Search

Background: Small bowel diverticula are a rare condition occurring mainly in the elderly. They can be isolated or multiple and can involve the duodenum, jejunum and ileum. Acute complications are extremely rare, with an aspecific pattern of symptoms. The aim of the study is to report the different patterns of presentation of patients with complicated jejunoileal diverticula. Methods: This is a retrospective descriptive study on a consecutive series of patients admitted for complicated jejunoileal diverticula in four Italian surgical departments between 2012 and 2019. Complications included acute diverticulitis, bleeding, perforation and intestinal obstruction. Patients presenting with complicated duodenal or Meckel's diverticula were not included. Results: Twenty‐six patients were enrolled. The median age was 77 (46–94) years. Abdominal pain, fever and nausea/vomiting were the most frequent symptoms at presentation. Abdominal computed tomography (CT) was diagnostic in 35% of patients. Ten (38%) patients had bowel perforation, nine (35%) acute diverticulitis, five (19%) bowel obstruction and two (8%) had intestinal bleeding. Twenty‐one (81%) patients underwent surgery, two (8%) were managed by CT‐guided drainage of collections and three (11%) were treated with antibiotics. One patient died post‐operatively. The median hospital stay was 9 (5–62) days. Conclusion: Acutely complicated jejunoileal diverticula are infrequent, but a strong suspect should be raised whenever elderly patients are admitted for unspecific abdominal pain with a non‐diagnostic CT scan. Conservative management may be offered in very selected cases if a diagnosis is obtained, but in most instances, surgery is both diagnostic and therapeutic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: ERAS pathway has been proposed as the standard of care in elective abdominal surgery. Guidelines on ERAS in emergency surgery have been recently published; however, few evidences are still available in the literature. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of an enhanced recovery protocol in a large cohort of patients undergoing emergency surgery and to identify possible factors impacting postoperative protocol compliance. Methods: This is a prospective multicenter observational study including patients who underwent major emergency general surgery for either intra-abdominal infection or intestinal obstruction. The primary endpoint of the study is the adherence to ERAS postoperative protocol. Secondary endpoints are 30-day mortality and morbidity rates, and length of hospital stay. Results: A total of 589 patients were enrolled in the study, 256 (43.5%) of them underwent intestinal resection with anastomosis. Major complications occurred in 92 (15.6%) patients and 30-day mortality was 6.3%. Median adherence occurred on postoperative day (POD) 1 for naso-gastric tube removal, on POD 2 for mobilization and urinary catheter removal, and on POD 3 for oral intake and i.v. fluid suspension. Laparoscopy was significantly associated with adherence to postoperative protocol, whereas operative fluid infusion > 12 mL/Kg/h, preoperative hyperglycemia, presence of a drain, duration of surgery and major complications showed a negative association. Conclusions: The present study supports that an enhanced recovery protocol in emergency surgery is feasible and safe. Laparoscopy was associated with an earlier recovery, whereas preoperative hyperglycemia, fluid overload, and abdominal drain were associated with a delayed recovery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is increasing recognition that point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS), performed by the clinician at the bedside, can be a natural extension of the clinical examination—the modern abdominal "stethoscope" and provides an opportunity to expedite the care pathway for patients with acute gallbladder disease. The primary aims of this study were to benchmark the accuracy of surgeon-performed POCUS in suspected acute gallbladder disease against standard radiology or pathology reports and to compare time to POCUS diagnosis with time to definitive imaging. This prospective single-arm observational cohort study was conducted in four hospitals in Ireland, Italy, and Portugal to assess the accuracy of POCUS against standard radiology in patients with suspected acute biliary disease (ClinicalTrials.govIdentifier: NCT02682368). The findings of surgeon-performed POCUS were compared with those on definitive imaging or surgery. Of 100 patients recruited, 89 were suitable for comparative analysis, comparing POCUS with radiological findings in 84 patients and with surgical/histological findings in five. The overall global accuracy of POCUS was 88.7% (95% CI, 80.3–94.4%), with a sensitivity of 94.7% (95% CI, 85.3–98.9%), a specificity of 78.1% (95% CI, 60.03–90.7%), a positive likelihood ratio (LR+) of 4.33 and negative likelihood ratio (LR) of 0.07. The mean time from POCUS to the final radiological report was 11.9 h (range 0.06–54.9). In five patients admitted directly to surgery, the mean time between POCUS and incision was 2.30 h (range 1.5–5), which was significantly shorter than the mean time to formal radiology report. Sixteen patients were discharged from the emergency department, of whom nine did not need follow-up. Our study is one of the very few to demonstrate a high concordance between surgeon-performed POCUS of patients without a priori radiologic diagnosis of gallstone disease and shows that the expedited diagnosis afforded by POCUS can be reliably leveraged to deliver earlier definitive care for patients with acute gallbladder pathology, as the general surgeon skilled in POCUS is uniquely positioned to integrate it into their bedside assessment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: The American College of Surgeons NSQIP surgical risk calculator provides an estimation of 30-day postoperative adverse outcomes. It is useful in the identification of high-risk patients needing clinical optimization and supports the informed consent process. The purpose of this study is to validate its predictive value in the Italian emergency setting. STUDY DESIGN: Six Italian institutions were included. Inclusion diagnoses were acute cholecystitis, appendicitis, gastrointestinal perforation or obstruction. Areas under the receiving operating characteristic curves, Brier score, Hosmer-Lemeshow index, and observed-to-expected event ratio were measured to assess both discrimination and calibration. Effect of the Surgeon Adjustment Score on calibration was then tested. A patient's personal risk ratio was obtained, and a cutoff was chosen to predict mortality with a high negative predicted value. RESULTS: A total of 2,749 emergency procedures were considered for the analysis. The areas under the receiving operating characteristic curve were 0.932 for death (0.921 to 0.941, p < 0.0001; Brier 0.041) and 0.918 for discharge to nursing or rehabilitation facility (0.907 to 0.929, p < 0.0001; 0.070). Discrimination was also strong (area under the receiving operating characteristic curve >0.8) for renal failure, cardiac complication, pneumonia, venous thromboembolism, serious complication, and any complication. Brier score was informative (<0.25) for all the presented variables. The observed-to-expected event ratios were 1.0 for death and 0.8 for discharge to facility. For almost all other variables, there was a general risk underestimation, but the use of the Surgeon Adjustment Score permitted a better calibration of the model. A risk ratio >3.00 predicted the onset of death with sensitivity = 86%, specificity = 77%, and negative predicted value = 99%. CONCLUSIONS: The American College of Surgeons NSQIP surgical risk calculator has proved to be a reliable predictor of adverse postoperative outcomes also in Italian emergency settings, with particular regard to mortality. We therefore recommend the use of the surgical risk calculator in the multidisciplinary care of patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery. The American College of Surgeons NSQIP Surgical Risk Calculator was not validated in emergency surgery outside the US. External validation on 2,749 emergency procedures was performed at 6 Italian institutions. The analysis showed that the calculator is a reliable predictor of adverse postoperative outcomes, particularly mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We aimed to evaluate, in a large Western cohort, perioperative and long-term oncological outcomes of salvage hepatectomy (SH) for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (rHCC) after primary hepatectomy (PH) or locoregional treatments. Data were collected from the Hepatocarcinoma Recurrence on the Liver Study Group (He.RC.O.Le.S.) Italian Registry. After 1:1 propensity score-matched analysis (PSM), two groups were compared: the PH group (patients submitted to resection for a first HCC) and the SH group (patients resected for intrahepatic rHCC after previous HCC-related treatments). 2689 patients were enrolled. PH included 2339 patients, SH 350. After PSM, 263 patients were selected in each group with major resected nodule median size, intraoperative blood loss and minimally invasive approach significantly lower in the SH group. Long-term outcomes were compared, with no difference in OS and DFS. Univariate and multivariate analyses revealed only microvascular invasion as an independent prognostic factor for OS. SH proved to be equivalent to PH in terms of safety, feasibility and long-term outcomes, consistent with data gathered from East Asia. In the awaiting of reliable treatment-allocating algorithms for rHCC, SH appears to be a suitable alternative in patients fit for surgery, regardless of the previous therapeutic modality implemented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Background: In the last two decades, there has been a Copernican revolution in the decision-making for the treatment of Diverticular Disease. Purpose: This article provides a report on the state-of-the-art of surgery for sigmoid diverticulitis. Conclusion: Acute diverticulitis is the most common reason for colonic resection after cancer; in the last decade, the indication for surgical resection has become more and more infrequent also in emergency. Currently, emergency surgery is seldom indicated, mostly for severe abdominal infective complications. Nowadays, uncomplicated diverticulitis is the most frequent presentation of diverticular disease and it is usually approached with a conservative medical treatment. Non-Operative Management may be considered also for complicated diverticulitis with abdominal abscess. At present, there is consensus among experts that the hemodynamic response to the initial fluid resuscitation should guide the emergency surgical approach to patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. In hemodynamically stable patients, a laparoscopic approach is the first choice, and surgeons with advanced laparoscopic skills report advantages in terms of lower postoperative complication rates. At the moment, the so-called Hartmann's procedure is only indicated in severe generalized peritonitis with metabolic derangement or in severely ill patients. Some authors suggested laparoscopic peritoneal lavage as a bridge to surgery or also as a definitive treatment without colonic resection in selected patients. In case of hemodynamic instability not responding to fluid resuscitation, an initial damage control surgery seems to be more attractive than a Hartmann's procedure, and it is associated with a high rate of primary anastomosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Acute left colonic diverticulitis (ALCD) in the elderly presents with unique epidemiological features when compared with younger patients. The clinical presentation is more nuanced in the elderly population, having higher in-hospital and postoperative mortality. Furthermore, geriatric comorbidities are a risk factor for complicated diverticulitis. Finally, elderly patients have a lower risk of recurrent episodes and, in case of recurrence, a lower probability of requiring urgent surgery than younger patients. The aim of the present work is to study age-related factors that may support a unique approach to the diagnosis and treatment of this problem in the elderly when compared with the WSES guidelines for the management of acute left-sided colonic diverticulitis. During the 1° Pisa Workshop of Acute Care & Trauma Surgery held in Pisa (Italy) in September 2019, with the collaboration of the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), the Italian Society of Geriatric Surgery (SICG), the Italian Hospital Surgeons Association (ACOI), the Italian Emergency Surgery and Trauma Association (SICUT), the Academy of Emergency Medicine and Care (AcEMC) and the Italian Society of Surgical Pathophysiology (SIFIPAC), three panel members presented a number of statements developed for each of the four themes regarding the diagnosis and management of ALCD in older patients, formulated according to the GRADE approach, at a Consensus Conference where a panel of experts participated. The statements were subsequently debated, revised, and finally approved by the Consensus Conference attendees. The current paper is a summary report of the definitive guidelines statements on each of the following topics: diagnosis, management, surgical technique and antibiotic therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is considered to be the gold standard in the early management of acute cholecystitis however, recommendations for routine drain insertion in the acute setting are unavailable.Study Design: A systematic review of literature review and metanalysis was conducted. All studies comparing drain versus no drain after LC for acute cholecystitis were included.Results: Seven studies, with 1274 patients, were included. Postoperative wound infection rates (relative risk (RR) 0.30, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.10 to 0.88; I2 = 0%) and postoperative abdominal collection requiring drainage (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.35 to 4.12; I 2 = 0%) were lower in the no-drain group, but this was only significant for wounded infections on subgroup analysis of RCTs. Length of stay hospital (mean difference (MD) -0.49, 95% CI -0.89 to -0.09; I 2 = 69%) and operative time (MD -8.13, 95% CI -13.87 to -2.38; I 2 = 92%) were significantly shorter in the no drain group however this was in the context of significant heterogeneity.Conclusion: The available data suggests that acute cholecystitis is not an indication for routine drain placement after LC. However, these results must be interpreted with caution due to the limitations of the included studies. In effect, the main issue of this meta-analysis lies on the limitations of the included studies themselves, because of a considerable heterogeneity among the included works, particularly for the inclusion criteria of patients and reported severity of acute cholecystitis. Further work is required to produce evidence which will definitively alter clinical practice.Level Of Evidence: Level 2a (systematic review of cohort studies). Oxford CEBM levels of evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Damage control surgery (DCS) is the classic approach to manage severe trauma and has recently also been considered an appropriate approach to the treatment of critically ill patients with severe intra-abdominal sepsis. The purpose of the present review is to evaluate the outcomes following DCS for Hinchey II–IV complicated acute diverticulitis (CAD). Methods: A comprehensive systematic search was undertaken to identify all randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and observational studies, irrespectively of their size, publication status, and language. Adults who have undergone DCS for CAD Hinchey II, III, or IV were included in this review. DCS is compared with the immediate and definitive surgical treatment in the form of HP, colonic resection, and primary anastomosis (RPA) with or without covering stoma or laparoscopic lavage. We searched the following electronic databases: PubMed MEDLINE, Scopus, and ISI Web of Knowledge. The protocol of this systematic review and meta-analysis was published on Prospero (CRD42020144953). Results: Nine studies with 318 patients, undergoing DCS, were included. The presence of septic shock at the presentation in the emergency department was heterogeneous, and the weighted mean rate of septic shock across the studies was shown to be 35.1% [95% CI 8.4 to 78.6%]. The majority of the patients had Hinchey III (68.3%) disease. The remainder had either Hinchey IV (28.9%) or Hinchey II (2.8%). Phase I is similarly described in most of the studies as lavage, limited resection with closed blind colonic ends. In a few studies, resection and anastomosis (9.1%) or suture of the perforation site (0.9%) were performed in phase I of DCS. In those patients who underwent DCS, the most common method of temporary abdominal closure (TAC) was the negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) (97.8%). The RPA was performed in 62.1% [95% CI 40.8 to 83.3%] and the 22.7% [95% CI 15.1 to 30.3%]: 12.8% during phase I and 87.2% during phase III. A covering ileostomy was performed in 6.9% [95% CI 1.5 to 12.2%]. In patients with RPA, the overall leak was 7.3% [95% CI 4.3 to 10.4%] and the major anastomotic leaks were 4.7% [95% CI 2.0 to 7.4%]; the rate of postoperative mortality was estimated to be 9.2% [95% CI 6.0 to 12.4%]. Conclusions: The present meta-analysis revealed an approximately 62.1% weighted rate of achieving GI continuity with the DCS approach to generalized peritonitis in Hinchey III and IV with major leaks of 4.7% and overall mortality of 9.2%. Despite the promising results, we are aware of the limitations related to the significant heterogeneity of inclusion criteria. Importantly, the low rate of reported septic shock may point toward selection bias. Further studies are needed to evaluate the clinical advantages and cost-effectiveness of the DCS approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The current COVID-19 pandemic underlines the importance of a mindful utilization of financial and human resources. Preserving resources and manpower is paramount in healthcare. It is important to ensure the ability of surgeons and specialized professionals to function through the pandemic. A conscious effort should be made to minimize infection in this sector. A high mortality rate within this group would be detrimental. This manuscript is the result of a collaboration between the major Italian surgical and anesthesiologic societies: ACOI, SIC, SICUT, SICO, SICG, SIFIPAC, SICE, and SIAARTI. We aim to describe recommended clinical pathways for COVID-19-positive patients requiring acute non-deferrable surgical care. All hospitals should organize dedicated protocols and workforce training as part of the effort to face the current pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The surgical management of perforated sigmoid diverticulitis and generalised peritonitis is challenging. Surgical resection is the established standard of care. However, there is debate as to whether a primary anastomosis (PA) or a Hartmann's procedure (HP) should be performed. The aim of the present study was to perform a review of the literature comparing HP to PA for the treatment of perforated sigmoid diverticulitis with generalised peritonitis.Methods: A systematic literature search was performed for articles published up to March 2018. We considered only randomised control trials (RCTs) comparing the outcomes of sigmoidectomy with PA versus HP in adults with perforated sigmoid diverticulitis and generalised peritonitis (Hinchey III or IV). Primary outcomes were mortality and permanent stoma rate. Outcomes were pooled using a random-effects model to estimate the risk ratio and 95% confidence intervals.Results: Of the 1,204 potentially relevant articles, 3 RCTs were included in the meta-analysis with 254 patients in total (116 and 138 in the PA and HP groups, respectively). All three RCTs had significant limitations including small size, lack of blinding and possible selection bias. There was no statistically significant difference in mortality or overall morbidity. Although 2 out of the 3 trials reported a lower permanent stoma rate in the PA arm, the difference in permanent stoma rates was not statistically significant (RR = 0.40, 95% CI 0.14-1.16). The incidence of anastomotic leaks, including leaks after stoma reversal, was not statistically different between PA and HP (RR = 1.42, 95% CI 0.41-4.87, p = 0.58) while risk of a postoperative intra-abdominal abscess was lower after PA than after HP (RR = 0.34, 95% CI 0.12-0.96, p = 0.04).Conclusions: PA and HP appear to be equivalent in terms of most outcomes of interest, except for a lower intra-abdominal abscess risk after PA. The latter finding needs further investigation as it was not reported in any of the individual trials. However, given the limitations of the included RCTs, no firm conclusion can be drawn on which is the best surgical option in patients with generalised peritonitis due to diverticular perforation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In January 2010, the SICE (Italian Society of Endoscopic Surgery), under the auspices of the EAES, decided to revisit the clinical recommendations for the role of laparoscopy in abdominal emergencies in adults, with the primary intent being to update the 2006 EAES indications and supplement the existing guidelines on specific diseases. Methods: Other Italian surgical societies were invited into the Consensus to form a panel of 12 expert surgeons. In order to get a multidisciplinary panel, other stakeholders involved in abdominal emergencies were invited along with a patient's association. In November 2010, the panel met in Rome to discuss each chapter according to the Delphi method, producing key statements with a grade of recommendations followed by commentary to explain the rationale and the level of evidence behind the statements. Thereafter, the statements were presented to the Annual Congress of the EAES in June 2011. Results: A thorough literature review was necessary to assess whether the recommendations issued in 2006 are still current. In many cases new studies allowed us to better clarify some issues (such as for diverticulitis, small bowel obstruction, pancreatitis, hernias, trauma), to confirm the key role of laparoscopy (such as for cholecystitis, gynecological disorders, nonspecific abdominal pain, appendicitis), but occasionally previous strong recommendations have to be challenged after review of recent research (such as for perforated peptic ulcer). Conclusions: Every surgeon has to develop his or her own approach, taking into account the clinical situation, her/his proficiency (and the experience of the team) with the various techniques, and the specific organizational setting in which she/he is working. This guideline has been developed bearing in mind that every surgeon could use the data reported to support her/his judgment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Purpose: Epiphrenic diverticula are a rare disease probably caused by long-standing impairment of esophageal motor activity. Symptomatic disease, which may worsen clinically during follow-up even to severe symptoms, is usually considered an indication for surgical treatment. Surgery for epiphrenic diverticula consists of diverticulectomy, which traditionally is performed through a left thoracotomy; a myotomy and partial fundoplication are generally included in order to treat the underlying motor disorder and to prevent or correct reflux. The same principles of surgical treatment can be achieved through the laparoscopic transhiatal approach. The aim of this paper is to describe the technique and the results of laparoscopic diverticulectomy combined with esophageal myotomy and antireflux wrap to treat epiphrenic diverticula of the esophagus. Patients and Methods: From January 1994 through May 2001, 11 patients underwent laparoscopic transhiatal diverticulectomy, esophageal myotomy, and partial fundoplication at our institution. Results: In all patients, the operation was completed through the minimally invasive access. The postoperative course was complicated in one patient (9%), who had a leak from the staple line, which was repaired through a thoracotomy. At follow-up, this patient had persistence of a small pouch at the diverticuletomy site. However, he was asymptomatic. All other patients were free of symptoms and without recurrence. Conclusion: Laparoscopy offers good access to the distal esophagus and the inferior mediastinum. Removal of the diverticulum, treatment of the motor disorder, and prevention of postoperative reflux can all be obtained through this approach. The immediate postoperative and long-term results are satisfactory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]