-
Journal of Crohn's & Colitis Jun 2024Crohn's disease [CD] is frequently associated with the development of strictures and penetrating complications. Intestinal ultrasound [IUS] is a non-invasive imaging... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Crohn's disease [CD] is frequently associated with the development of strictures and penetrating complications. Intestinal ultrasound [IUS] is a non-invasive imaging modality ideal for point-of-care assessment. In this systematic review and meta-analysis we provide a current overview on the diagnostic accuracy of IUS and its advanced modalities in the detection of intra-abdominal complications in CD compared to endoscopy, cross-sectional imaging, surgery, and pathology.
METHOD
We conducted a literature search for studies describing the diagnostic accuracy of IUS in adult patients with CD-related intra-abdominal complications. Quality of the included studies was assessed with the QUADAS-2 tool. Meta-analysis was performed for both conventional IUS [B-mode] and oral contrast IUS [SICUS].
RESULTS
Of the 1498 studies we identified, 68 were included in this review and 23 studies [3863 patients] were used for the meta-analysis. Pooled sensitivities and specificities for strictures, inflammatory masses, and fistulas by B-mode IUS were 0.81 and 0.90, 0.87 [sensitivities] and 0.95, and 0.67 and 0.97 [specificities], respectively. Pooled overall log diagnostic odds ratios were 3.56, 3.97 and 3.84, respectively. Pooled sensitivity and specificity of SICUS were 0.94 and 0.95, 0.91 and 0.97 [sensitivities], and 0.90 and 0.94 [specificities], respectively. The pooled overall log diagnostic odds ratios of SICUS were 4.51, 5.46, and 4.80, respectively.
CONCLUSION
IUS is accurate for the diagnosis of intra-abdominal complications in CD. As a non-invasive, point-of-care modality, IUS is recommended as the first-line imaging tool if there is a suspicion of CD-related intra-abdominal complications.
Topics: Humans; Crohn Disease; Ultrasonography; Constriction, Pathologic; Sensitivity and Specificity; Intestinal Fistula
PubMed: 38173288
DOI: 10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjad215 -
Annals of Surgical Treatment and... Apr 2023The choice of temporary abdominal closure (TAC) method affects the prognosis of trauma patients. Previous studies on TAC are challenging to extrapolate due to data...
PURPOSE
The choice of temporary abdominal closure (TAC) method affects the prognosis of trauma patients. Previous studies on TAC are challenging to extrapolate due to data heterogeneity. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and comparison of various TAC techniques.
METHODS
We accessed web-based databases for studies on the clinical outcomes of TAC techniques. Recognized techniques, including negative-pressure wound therapy with or without continuous fascial traction, skin tension, meshes, Bogota bags, and Wittman patches, were classified via a method of closure such as skin-only closure patch closure vacuum closure; and via dynamics of treatment like static therapy (ST) dynamic therapy (DT). Study endpoints included in-hospital mortality, definitive fascial closure (DFC) rate, and incidence of intraabdominal complications.
RESULTS
Among 1,065 identified studies, 37 papers comprising 2,582 trauma patients met the inclusion criteria. The vacuum closure group showed the lowest mortality (13%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 6%-19%) and a moderate DFC rate (74%; 95% CI, 67%-82%). The skin-only closure group showed the highest mortality (35%; 95% CI, 7%-63%) and the highest DFC rate (96%; 95% CI, 93%-99%). In the second group analysis, DT showed better outcomes than ST for all endpoints.
CONCLUSION
Vacuum closure was favorable in terms of in-hospital mortality, ventral hernia, and peritoneal abscess. Skin-only closure might be an alternative TAC method in carefully selected groups. DT may provide the best results; however, further studies are needed.
PubMed: 37051156
DOI: 10.4174/astr.2023.104.4.237 -
International Journal of Infectious... Dec 2020Endogenous endophthalmitis (EE) is a devastating complication that develops as a metastatic infection in patients with Klebsiella pneumoniae pyogenic liver abscess... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Endogenous endophthalmitis (EE) is a devastating complication that develops as a metastatic infection in patients with Klebsiella pneumoniae pyogenic liver abscess (KPPLA). The existing data are heterogeneous and the actual disease burden and risk factors for the development of EE among patients with KPPLA have not been systematically examined. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the incidence of EE, temporal trend of EE, and risk factors for EE in patients with KPPLA.
METHODOLOGY
The MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for articles published from inception to 2020 that evaluated the incidence of EE among patients with KPPLA. By a random-effects method, a pooled estimate of its incidence with 95% confidence intervals was estimated along with examination of its temporal and geographic variations. Pooled odds ratios were calculated for risk factors.
RESULTS
Fifteen retrospective studies reporting data on 11889 patients with KPPLA met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. With 217 patients developing EE, the pooled incidence of EE was 4.5% (95% confidence interval 2.4% to 8.2%). The heterogeneity was considerable and significant (Cochran's Q 243.5, p < 0.001, I = 94.2%).
CONCLUSION
This meta-analysis estimates the actual incidence of EE among patients with KPPLA, where EE is reported in about 1 of 22 patients with KPPLA. Infection caused by K1 capsular serotype was an independent risk factor.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Endophthalmitis; Female; Humans; Incidence; Klebsiella Infections; Klebsiella pneumoniae; Liver Abscess, Pyogenic; Male; Middle Aged; Retrospective Studies; Risk Factors; Young Adult
PubMed: 33035676
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijid.2020.09.1485 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2021This is the second update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2015 and last updated in 2018. Appendectomy, the surgical removal of the appendix, is performed... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
This is the second update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2015 and last updated in 2018. Appendectomy, the surgical removal of the appendix, is performed primarily for acute appendicitis. Patients who undergo appendectomy for complicated appendicitis, defined as gangrenous or perforated appendicitis, are more likely to suffer postoperative complications. The routine use of abdominal drainage to reduce postoperative complications after appendectomy for complicated appendicitis is controversial.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the safety and efficacy of abdominal drainage to prevent intraperitoneal abscess after appendectomy (irrespective of open or laparoscopic) for complicated appendicitis; to compare the effects of different types of surgical drains; and to evaluate the optimal time for drain removal.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Web of Science, the World Health Organization International Trials Registry Platform, ClinicalTrials.gov, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, and three trials registers on 24 February 2020, together with reference checking, citation searching, and contact with study authors to identify additional studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared abdominal drainage versus no drainage in people undergoing emergency open or laparoscopic appendectomy for complicated appendicitis. We also included RCTs that compared different types of drains and different schedules for drain removal in people undergoing appendectomy for complicated appendicitis.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two review authors independently identified the trials for inclusion, collected the data, and assessed the risk of bias. We used the GRADE approach to assess evidence certainty. We included intraperitoneal abscess as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were wound infection, morbidity, mortality, hospital stay, hospital costs, pain, and quality of life.
MAIN RESULTS
Use of drain versus no drain We included six RCTs (521 participants) comparing abdominal drainage and no drainage in participants undergoing emergency open appendectomy for complicated appendicitis. The studies were conducted in North America, Asia, and Africa. The majority of participants had perforated appendicitis with local or general peritonitis. All participants received antibiotic regimens after open appendectomy. None of the trials was assessed as at low risk of bias. The evidence is very uncertain regarding the effects of abdominal drainage versus no drainage on intraperitoneal abscess at 30 days (risk ratio (RR) 1.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47 to 3.21; 5 RCTs; 453 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or wound infection at 30 days (RR 2.01, 95% CI 0.88 to 4.56; 5 RCTs; 478 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There were seven deaths in the drainage group (N = 183) compared to one in the no-drainage group (N = 180), equating to an increase in the risk of 30-day mortality from 0.6% to 2.7% (Peto odds ratio 4.88, 95% CI 1.18 to 20.09; 4 RCTs; 363 participants; low-certainty evidence). Abdominal drainage may increase 30-day overall complication rate (morbidity; RR 6.67, 95% CI 2.13 to 20.87; 1 RCT; 90 participants; low-certainty evidence) and hospital stay by 2.17 days (95% CI 1.76 to 2.58; 3 RCTs; 298 participants; low-certainty evidence) compared to no drainage. The outcomes hospital costs, pain, and quality of life were not reported in any of the included studies. There were no RCTs comparing the use of drain versus no drain in participants undergoing emergency laparoscopic appendectomy for complicated appendicitis. Open drain versus closed drain There were no RCTs comparing open drain versus closed drain for complicated appendicitis. Early versus late drain removal There were no RCTs comparing early versus late drain removal for complicated appendicitis.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The certainty of the currently available evidence is low to very low. The effect of abdominal drainage on the prevention of intraperitoneal abscess or wound infection after open appendectomy is uncertain for patients with complicated appendicitis. The increased rates for overall complication rate and hospital stay for the drainage group compared to the no-drainage group are based on low-certainty evidence. Consequently, there is no evidence for any clinical improvement with the use of abdominal drainage in patients undergoing open appendectomy for complicated appendicitis. The increased risk of mortality with drainage comes from eight deaths observed in just under 400 recruited participants. Larger studies are needed to more reliably determine the effects of drainage on morbidity and mortality outcomes.
Topics: Abscess; Appendectomy; Appendicitis; Drainage; Humans; Peritonitis; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 34402522
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010168.pub4 -
The British Journal of Surgery Jan 2024Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is increasingly used to treat locally advanced (T3-4 Nx-2 M0) colon cancer due to its potential advantages over the standard approach of upfront... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is increasingly used to treat locally advanced (T3-4 Nx-2 M0) colon cancer due to its potential advantages over the standard approach of upfront surgery. The primary objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to analyse data from comparative studies to assess the impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on oncological outcomes.
METHODS
A systematic review was conducted by searching the MEDLINE and Scopus databases. The search encompassed RCTs, propensity score-matched studies, and controlled prospective studies published up to 1 April 2023. As a primary objective, overall survival and disease-free survival were compared. As a secondary objective, perioperative morbidity, mortality, and complete resection were compared using the DerSimonian and Laird models.
RESULTS
A total of seven studies comprising a total of 2120 patients were included. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was associated with a reduction in the hazard of recurrence (HR 0.73, 95% c.i. 0.59 to 0.90; P = 0.003) and death (HR 0.67, 95% c.i. 0.54 to 0.83; P < 0.001) compared with upfront surgery. Additionally, neoadjuvant chemotherapy was significantly associated with higher 5-year overall survival (79.9% versus 72.6%; P < 0.001) and disease-free survival (73.1% versus 64.5%; P = 0.028) rates. No significant differences were observed in perioperative mortality (OR 0.97, 95% c.i. 0.28 to 3.33), overall complications (OR 0.95, 95% c.i. 0.77 to 1.16), or anastomotic leakage/intra-abdominal abscess (OR 0.88, 95% c.i. 0.60 to 1.29). However, neoadjuvant chemotherapy was associated with a lower risk of incomplete resection (OR 0.70, 95% c.i. 0.49 to 0.99).
CONCLUSION
Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is associated with a reduced hazard of recurrence and death, as well as improved overall survival and disease-free survival rates, compared with upfront surgery in patients with locally advanced colon cancer.
Topics: Humans; Neoadjuvant Therapy; Prospective Studies; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; Disease-Free Survival; Colonic Neoplasms
PubMed: 38381934
DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znae021 -
Polski Przeglad Chirurgiczny May 2022<b> Aim: </b> The study was conducted to analyse the recent peer-reviewed literature related to symptomatic spilled gallstones after Laparoscopic...
<b> Aim: </b> The study was conducted to analyse the recent peer-reviewed literature related to symptomatic spilled gallstones after Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy (LC). </br></br> <b>Materials and methods:</b> Articles published in the peer-reviewed journals of repute from 20122022 were evaluated for nine variables including: [I] age of the patient, [II] gender, [III] interval since index LC, [IV] index LC if emergent/difficult or elective/straightforward, [V] clinical presentation, [VI] spilled gallstones if detected by imaging, [VII] management, [VIII] approach to management, [IX] number of spilled gallstones. </br></br> <b>Results:</b> There were a total of 71 cases (37 males and 34 females) with a mean age of 63.7 years. The time of onset of symptoms from spilled gallstones, after index LC, ranged from 2 days to 15 years and 57 patients (80.3%) presented within 6 years. Forty (56.3%) patients were unaware of the fact that gallstone spillage had occurred during index LC. The retained gallstones were detected by imaging in 47 (66.1%) cases and they were multiple in 51 (71.8%). In 52 patients (73.2%), the stones manifested as abdominal abscess/foreign body granuloma; the other presentations being pelvic pain/fistula, intestinal obstruction, abdominal lump simulating malignancy, incidental finding of metastatic lesions and generalized peritonitis. The major approaches adopted to retrieve the retained stones included open surgery, laparoscopy and percutaneous drainage. There were two deaths (2.9%) due to spilled gallstones. </br></br> <b>Conclusion:</b> Retained gallstones represent a complication of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) that has a potential to create morbidity and diagnostic difficulties, even after a substantial delay. There is a need to spread awareness about the adverse effects of spilled stones so that they are actively looked for and retrieved if gallbladder perforates during cholecystectomy. Whenever such a complication occurs, the patient should be properly informed and the details should be very clearly mentioned in the operation notes.
Topics: Female; Male; Humans; Middle Aged; Gallstones; Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic; Cholecystectomy; Laparoscopy; Abdominal Abscess; Abdominal Neoplasms
PubMed: 36805307
DOI: 10.5604/01.3001.0015.8571 -
Frontiers in Surgery 2022The objective of this study is to compare clinical and surgical outcomes of appendectomy among elderly and non-elderly subjects.
BACKGROUND
The objective of this study is to compare clinical and surgical outcomes of appendectomy among elderly and non-elderly subjects.
METHODS
A systematic search was conducted on PubMed, Scopus, and Google academic databases. Studies, observational in design, that compared peri-and postoperative outcomes of appendectomy, in patients with acute appendicitis, between elderly and non-elderly/younger subjects were considered for inclusion. Statistical analysis was performed using STATA software.
RESULTS
A total of 15 studies were included. Compared to non-elderly patients, those that were elderly had an increased risk of complicated appendicitis [relative risk (RR), 2.38; 95% CI: 2.13, 2.66], peritonitis [RR, 1.88; 95% CI: 1.36, 2.59], and conversion from laparoscopic to open appendectomy [RR, 3.02; 95% CI: 2.31, 3.95]. The risk of overall postoperative complications [RR, 2.59; 95% CI: 2.19, 3.06], intra-abdominal abscess [RR, 1.84; 95% CI: 1.15, 2.96], wound infection [RR, 3.80; 95% CI: 2.57, 5.61], and use of postoperative drainage [RR, 1.14; 95% CI: 1.09, 1.19] was higher among the elderly. The risk of readmission (30 days) [RR, 1.61; 95% CI: 1.16, 2.24] and mortality (30 days) [RR, 12.48; 95% CI: 3.65, 42.7] was also higher among elderly.
CONCLUSIONS
Findings suggest an increased risk of peri-and postoperative complications among elderly subjects undergoing appendectomy, compared to non-elderly subjects.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier: CRD42021286157.
PubMed: 35265661
DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.818347 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2021Prophylactic intra-peritoneal drainage has been considered to be an effective measure to reduce postoperative complications after pancreatectomy. However, routinely...
INTRODUCTION
Prophylactic intra-peritoneal drainage has been considered to be an effective measure to reduce postoperative complications after pancreatectomy. However, routinely placed drainage during abdominal surgery may be unnecessary or even harmful to some patients, due to the possibility of increasing complications. And there is still controversy about the prophylactic intra-peritoneal drainage after pancreatectomy. This meta-analysis aimed to analyze the incidence of complications after either pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) or distal pancreatectomy (DP) in the drain group and no-drain group.
METHODS
Data were retrieved from four electronic databases PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and Web of Science up to December 2020, including the outcomes of individual treatment after PD and DP, mortality, morbidity, clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF), bile leak, wound infection, postoperative hemorrhage, delayed gastric emptying (DGE), intra-abdominal abscess, reoperation, intervened radiology (IR), and readmission. Cochrane Collaboration Handbook and the criteria of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale were used to assess the quality of studies included.
RESULTS
We included 15 studies after strict screening. 13 studies with 16,648 patients were analyzed to assess the effect of drain placement on patients with different surgery procedures, and 4 studies with 6,990 patients were analyzed to assess the effect of drain placement on patients with different fistula risk. For patients undergoing PD, the drain group had lower mortality but higher rate of CR-POPF than the no-drain group. For patients undergoing DP, the drain group had higher rates of CR-POPF, wound infection and readmission. There were no significant differences in bile leak, hemorrhage, DGE, intra-abdominal abscess, and IR in either overall or each subgroup. For Low-risk subgroup, the rates of hemorrhage, DGE and morbidity were higher after drainage. For High-risk subgroup, the rate of hemorrhage was higher while the rates of reoperation and morbidity were lower in the drain group.
CONCLUSIONS
Intraperitoneal drainage may benefit some patients undergoing PD, especially those with high pancreatic fistula risk. For DP, current evidences suggest that routine drainage might not benefit patients, but no clear conclusions can be drawn because of the study limitations.
PubMed: 34094952
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.658829 -
Life (Basel, Switzerland) Jan 2023(1) Background: Although invasive fungal infections are a major cause of neonatal morbidity and mortality, data on the incidence and outcomes of localized abscesses in... (Review)
Review
(1) Background: Although invasive fungal infections are a major cause of neonatal morbidity and mortality, data on the incidence and outcomes of localized abscesses in solid organs due to fungal infections are scarce. The aim of this study was to consolidate evidence and enhance our understanding on neonatal liver abscesses due to invasive fungal infections. (2) Methods: An electronic search of the PubMed and Scopus databases was conducted, considering studies that evaluated fungal liver abscesses in the neonatal population. Data on the epidemiology, clinical course, treatment, and outcome of these infections were integrated in our study. (3) Results: Overall, 10 studies were included presenting data on 19 cases of neonatal fungal liver abscesses. spp. were the most common causative pathogens (94.7%). Premature neonates constituted the majority of cases (93%), while umbilical venous catheter placement, broad spectrum antibiotics, and prolonged parenteral nutrition administration were identified as other common predisposing factors. Diagnosis was established primarily by abdominal ultrasonography. Medical therapy with antifungal agents was the mainstay of treatment, with Amphotericin B being the most common agent (47%). Abscess drainage was required in four cases (21%). Eradication of the infection was achieved in the majority of cases (80%). (4) Conclusions: Even though fungal liver abscess is a rare entity in the neonatal population, clinicians should keep it in mind in small, premature infants who fail to respond to conventional treatment for sepsis, particularly if an indwelling catheter is in situ. A high index of suspicion is necessary in order to achieve a timely diagnosis and the initiation of the appropriate treatment.
PubMed: 36676116
DOI: 10.3390/life13010167 -
Cureus Nov 2023Intra-abdominal complications such as peritoneal abscesses pose significant medical challenges. Over recent years, there has been a heightened focus on refining... (Review)
Review
Intra-abdominal complications such as peritoneal abscesses pose significant medical challenges. Over recent years, there has been a heightened focus on refining treatments for these conditions, such as optimal surgical techniques, drug therapies, and intervention methods. This paper aims to present a comprehensive overview of 10 research studies spanning various countries to highlight recent advancements and findings in the treatment and management of peritoneal abscesses. The paper reviewed 10 trials involving a total of 942 participants, covering diverse methodologies including randomized controlled trials, retrospective analyses, and phase 3 clinical trials. The research spanned countries such as the USA, Finland, Japan, Turkey, India, and China. Key findings included the notable benefits of laparoscopic interventions in appendiceal abscess treatments, which led to quicker recoveries and reduced readmissions compared to conservative approaches. Additionally, certain drug combinations, such as tazobactam/ceftolozane with metronidazole, showcased high clinical efficacy, particularly against resistant bacterial strains. Challenges persist in the early detection of intra-abdominal infections, emphasizing the pivotal role of antimicrobial treatments. Unique therapeutic approaches, like the use of strong acid-electrolyzed water (SAEW) in pediatric appendicitis cases, have proven effective in reducing surgical site infections. Intrabdominal complications such as peritoneal abscesses pose a real challenge. Early detection plays a critical role, which relies on using imaging techniques such as CT scans. Poorly managed mild intra-abdominal diseases can lead to the development of abscesses. Therefore, the implication of highly effective antibiotic combinations such as tazobactam/ceftolozane and metronidazole/ceftriaxone from the start can effectively combat challenging bacterial infections such as Gram-negative and anaerobic bacteria. Surgical procedures remain the most effective method to treat abscesses, and they are usually used as the last resort when drainage, laparoscopy, and other methods fail.
PubMed: 38084178
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.48601