Search

Approximately 5 billion people do not have access to safe, timely, and affordable surgical and anesthesia care, with this number disproportionately affecting those from low–middle-income countries (LMICs). Perioperative mortality rates (POMRs) have been identified by the World Health Organization as a potential health metric to monitor quality of surgical care provided. The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate published reports of POMR and suggest recommendations for its appropriate use as a health metric. The protocol was registered a priori with PROSPERO. A peer-reviewed search strategy was developed adhering with the PRISMA guidelines. Relevant articles were identified through Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, CDSR, LILACS, PubMed, BIOSIS, Global Health, Africa-Wide Information, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. Two independent reviewers performed a primary screening analysis based on titles and abstracts, followed by a full-text screen. Studies describing POMRs of adult emergency abdominal surgeries in LMICs were included. A total of 7787 articles were screened of which 7466 were excluded based on title and abstract. Three hundred and twenty-one articles entered full-text screen of which 70 articles met the inclusion criteria. Variables including timing of POMR reporting, intraoperative mortality, length of hospital stay, complication rates, and disease severity score were collected. Complication rates were reported in 83% of studies and postoperative stay in 46% of studies. 40% of papers did not report the specific timing of POMR collection. 7% of papers reported on intraoperative death. Additionally, 46% of papers used a POMR timing specific to the duration of their study. Vital signs were discussed in 24% of articles, with disease severity score only mentioned in 20% of studies. POMR is an important health metric for quantifications of quality of care of surgical systems. Further validation and standardization are necessary to effectively use this health metric.

Objective To evaluate whether outpatient treatment of periorbital cellulitis with daily administration of intravenous antibiotics and physician evaluation is an effective and safe alternative to admission. Design A retrospective chart review study of paediatric patients treated on an outpatient basis for periorbital cellulitis at a tertiary children's hospital between 2013 and 2015 was performed. Children were assessed day by a paediatrician to monitor for resolution of symptoms or complications. Setting The Montreal Children's hospital, a tertiary care centre. Participants Children diagnosed with an uncomplicated periorbital cellulitis secondary to an acute sinusitis or upper respiratory tract infection. Main outcome measures The number of days of intravenous antibiotics, complications or need for subsequent admission. Complications were defined as formation of an abscess or phlegmon confirmed on computerised tomography scan, worsening or recurrent persistent cellulitis, failure to improve on intravenous antibiotics, and intracranial complications. Results Sixty-six children with a diagnosis of uncomplicated periorbital cellulitis secondary to sinusitis who received intravenous antibiotics via medical day hospital and who fit the inclusion criteria were identified. The mean duration of intravenous antibiotic therapy was 4.1 days. All children received ceftriaxone, with one patient also receiving cefuroxime. Two of 66 patients developed complications; one patient required admission for failure to improve/subperiosteal phlegmon and later underwent functional endoscopic sinus surgery, and one patient developed an eyelid abscess that did not require admission. No patients developed severe neurological or visual deficits. Conclusions Outpatient intravenous therapy with daily reassessment by a physician may be a safe alternative to admission in select cases of periorbital cellulitis without systemic signs of illness.

Background Trauma registries (TR) provide invaluable data, informing resource allocation and quality improvement. The purpose of this systematic review was to identify factors promoting and inhibiting successful TR implementation in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods The protocol was registered a priori (CRD42017058586). With librarian oversight, a peer-reviewed search strategy was developed. Adhering to PRISMA guidelines, two independent reviewers performed first-screen and full-text screening. Studies describing implementation of a TR in LMICs or reviewed the experience of registry users/implementers were included. Extracted data, focusing on publication, institution, registry and data factors, was summarized using descriptive statistics and subjected to thematic qualitative analysis. Results Out of 3842 screened references, 40 articles were included for analysis. Most registries were paper-based, implemented in single publicly-funded institutions within LMICs, benefited from funding, and were run by untrained house-staff with other clinical responsibilities. Constituent variables, injury scoring, outcome assessment, and quality assurance practices were very diverse. Principal obstacles to successful implementation were lack of funding, significant missing data, and insufficient resources. Conclusions This work may contribute to the planning of future efforts towards TR implementation in LMICs, where better injury data has the potential to alleviate the morbidity and mortality associated with trauma through advocacy and quality-improvement.

Summary The use of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) in penetrating injuries is an emerging adjunct in the civilian trauma surgeon’s toolbox for the management of traumatic hemorrhagic shock. Furthermore, within the Canadian civilian context, little has been reported with regard to its use as an assisted damage-control measure in vascular reconstruction of the lower extremity. We report a case of penetrating gunshot injury of the lower extremity where the preoperative deployment of REBOA had a remarkable positive impact in the resuscitation phase and the intraoperative control of blood loss. A description of the procedure and the advantage gained from REBOA are discussed.

Background The benefits of trauma registries have been well described. The crucial data they provide may guide injury prevention strategies, inform resource allocation, and support advocacy and policy. This has been shown to reduce trauma-related mortality in various settings. Trauma remains a leading cause of mortality in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). However, the implementation of trauma registries in LMICs can be challenging due to lack of funding, specialized personnel, and infrastructure. This study explores strategies for successful trauma registry implementation in LMICs. Methods The protocol was registered a priori (CRD42017058586). A peer-reviewed search strategy of multiple databases will be developed with a senior librarian. As per PRISMA guidelines, first screen of references based on abstract and title and subsequent full-text review will be conducted by two independent reviewers. Disagreements that cannot be resolved by discussion between reviewers shall be arbitrated by the principal investigator. Data extraction will be performed using a pre-defined data extraction sheet. Finally, bibliographies of included articles will be hand-searched. Studies of any design will be included if they describe or review development and implementation of a trauma registry in LMICs. No language or period restrictions will be applied. Summary statistics and qualitative meta-narrative analyses will be performed. Discussion The significant burden of trauma in LMIC environments presents unique challenges and limitations. Adapted strategies for deployment and maintenance of sustainable trauma registries are needed. Our methodology will systematically identify recommendations and strategies for successful trauma registry implementation in LMICs and describe threats and barriers to this endeavor. Systematic review registration The protocol was registered on the PROSPERO international prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD42017058586). Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13643-018-0700-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Summary Noncompressible hemorrhagic control remains one of the most challenging areas in damage control medicine and continues to be a leading cause of preventable death. For decades, emergency thoracotomy or laparotomy and aortic cross clamping have remained the gold standard intervention. Recently, there has been a movement toward less invasive techniques for noncompressible hemorrhagic control, such as resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA). The REBOA technique involves inflation of an endovascular balloon within the abdominal aorta proximal to the vascular injury to temporarily inhibit bleeding. Although the literature is robust on this new technique, skepticism remains about whether REBOA is superior to aortic cross clamping, as it has been associated with complications including organ and limb ischemia, limb amputation, femoral aneurysm, and thrombosis.

C-reactive protein may predict anastomotic complications after colorectal surgery, but its predictive ability may differ between laparoscopic and open resection due to differences in stress response. Therefore, the objective of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis on the diagnostic characteristics of C-reactive protein to detect anastomotic leaks and infectious complications after laparoscopic and open colorectal surgery. A systematic review was performed according to PRISMA. Studies were included if they reported on the diagnostic characteristics of postoperative day 3–5 values of serum C-reactive protein to diagnose anastomotic leak or infectious complications specifically in patients undergoing elective laparoscopic and open colorectal surgery. The main outcome was a composite of anastomotic leak and infectious complications. A random-effects model was used to perform a meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy. A total of 13 studies were included (9 for laparoscopic surgery, 8 for open surgery). The pooled incidence of the composite outcome was 14.8% (95% CI 10.2–19.3) in laparoscopic studies and 21.0% (95% CI 11.9–30.0) for open. The pooled diagnostic accuracy characteristics were similar for open and laparoscopic studies. However, the C-reactive protein threshold cutoffs were lower in laparoscopic studies for postoperative days 3 and 4, but similar on day 5. The diagnostic characteristics of C-reactive protein in the early postoperative period to detect infectious complications and leaks are similar after laparoscopic and open colorectal surgery. However, thresholds are lower for laparoscopic surgery, suggesting that the interpretation of serum CRP values needs to be tailored based on operative approach.

Management of the post-traumatic open abdomen (OA) using negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) alone is associated with low rates of primary fascial closure. The abdominal reapproximation anchor (ABRA) system exerts dynamic medial fascial traction and may work synergistically with NPWT to facilitate primary fascial closure. Patients with an OA following trauma laparotomy between 2009 and 2018 were identified from a prospectively maintained institutional database. Patients treated with ABRA in conjunction with NPWT (ABRA) versus NPWT alone (NPWT) were compared in terms of primary fascial closure rate, number of surgeries to closure, tracheostomy duration, length of stay and incidence of entero-atmospheric fistula. Multivariable linear regression was performed to identify predictors of tracheostomy duration. We identified 48 patients [ABRA, 12 and NPWT, 36]. The ABRA group was significantly younger (25 vs. 37 years, p = 0.027) and included a lower proportion of males (58% vs. 89%, p = 0.032). Groups were similar with respect to the incidence of hollow viscus injury, injury severity score and abdominal abbreviated injury score. Compared to the NPWT group, the ABRA group had a significantly higher rate of primary fascial closure (100% vs. 28%, p

BackgroundResuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is regaining popularity in the treatment of traumatic non-compressible torso bleeding. Advances in invasive radiology coupled with new damage control measures assisted in the refinement of the technique with promising outcomes. The literature continues to have substantial heterogeneity about REBOA indications, applications, and the challenges confronted when implementing the technique in a level I trauma center. Scoping reviews are excellent platforms to assess the diverse literature of a new technique. It is for the first time that a scoping review is adopted for this topic. Advances in invasive radiology coupled with new damage control measures assisted in the refinement of the technique with promising outcomes. The literature continues to have substantial heterogeneity about REBOA indications, applications, and the challenges confronted when implementing the technique in a level I trauma center. Scoping reviews are excellent platforms to assess the diverse literature of a new technique. It is for the first time that a scoping review is adopted for this topic.MethodsCritical search from MEDLINE, EMBASE, BIOSIS, COCHRANE CENTRAL, PUBMED and SCOPUS were conducted from the earliest available dates until March 2018. Evidence-based articles, as well as gray literature at large, were analyzed regardless of the quality of articles.ResultsWe identified 1176 articles related to the topic from all available database sources and 57 reviews from the gray literature search. The final review yielded 105 articles. Quantitative and qualitative variables included patient demographics, study design, study objectives, methods of data collection, indications, REBOA protocol used, time to deployment, zone of deployment, occlusion time, complications, outcome, and the level of expertise at the concerned trauma center.ConclusionGrowing levels of evidence support the use of REBOA in selected indications. Our data analysis showed an advantage for its use in terms of morbidities and physiologic derangement in comparison to other resuscitation measures. Current challenges remain in the selective application, implementation, competency assessment, and credentialing for the use of REBOA in trauma settings. The identification of the proper indication, terms of use, and possible advantage of the prehospital and partial REBOA are topics for further research.Level of evidenceLevel III.

IntroductionHaemorrhage remains the leading cause of preventable death in trauma. Damage control measures applied to patients in extremis in order to control exsanguinating bleeding from non-compressible torso injuries use different techniques to limit blood flow from the aorta to the rest of the body. Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is regaining momentum recently as an adjunct measure that can provide the same results using less invasive approaches. This scoping review aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the existing literature on REBOA. The objective is to analyse evidence and non-evidence-based medical reports and to describe current gaps in the literature about the best indication and implementation strategies for REBOA.Methods and analysisUsing the five-stage framework of Arksey and O’Malley’s scoping review methodology as a guide, we will perform a systematic search in the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, BIOSIS, COCHRANE CENTRAL, PUBMED and SCOPUS from the earliest available publications. The aim is to identify diverse studies related to the topic of REBOA. For a comprehensive search, we will explore organisational websites, key journals and hand-search reference lists of key studies. Data will be charted and sorted using a descriptive analytical approach.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not necessary as the data are collected from publicly available sources and there will be no consultative phase. The results will be disseminated through presentations at local, national, clinical and medical education conferences and through publication in a peer-reviewed journal.