity and mortality rates. A close collaboration between emergency surgeons, radiologists, endoscopists, and anesthesiologists is mandatory in the management of this group of patients in the emergency setting.