| 1. |
- Bass, Gary Alan, 1979-, et al.
(author)
-
Techniques for mesoappendix transection and appendix resection: insights from the ESTES SnapAppy study
- 2023
-
In: European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1863-9933 .- 1615-3146 .- 1863-9941. ; 49, s. 17-32
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Introduction: Surgically managed appendicitis exhibits great heterogeneity in techniques for mesoappendix transection and appendix amputation from its base. It is unclear whether a particular surgical technique provides outcome benefit or reduces complications. Material and methods: We undertook a pre-specified subgroup analysis of all patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy at index admission during SnapAppy (ClinicalTrials.gov Registration: NCT04365491). We collected routine, anonymized observational data regarding surgical technique, patient demographics and indices of disease severity, without change to clinical care pathway or usual surgeon preference. Outcome measures of interest were the incidence of complications, unplanned reoperation, readmission, admission to the ICU, death, hospital length of stay, and procedure duration. We used Poisson regression models with robust standard errors to calculate incident rate ratios (IRRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: Three-thousand seven hundred sixty-eight consecutive adult patients, included from 71 centers in 14 countries, were followed up from date of admission for 90days. The mesoappendix was divided hemostatically using electrocautery in 1564(69.4%) and an energy device in 688(30.5%). The appendix was amputated by division of its base between looped ligatures in 1379(37.0%), with a stapler in 1421(38.1%) and between clips in 929(24.9%). The technique for securely dividing the appendix at its base in acutely inflamed (AAST Grade 1) appendicitis was equally divided between division between looped ligatures, clips and stapled transection. However, the technique used differed in complicated appendicitis (AAST Grade 2 +) compared with uncomplicated (Grade 1), with a shift toward transection of the appendix base by stapler (58% vs. 38%; p < 0.001). While no statistical difference in outcomes could be detected between different techniques for division of appendix base, decreased risk of any [adjusted IRR (95% CI): 0.58 (0.41–0.82), p = 0.002] and severe [adjusted IRR (95% CI): 0.33 (0.11–0.96), p = 0.045] complications could be detected when using energy devices. Conclusions: Safe mesoappendix transection and appendix resection are accomplished using heterogeneous techniques. Technique selection for both mesoappendix transection and appendix resection correlates with AAST grade. Higher grade led to more ultrasonic tissue transection and stapled appendix resection. Higher AAST appendicitis grade also correlated with infection-related complication occurrence. Despite the overall well-tolerated heterogeneity of approaches to acute appendicitis, increasing disease acuity or complexity appears to encourage homogeneity of intraoperative surgical technique toward advanced adjuncts.
|
|
| 2. |
- Forssten, Maximilian Peter, 1996-, et al.
(author)
-
Surgical management of acute appendicitis during the European COVID-19 second wave: safe and effective
- 2023
-
In: European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1863-9933 .- 1615-3146 .- 1863-9941. ; 49, s. 57-67
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Introduction: The COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic drove acute care surgeons to pivot from long established practice patterns. Early safety concerns regarding increased postoperative complication risk in those with active COVID infection promoted antibiotic-driven non-operative therapy for select conditions ahead of an evidence-base. Our study assesses whether active or recent SARS-CoV-2 positivity increases hospital length of stay (LOS) or postoperative complications following appendectomy. Methods: Data were derived from the prospective multi-institutional observational SnapAppy cohort study. This preplanned data analysis assessed consecutive patients aged ≥ 15years who underwent appendectomy for appendicitis (November 2020–May 2021). Patients were categorized based on SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity: no infection, active infection, and prior infection. Appendectomy method, LOS, and complications were abstracted. The association between SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity and complications was determined using Poisson regression, while the association with LOS was calculated using a quantile regression model. Results: Appendectomy for acute appendicitis was performed in 4047 patients during the second and third European COVID waves. The majority were SARS-CoV-2 uninfected (3861, 95.4%), while 70 (1.7%) were acutely SARS-CoV-2 positive, and 116 (2.8%) reported prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. After confounder adjustment, there was no statistically significant association between SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity and LOS, any complication, or severe complications. Conclusion: During sequential SARS-CoV-2 infection waves, neither active nor prior SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with prolonged hospital LOS or postoperative complication. Despite early concerns regarding postoperative safety and outcome during active SARS-CoV-2 infection, no such association was noted for those with appendicitis who underwent operative management.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Di Saverio, Salomone, et al.
(author)
-
Diagnosis and treatment of acute appendicitis: 2020 update of the WSES Jerusalem guidelines
- 2020
-
In: World Journal of Emergency Surgery. - : BMC. - 1749-7922. ; 15:1
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background and aims Acute appendicitis (AA) is among the most common causes of acute abdominal pain. Diagnosis of AA is still challenging and some controversies on its management are still present among different settings and practice patterns worldwide. In July 2015, the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) organized in Jerusalem the first consensus conference on the diagnosis and treatment of AA in adult patients with the intention of producing evidence-based guidelines. An updated consensus conference took place in Nijemegen in June 2019 and the guidelines have now been updated in order to provide evidence-based statements and recommendations in keeping with varying clinical practice: use of clinical scores and imaging in diagnosing AA, indications and timing for surgery, use of non-operative management and antibiotics, laparoscopy and surgical techniques, intra-operative scoring, and peri-operative antibiotic therapy. Methods This executive manuscript summarizes the WSES guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of AA. Literature search has been updated up to 2019 and statements and recommendations have been developed according to the GRADE methodology. The statements were voted, eventually modified, and finally approved by the participants to the consensus conference and by the board of co-authors, using a Delphi methodology for voting whenever there was controversy on a statement or a recommendation. Several tables highlighting the research topics and questions, search syntaxes, and the statements and the WSES evidence-based recommendations are provided. Finally, two different practical clinical algorithms are provided in the form of a flow chart for both adults and pediatric (< 16 years old) patients. Conclusions The 2020 WSES guidelines on AA aim to provide updated evidence-based statements and recommendations on each of the following topics: (1) diagnosis, (2) non-operative management for uncomplicated AA, (3) timing of appendectomy and in-hospital delay, (4) surgical treatment, (5) intra-operative grading of AA, (6) ,management of perforated AA with phlegmon or abscess, and (7) peri-operative antibiotic therapy.
|
|
| 5. |
- Farhadfar, Nosha, et al.
(author)
-
Impact of autologous blood transfusion after bone marrow harvest on unrelated donor's health and outcome : a CIBMTR analysis
- 2020
-
In: Bone Marrow Transplantation. - : SPRINGERNATURE. - 0268-3369 .- 1476-5365. ; 55:11, s. 2121-2131
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Pre-harvest autologous blood collection from bone marrow (BM) donors is performed to meet potential post-operative transfusion needs. This study examines the impact of autologous blood transfusion on BM donor's health and safety. The study included first-time unrelated BM donors from the United States whose BM harvest was facilitated by the National Marrow Donor Program (NMDP) centers between 2006 and 2017. Examination of 7024 BM donors revealed that 60% received at least one unit of autologous blood. The donors who received autologous blood were older, had lower hemoglobin pre-harvest, underwent longer duration of anesthesia, and higher volume BM harvest. Only donors who underwent high-volume BM harvest, defined as a BM harvest volume >27% of donor's blood volume, benefited from autologous transfusion. After a high-volume BM harvest, autologous blood transfusion was shown to decrease grade 2 to 4 collection-associated toxicities within 48 h of BM donation (p = 0.010) and shorten the time to donor-reported "complete" recovery from donation-associated symptoms (p < 0.001). Therefore, autologous transfusion could be avoided as support of marrow donation in the majority of unrelated BM donors and should be limited to cases where the planned BM harvest volume is expected to exceed 27% of donor's blood volume.
|
|
| 6. |
- Jacobs, Rita, et al.
(author)
-
Fluid Management, Intra-Abdominal Hypertension and the Abdominal Compartment Syndrome : A Narrative Review
- 2022
-
In: Life. - : MDPI AG. - 0024-3019 .- 2075-1729. ; 12:9
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: General pathophysiological mechanisms regarding associations between fluid administration and intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) are evident, but specific effects of type, amount, and timing of fluids are less clear. Objectives: This review aims to summarize current knowledge on associations between fluid administration and intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) and fluid management in patients at risk of intra-abdominal hypertension and abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS). Methods: We performed a structured literature search from 1950 until May 2021 to identify evidence of associations between fluid management and intra-abdominal pressure not limited to any specific study or patient population. Findings were summarized based on the following information: general concepts of fluid management, physiology of fluid movement in patients with intra-abdominal hypertension, and data on associations between fluid administration and IAH. Results: We identified three randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 38 prospective observational studies, 29 retrospective studies, 18 case reports in adults, two observational studies and 10 case reports in children, and three animal studies that addressed associations between fluid administration and IAH. Associations between fluid resuscitation and IAH were confirmed in most studies. Fluid resuscitation contributes to the development of IAH. However, patients with IAH receive more fluids to manage the effect of IAH on other organ systems, thereby causing a vicious cycle. Timing and approach to de-resuscitation are of utmost importance, but clear indicators to guide this decision-making process are lacking. In selected cases, only surgical decompression of the abdomen can stop deterioration and prevent further morbidity and mortality. Conclusions: Current evidence confirms an association between fluid resuscitation and secondary IAH, but optimal fluid management strategies for patients with IAH remain controversial.
|
|
| 7. |
- Kirkpatrick, Andrew W, et al.
(author)
-
Intra-abdominal hypertension and the abdominal compartment syndrome : updated consensus definitions and clinical practice guidelines from the World Society of the Abdominal Compartment Syndrome
- 2013
-
In: Intensive Care Medicine. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0342-4642 .- 1432-1238. ; 39:7, s. 1190-1206
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- PURPOSE:To update the World Society of the Abdominal Compartment Syndrome (WSACS) consensus definitions and management statements relating to intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) and the abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS).METHODS:We conducted systematic or structured reviews to identify relevant studies relating to IAH or ACS. Updated consensus definitions and management statements were then derived using a modified Delphi method and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) guidelines, respectively. Quality of evidence was graded from high (A) to very low (D) and management statements from strong RECOMMENDATIONS (desirable effects clearly outweigh potential undesirable ones) to weaker SUGGESTIONS (potential risks and benefits of the intervention are less clear).RESULTS:In addition to reviewing the consensus definitions proposed in 2006, the WSACS defined the open abdomen, lateralization of the abdominal musculature, polycompartment syndrome, and abdominal compliance, and proposed an open abdomen classification system. RECOMMENDATIONS included intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) measurement, avoidance of sustained IAH, protocolized IAP monitoring and management, decompressive laparotomy for overt ACS, and negative pressure wound therapy and efforts to achieve same-hospital-stay fascial closure among patients with an open abdomen. SUGGESTIONS included use of medical therapies and percutaneous catheter drainage for treatment of IAH/ACS, considering the association between body position and IAP, attempts to avoid a positive fluid balance after initial patient resuscitation, use of enhanced ratios of plasma to red blood cells and prophylactic open abdominal strategies, and avoidance of routine early biologic mesh use among patients with open abdominal wounds. NO RECOMMENDATIONS were possible regarding monitoring of abdominal perfusion pressure or the use of diuretics, renal replacement therapies, albumin, or acute component-parts separation.CONCLUSION: Although IAH and ACS are common and frequently associated with poor outcomes, the overall quality of evidence available to guide development of RECOMMENDATIONS was generally low. Appropriately designed intervention trials are urgently needed for patients with IAH and ACS.
|
|
| 8. |
- Kirkpatrick, Andrew W., et al.
(author)
-
Methodological background and strategy for the 2012-2013 updated consensus definitions and clinical practice guidelines from the abdominal compartment society
- 2015
-
In: ANAESTHESIOLOGY INTENSIVE THERAPY. - 1642-5758. ; 47, s. S63-S77
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The Abdominal Compartment Society (www.wsacs.org) previously created highly cited Consensus Definitions/Management Guidelines related to intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) and abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS). Implicit in this previous work, was a commitment to regularly reassess and update in relation to evolving research. Two years preceding the Fifth World Congress on Abdominal Compartment Syndrome, an International Guidelines committee began preparation. An oversight/steering committee formulated key clinical questions regarding IAH//ACS based on polling of the Executive to redundancy, structured according to the Patient, Intervention, Comparator, and Outcome (PICO) format. Scientific consultations were obtained from Methodological GRADE experts and a series of educational teleconferences were conducted to educate scientific review teams from among the wscacs. org membership. Each team conducted systematic or structured reviews to identify relevant studies and prepared evidence summaries and draft Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) recommendations. The evidence and draft recommendations were presented and debated in person over four days. Updated consensus definitions and management statements were derived using a modified Delphi method. A writing committee subsequently compiled the results utilizing frequent Internet discussion and Delphi voting methods to compile a robust online Master Report and a concise peer-reviewed summarizing publication. A dedicated Paediatric Guidelines Subcommittee reviewed all recommendations and either accepted or revised them for appropriateness in children. Of the original 12 IAH/ACS definitions proposed in 2006, three (25%) were accepted unanimously, with four (33%) accepted by >80%, and four (33%) accepted by >50%, but required discussion to produce revised definitions. One (8%) was rejected by >50%. In addition to previous 2006 definitions, the panel also defined the open abdomen, lateralization of the abdominal musculature, polycompartment syndrome, abdominal compliance, and suggested a refined open abdomen classification system. Recommendations were possible regarding intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) measurement, approach to sustained IAH, philosophy of protocolized IAP management and same-hospital-stay fascial closure, use of decompressive laparotomy, and negative pressure wound therapy. Consensus suggestions included use of non-invasive therapies for treating IAH/ACS, considering body position and IAP, damage control resuscitation, prophylactic open abdomen usage, and prudence in early biological mesh usage. No recommendations were made for the use of diuretics, albumin, renal replacement therapies, and utilizing abdominal perfusion pressure as a resuscitation-endpoint. Collaborating Methodological Guideline Development and Clinical Experts produced Consensus Definitions/Clinical Management statements encompassing the most contemporary evidence. Data summaries now exist for clinically relevant IAH/ACS questions, which will facilitate future scientific reanalysis.
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
- Bass, Gary Alan, 1979-, et al.
(author)
-
European society for trauma and emergency surgery member-identified research priorities in emergency surgery : a roadmap for future clinical research opportunities
- 2024
-
In: European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery. - : Urban und Vogel Medien und Medizin Verlagsgesellsc. - 1863-9933 .- 1863-9941. ; 50:2, s. 367-382
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: European Society for Trauma and Emergency Surgery (ESTES) is the European community of clinicians providing care to the injured and critically ill surgical patient. ESTES has several interlinked missions - (1) the promotion of optimal emergency surgical care through networked advocacy, (2) promulgation of relevant clinical cognitive and technical skills, and (3) the advancement of scientific inquiry that closes knowledge gaps, iteratively improves upon surgical and perioperative practice, and guides decision-making rooted in scientific evidence. Faced with multitudinous opportunities for clinical research, ESTES undertook an exercise to determine member priorities for surgical research in the short-to-medium term; these research priorities were presented to a panel of experts to inform a 'road map' narrative review which anchored these research priorities in the contemporary surgical literature.METHODS: Individual ESTES members in active emergency surgery practice were polled as a representative sample of end-users and were asked to rank potential areas of future research according to their personal perceptions of priority. Using the modified eDelphi method, an invited panel of ESTES-associated experts in academic emergency surgery then crafted a narrative review highlighting potential research priorities for the Society.RESULTS: Seventy-two responding ESTES members from 23 countries provided feedback to guide the modified eDelphi expert consensus narrative review. Experts then crafted evidence-based mini-reviews highlighting knowledge gaps and areas of interest for future clinical research in emergency surgery: timing of surgery, inter-hospital transfer, diagnostic imaging in emergency surgery, the role of minimally-invasive surgical techniques and Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols, patient-reported outcome measures, risk-stratification methods, disparities in access to care, geriatric outcomes, data registry and snapshot audit evaluations, emerging technologies interrogation, and the delivery and benchmarking of emergency surgical training.CONCLUSIONS: This manuscript presents the priorities for future clinical research in academic emergency surgery as determined by a sample of the membership of ESTES. While the precise basis for prioritization was not evident, it may be anchored in disease prevalence, controversy around aspects of current patient care, or indeed the identification of a knowledge gap. These expert-crafted evidence-based mini-reviews provide useful insights that may guide the direction of future academic emergency surgery research efforts.
|
|
| 11. |
- De Waele, Jan J, et al.
(author)
-
How to deal with an open abdomen?
- 2015
-
In: Anaesthesiology intensive therapy. - 1731-2515. ; 47:4, s. 372-378
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Appropriate open abdomen treatment is one of the key elements in the management of patients who require decompressive laparotomy or in whom the abdomen is left open prophylactically. Apart from fluid control and protection from external injury, fluid evacuation and facilitation of early closure are now the goals of open abdomen treatment. Abdominal negative pressure therapy has emerged as the most appropriate method to reach these goals. Especially when combined with strategies that allow progressive approximation of the fascial edges, high closure rates can be obtained. Intra-abdominal pressure measurement can be used to guide the surgical strategy and continued attention to intra-abdominal hypertension is necessary. This paper reviews recent advances as well as identifying the remaining challenges in patients requiring open abdomen treatment. The new classification system of the open abdomen is an important tool to use when comparing the efficacy of different strategies, as well as different systems of temporary abdominal closure.
|
|
| 12. |
- Di Saverio, Salomone, et al.
(author)
-
WSES Jerusalem guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of acute appendicitis
- 2016
-
In: World Journal of Emergency Surgery. - : BIOMED CENTRAL LTD. - 1749-7922. ; 11:34
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Acute appendicitis (AA) is among the most common cause of acute abdominal pain. Diagnosis of AA is challenging; a variable combination of clinical signs and symptoms has been used together with laboratory findings in several scoring systems proposed for suggesting the probability of AA and the possible subsequent management pathway. The role of imaging in the diagnosis of AA is still debated, with variable use of US, CT and MRI in different settings worldwide. Up to date, comprehensive clinical guidelines for diagnosis and management of AA have never been issued. In July 2015, during the 3rd World Congress of the WSES, held in Jerusalem (Israel), a panel of experts including an Organizational Committee and Scientific Committee and Scientific Secretariat, participated to a Consensus Conference where eight panelists presented a number of statements developed for each of the eight main questions about diagnosis and management of AA. The statements were then voted, eventually modified and finally approved by the participants to The Consensus Conference and lately by the board of co-authors. The current paper is reporting the definitive Guidelines Statements on each of the following topics: 1) Diagnostic efficiency of clinical scoring systems, 2) Role of Imaging, 3) Non-operative treatment for uncomplicated appendicitis, 4) Timing of appendectomy and in-hospital delay, 5) Surgical treatment 6) Scoring systems for intra-operative grading of appendicitis and their clinical usefulness 7) Non-surgical treatment for complicated appendicitis: abscess or phlegmon 8) Pre-operative and post-operative antibiotics.
|
|
| 13. |
- Farhadfar, Nosha, et al.
(author)
-
Weighty choices : selecting optimal G-CSF doses for stem cell mobilization to optimize yield
- 2020
-
In: Blood Advances. - : AMER SOC HEMATOLOGY. - 2473-9529 .- 2473-9537. ; 4:4, s. 706-716
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- There are limited data on the effect of donor body mass index (BMI) on peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) mobilization response to granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), especially in unrelated donors. Obesity has been associated with persistent leukocytosis, elevated circulating progenitor cells, and enhanced stem cell mobilization. Therefore, we hypothesized that adequate collection of CD34(+) cells may be achieved with lower doses (per kilogram of body weight) of G-CSF in donors with higher BMI compared with donors with lower BMI. Using the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research database, we evaluated the impact of donor BMI on G-CSF-mobilized PBSC yield in healthy unrelated donors. We examined 20 884 PBSC donations collected at National Marrow Donor Program centers between 2006 and 2016. We found significantly higher collection yields in obese and severely obese donors compared with normal and overweight donors. An increase in average daily G-CSF dose was associated with an increase in stem cell yield in donors with normal or overweight BMI. In contrast, an increase in average daily G-CSF dose beyond 780 mu g per day in obese and 900 mg per day in severely obese donors did not increase cell yield. Pain and toxicities were assessed at baseline, during G-CSF administration, and postcollection. Obesity was associated with higher levels of self-reported donation-related pain and toxicities in the pericollection and early postdonation recovery periods. This study suggests a maximum effective G-CSF dose for PBSC mobilization in obese and severely obese donors, beyond which higher doses of G-CSF add no increased yield.
|
|
| 14. |
- Hsu, Jack W., et al.
(author)
-
Collection of Peripheral Blood Progenitor Cells in 1 Day Is Associated with Decreased Donor Toxicity Compared to 2 Days in Unrelated Donors
- 2020
-
In: Biology of blood and marrow transplantation. - : Elsevier BV. - 1083-8791 .- 1523-6536. ; 26:6, s. 1210-1217
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Peripheral blood stem cells (PBSCs) have been increasingly used for allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation instead of bone marrow stem cells. Current National Marrow Donor Program policy recommends 5 days of daily filgrastim, followed by either 1 or 2 days of apheresis for unrelated donors, depending on collection center choice. To date, there are no published studies comparing the differences in donor experience between 1 day and 2 days of apheresis. We examined 22,348 adult unrelated donor collections in 184 centers between 2006 and 2016. Of these 22,348 donors, 20,004 (89.5%) had collection on 1 day, and the other 2344 (9.5%) had collection over 2 days. Information on why donors underwent apheresis in 1 day or 2 days was not available. Donors who underwent apheresis in 1 day were more likely to be male (67% versus 46%; P < .001), younger (age <30 years, 48% versus 36%; P < .001), and have a higher body weight (83.0 kg versus 75.9 kg; P< .001) and body mass index (BMI; >30, 30% versus 22%; P < .001). Successful collection of the requested CD34(+) cell count was achieved on the first day in 82% of 1-day collections and in 16% of 2-day collections. Despite not administering filgrastim the evening after the first day of collection in patients who underwent 2 days of apheresis, the median concentration of CD34' cells/I, in the product was higher on the second day of apheresis compared with the first day (23.8 x 10(6) CD34(+)/L. on day 1 versus 28.7 x 10(6) CD34(+)/L. on day 2; P< .001). Donors who underwent collection in 1 day were less likely to experience citrate toxicity (36% versus 52%; P< .001), hospitalization (1% versus 6%; P< .001), and other side effects related to apheresis (Modified Toxicity Criteria incidence: 20% versus 26%; P < .001). Female sex, older age, collection via central lines, and higher BMI were factors associated with greater likelihood for the development of toxicity, whereas less toxicity was noted in those with higher CD34(+) counts and more blood processed on the first day of collection. We conclude that although unrelated donors can be successfully collected in 1 day or 2 days, 1-day apheresis procedures were associated with less overall toxicity, and thus we recommend single-day collections, especially if the requested number of cells have been collected in 1 day.
|
|
| 15. |
|
|
| 16. |
- Mc Geehan, Gearóid, et al.
(author)
-
Prophylactic cholecystectomy offers best outcomes following ERCP clearance of common bile duct stones : a meta-analysis
- 2023
-
In: European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery. - : Urban und Vogel Medien und Medizin Verlagsgesellsc. - 1863-9933 .- 1863-9941. ; 49:5, s. 2257-2267
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Symptomatic calculus biliary disease is common with associated morbidity and occasional mortality, further confounded when there is concomitant common bile duct (CBD) stones. Choledocholithiasis and clearance of the duct reduces recurrent cholangitis, but the question is whether after clearance of the CBD if there is a need to perform a cholecystectomy. This meta-analysis evaluated outcomes in patients undergoing ERCP with or without sphincterotomy to determine if cholecystectomy post-ERCP clearance offers optimal outcomes over a wait-and-see approach.METHODS: A Prospero registered meta-analysis of the literature using PRISMA guidelines incorporating articles related to ERCP, choledocholithiasis, cholangitis and cholecystectomy was undertaken for papers published between 1st January 1991 and 31st May 2021. Existing research that demonstrates outcomes of ERCP with no cholecystectomy versus ERCP and cholecystectomy was reviewed to determine the related key events, complications and mortality of leaving the gallbladder in situ and removing it. Odds ratios (OR) were calculated using Review Manager Version 5.4 and meta-analyses performed using OR using fixed-effect (or random-effect) models, depending on the heterogeneity of studies.RESULTS: 13 studies (n = 2598), published between 2002 and 2019, were included in this meta-analysis, 6 retrospective, 2 propensity score-matched retrospective studies, 3 prospective studies and 2 randomised control trials from a total of 11 countries. There were 1433 in the no cholecystectomy cohort (55.2%) and 1165 in the prophylactic cholecystectomy (44.8%) cohort. Cholecystectomy resulted in a decreased risk of cholecystitis (OR = 0.15; CI 0.07-0.36; p < 0.0001), cholangitis (OR = 0.51; CI 0.26-1.00; p = 0.05) and mortality (OR = 0.38; CI 0.16-0.9; p = 0.03). In addition, prophylactic cholecystectomy resulted in a significant reduction in biliary events, biliary pain and pancreatitis.CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing CBD clearance, consideration should be given to performing prophylactic cholecystectomy to optimise outcomes.
|
|
| 17. |
- Melly, Conor, et al.
(author)
-
Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after laparoscopic cholecystectomy : systematic review
- 2022
-
In: BJS Open. - : Oxford University Press. - 2474-9842. ; 6:3
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Healthcare requires patient feedback to improve outcomes and experience. This study undertook a systematic review of the depth, variability, and digital suitability of current patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.METHODS: A PROSPERO-registered (registration number CRD42021261707) systematic review was undertaken for all relevant English language articles using PubMed version of MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science electronic databases in June 2021. The search used Boolean operators and wildcards and included the keywords: laparoscopic cholecystectomy AND patient outcome OR patient-reported outcome OR patient-reported outcome measure OR PRO OR PROM. Medical Subjects Heading terms were used to search PubMed and Scopus. Articles published from 1 January 2011 to 2 June 2021 were included.RESULTS: A total of 4960 individual articles were reviewed in this study, of which 44 were found to evaluate PROMs in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy and underwent methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS) grading. Twenty-one articles spanning 19 countries and four continents met all inclusion criteria and were included in the qualitative data synthesis. There was significant heterogeneity in PROMs identified with eight different comprehensive PROM tools used in the 21 studies. There was wide variation in the time points at which PROMs were recorded. Fourteen of 21 studies recorded PROMs before and after surgery, and 7 of 21 recorded PROMs only after surgery. Follow-up intervals ranged from 3 days to 2 years after surgery.CONCLUSIONS: This study identified that while post-laparoscopic cholecystectomy PROMs are infrequently measured currently, tools are widely available to achieve this in clinical practice. PROMs may not capture all the outcomes but should be incorporated into future cholecystectomy outcome research. The EQ-5D™ (EuroQoL Group, Rotterdam, the Netherlands) provides a simple platform for the modern digital era.
|
|
| 18. |
- Mohseni, Shahin, 1978-, et al.
(author)
-
Common bile duct stones management : A network meta-analysis
- 2022
-
In: Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery. - : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. - 2163-0755 .- 2163-0763. ; 93:5, s. E155-E165
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Timely management is critical for treating symptomatic common bile duct (CBD) stones; however, a single optimal management strategy has yet to be defined in the acute care setting. Consequently, this systematic review and network meta-analysis, comparing one-stage (CBD exploration or intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography [ERCP] with simultaneous cholecystectomy) and two-stage (precholecystectomy or postcholecystectomy ERCP) procedures, was undertaken with the main outcomes of interest being postprocedural complications and hospital length of stay (LOS).METHODS: PubMed, SCOPUS, MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were methodically queried for articles from 2010 to 2021. The search terms were a combination of medical subject headings terms and the subsequent terms: gallstone; common bile duct (stone); choledocholithiasis; cholecystitis; endoscopic retrograde cholangiography/ERCP; common bile duct exploration; intraoperative, preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiography: stone extraction; and one-stage and two-stage procedure. Studies that compared two procedures or more were included, whereas studies not recording complications (bile leak, hemorrhage, pancreatitis, perforation, intra-abdominal infections, and other infections) or LOS were excluded. A network meta-analysis was conducted to compare the four different approaches for managing CBD stones.RESULTS: A total of 16 studies (8,644 participants) addressing the LOS and 41 studies (19,756 participants) addressing postprocedural complications were included in the analysis. The one-stage approaches were associated with a decrease in LOS compared with the two-stage approaches. Common bile duct exploration demonstrated a lower overall risk of complications compared with preoperative ERCP, but there were no differences in the overall risk orcomplications in the remaining comparisons. However, differences in specific postprocedural complications were detected between the four different approaches managing CBD stones.CONCLUSION: This network meta-analysis suggests that both laparoscopic CBD exploration and intraoperative ERCP have equally good outcomes and provide a preferable single-anesthesia patient pathway with a shorter overall length of hospital stay compared with the two-stage approaches.
|
|
| 19. |
- Roberts, Derek J., et al.
(author)
-
The open abdomen in trauma, acute care, and vascular and endovascular surgery : comprehensive, expert, narrative review
- 2023
-
In: BJS Open. - : Oxford University Press. - 2474-9842. ; 7:5
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BackgroundThe open abdomen is an innovation that greatly improved surgical understanding of damage control, temporary abdominal closure, staged abdominal reconstruction, viscera and enteric fistula care, and abdominal wall reconstruction. This article provides an evidence-informed, expert, comprehensive narrative review of the open abdomen in trauma, acute care, and vascular and endovascular surgery.MethodsA group of 12 international trauma, acute care, and vascular and endovascular surgery experts were invited to review current literature and important concepts surrounding the open abdomen.ResultsThe open abdomen may be classified using validated systems developed by a working group in 2009 and modified by the World Society of the Abdominal Compartment Syndrome-The Abdominal Compartment Society in 2013. It may be indicated in major trauma, intra-abdominal sepsis, vascular surgical emergencies, and severe acute pancreatitis; to facilitate second look laparotomy or avoid or treat abdominal compartment syndrome; and when the abdominal wall cannot be safely closed. Temporary abdominal closure and staged abdominal reconstruction methods include a mesh/sheet, transabdominal wall dynamic fascial traction, negative pressure wound therapy, and hybrid negative pressure wound therapy and dynamic fascial traction. This last method likely has the highest primary fascial closure rates. Direct peritoneal resuscitation is currently an experimental strategy developed to improve primary fascial closure rates and reduce complications in those with an open abdomen. Primary fascial closure rates may be improved by early return to the operating room; limiting use of crystalloid fluids during the surgical interval; and preventing and/or treating intra-abdominal hypertension, enteric fistulae, and intra-abdominal collections after surgery. The majority of failures of primary fascial closure and enteroatmospheric fistula formation may be prevented using effective temporary abdominal closure techniques, providing appropriate resuscitation fluids and nutritional support, and closing the abdomen as early as possible.ConclusionSubsequent stages of the innovation of the open abdomen will likely involve the design and conduct of prospective studies to evaluate appropriate indications for its use and effectiveness and safety of the above components of open abdomen management.
|
|
