-
Journal of Nephrology Sep 2023This systematic review summarises the stability of less commonly prescribed antibiotics in different peritoneal dialysis solutions that could be used for... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
This systematic review summarises the stability of less commonly prescribed antibiotics in different peritoneal dialysis solutions that could be used for culture-directed therapy of peritonitis, which would be especially useful in regions with a high prevalence of multidrug antibiotic-resistant strains.
METHODS
A literature search of Medline, Scopus, Embase and Google Scholar for articles published from inception to 25 January, 2023 was conducted. Only antibiotic stability studies conducted in vitro and not recently reviewed by So et al. were included. The main outcomes were chemical, physical, antimicrobial and microbial stability. This protocol was registered in PROSPERO (registration number CRD42023393366).
RESULTS
We screened 1254 abstracts, and 28 articles were included in the study. In addition to those discussed in a recent systematic review (So et al., Clin Kidney J 15(6):1071-1078, 2022), we identified 18 antimicrobial agents. Of these, 9 have intraperitoneal dosing recommendations in the recent International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis (ISPD) peritonitis guidelines, and 7 of the 9 had stability data applicable to clinical practice. They were cefotaxime, ceftriaxone, daptomycin, ofloxacin, and teicoplanin in glucose-based solutions, tobramycin in Extraneal solution only and fosfomycin in Extraneal, Nutrineal, Physioneal 1.36% and 2.27% glucose solutions.
CONCLUSIONS
Physicochemical stability has not been demonstrated for all antibiotics with intraperitoneal dosing recommendations in the ISPD peritonitis guidelines. Further studies are required to determine the stability of antibiotics, especially in icodextrin-based and low-glucose degradation products, pH-neutral solutions.
Topics: Humans; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Dialysis Solutions; Glucose; Icodextrin; Peritoneal Dialysis; Peritonitis
PubMed: 37548827
DOI: 10.1007/s40620-023-01716-7 -
American Journal of Kidney Diseases :... Oct 2023COVID-19 disproportionately affects people with comorbidities, including chronic kidney disease (CKD). We describe the impact of COVID-19 on people with CKD and their...
RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE
COVID-19 disproportionately affects people with comorbidities, including chronic kidney disease (CKD). We describe the impact of COVID-19 on people with CKD and their caregivers.
STUDY DESIGN
A systematic review of qualitative studies.
SETTING & STUDY POPULATIONS
Primary studies that reported the experiences and perspectives of adults with CKD and/or caregivers were eligible.
SEARCH STRATEGY & SOURCES
MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL searched from database inception to October 2022.
DATA EXTRACTION
Two authors independently screened the search results. Full texts of potentially relevant studies were assessed for eligibility. Any discrepancies were resolved by discussion with another author.
ANALYTICAL APPROACH
A thematic synthesis was used to analyze the data.
RESULTS
Thirty-four studies involving 1,962 participants were included. Four themes were identified: exacerbating vulnerability and distress (looming threat of COVID-19 infection, intensifying isolation, aggravating pressure on families); uncertainty in accessing health care (overwhelmed by disruption of care, confused by lack of reliable information, challenged by adapting to telehealth, skeptical about vaccine efficacy and safety); coping with self-management (waning fitness due to decreasing physical activity, diminishing ability to manage diet, difficulty managing fluid restrictions, minimized burden with telehealth, motivating confidence and autonomy); and strengthening sense of safety and support (protection from lockdown restrictions, increasing trust in care, strengthened family connection).
LIMITATIONS
Non-English studies were excluded, and inability to delineate themes based on stage of kidney and treatment modality.
CONCLUSIONS
Uncertainty in accessing health care during the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated vulnerability, emotional distress, and burden, and led to reduced capacity to self-manage among patients with CKD and their caregivers. Optimizing telehealth and access to educational and psychosocial support may improve self-management and the quality and effectiveness of care during a pandemic, mitigating potentially catastrophic consequences for people with CKD.
PLAIN-LANGUAGE SUMMARY
During the COVID-19 pandemic, patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) faced barriers and challenges to accessing care and were at an increased risk of worsened health outcomes. To understand the perspectives about the impact of COVID-19 among patients with CKD and their caregivers, we conducted a systematic review of 34 studies involving 1,962 participants. Our findings demonstrated that uncertainty in accessing care during the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated the vulnerability, distress, and burden of patients and impaired their abilities for self-management. Optimizing the use of telehealth and providing education and psychosocial services may mitigate the potential consequences for people with CKD during a pandemic.
Topics: Adult; Humans; COVID-19; Pandemics; Communicable Disease Control; Qualitative Research; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic
PubMed: 37330133
DOI: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2023.04.001 -
Journal of Neurosurgery. Spine Sep 2023Lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) is a workhorse surgical approach for lumbar arthrodesis. There is growing interest in techniques for performing single-position...
OBJECTIVE
Lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) is a workhorse surgical approach for lumbar arthrodesis. There is growing interest in techniques for performing single-position surgery in which LLIF and pedicle screw fixation are performed with the patient in the prone position. Most studies of prone LLIF are of poor quality and without long-term follow-up; therefore, the complication profile related to this novel approach is not well known. The objective of this study was to perform a systematic review and pooled analysis to understand the safety profile of prone LLIF.
METHODS
A systematic review of the literature and a pooled analysis were conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. All studies reporting prone LLIF were assessed for inclusion. Studies not reporting complication rates were excluded.
RESULTS
Ten studies meeting the inclusion criteria were analyzed. Overall, 286 patients were treated with prone LLIF across these studies, and a mean (SD) of 1.3 (0.2) levels per patient were treated. The 18 intraoperative complications reported included cage subsidence (3.8% [3/78]), anterior longitudinal ligament rupture (2.3% [5/215]), cage repositioning (2.1% [2/95]), segmental artery injury (2.0% [5/244]), aborted prone interbody placement (0.8% [2/244]), and durotomy (0.6% [1/156]). No major vascular or peritoneal injuries were reported. Sixty-eight postoperative complications occurred, including hip flexor weakness (17.8% [21/118]), thigh and groin sensory symptoms (13.3% [31/233]), revision surgery (3.8% [3/78]), wound infection (1.9% [3/156]), psoas hematoma (1.3% [2/156]), and motor neural injury (1.2% [2/166]).
CONCLUSIONS
Single-position LLIF in the prone position appears to be a safe surgical approach with a low complication profile. Longer-term follow-up and prospective studies are needed to better characterize the long-term complication rates related to this approach.
Topics: Humans; Lumbar Vertebrae; Postoperative Complications; Spinal Fusion; Reoperation; Vascular System Injuries; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37310041
DOI: 10.3171/2023.4.SPINE221180 -
Surgery Aug 2023The role of proximal diversion in patients undergoing sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis for diverticulitis with generalized peritonitis is unclear. The aim of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The role of proximal diversion in patients undergoing sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis for diverticulitis with generalized peritonitis is unclear. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis and sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis with a proximal diversion in perforated diverticulitis with diffuse peritonitis.
METHOD
A systematic literature search on sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis and sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis with proximal diversion for diverticulitis with diffuse peritonitis was conducted in the Medline and EMBASE databases. Randomized clinical trials and observational studies reporting the primary outcome of interest (30-day mortality) were included. Secondary outcomes were major morbidity, anastomotic leak, reoperation, stoma nonreversal rates, and length of hospital stay. A meta-analysis of proportions and linear regression models were used to assess the effect of each procedure on the different outcomes.
RESULTS
A total of 17 studies involving 544 patients (sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis: 287 versus sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis with proximal diversion: 257) were included. Thirty-day mortality (odds ratio 1.12, 95% confidence interval 0.53-2.40, P = .76), major morbidity (odds ratio 1.40, 95% confidence interval 0.80-2.44, P = .24), anastomotic leak (odds ratio 0.34, 95% confidence interval 0.099-1.20, P = .10), reoperation (odds ratio 0.49, 95% confidence interval 0.17-1.46, P = .20), and length of stay (sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis: 12.1 vs resection and primary anastomosis with diverting ileostomy: 15 days, P = .44) were similar between groups. The risk of definitive stoma was significantly lower after sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis (odds ratio 0.05, 95% confidence interval 0.006-0.35, P = .003).
CONCLUSION
Sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis with or without proximal diversion have similar postoperative outcomes in selected patients with diverticulitis and diffuse peritonitis. However, further randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these results.
Topics: Humans; Diverticulitis, Colonic; Anastomotic Leak; Colostomy; Intestinal Perforation; Diverticulitis; Anastomosis, Surgical; Peritonitis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37258308
DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2023.04.035 -
Minerva Surgery Aug 2023The significance of laparoscopy after appendectomy is still unclear, despite the fact that it is thought to be an appropriate technique for the detection and management...
INTRODUCTION
The significance of laparoscopy after appendectomy is still unclear, despite the fact that it is thought to be an appropriate technique for the detection and management of postoperative complications. We aimed to determine the incidence, risk factors, diagnosis, and laparoscopic approach for the treatment of acute complications after appendectomy performing a systematic review of the literature.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
We performed systematic review of the PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase and GoogleScholar bibliographic databases between 1995 and 2022 regarding laparoscopic resolution of early postoperative complications after appendectomy. Demographics, peri-operative variables, and postoperative outcomes were analyzed.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
A total of 9 studies comprising 116 cases of laparoscopic resolution of early complications after appendectomy were included. The primary surgery showed a 60% of perforated or gangrenous appendicitis. Time elapse between the appendectomy and the diagnosis of the postoperative complication was from 2 to 15 days (median 5.8 days). The procedures performed at laparoscopy were as follows: laparoscopic washout and drainage of generalized peritonitis and intra-abdominal abscesses (95.6%), laparoscopic lysis of adhesions due to small bowel obstruction (1.7%), running suturing for unnoticed small bowel lesion (1.7%) and one patient required a right colectomy due to stump leakage (0.8%). Conversion to an open approach was necessary in 9 patients (7.8%). Postoperative complications after early re-laparoscopy washout were reported in 4 publications (15.5%). Finally, 15 (12.9%) patients required an additional intervention. The mean LOS was of 5 days.
CONCLUSIONS
Infectious complications are not uncommon after appendectomy, but their incidence increases significantly in complicated appendicitis, with IAA being the most feared complication. When re-exploration is mandatory, the laparoscopic approach is a safe and highly effective tool for the diagnosis and treatment of these complications, adding the benefits of minimally invasive surgery.
Topics: Humans; Appendectomy; Appendicitis; Retrospective Studies; Postoperative Complications; Laparoscopy
PubMed: 36789906
DOI: 10.23736/S2724-5691.22.09835-5 -
European Journal of Trauma and... Oct 2023Anastomotic leakage after small bowel resection in emergency laparotomy is a severe complication. A consensus on the risk factors for anastomotic leakage has not been... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Anastomotic leakage after small bowel resection in emergency laparotomy is a severe complication. A consensus on the risk factors for anastomotic leakage has not been established, and it is still unclear if peritonitis is a risk factor. This systematic review aimed to evaluate if an entero-entero/entero-colonic anastomosis is safe in patients with peritonitis undergoing abdominal acute care surgery.
METHODS
A systematic literature review based on PRISMA guidelines was performed, searching the databases Pubmed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Science Direct for studies of anastomosis in peritonitis. Patients with an anastomosis after non-planned small bowel resection (ischemia, perforation, or strangulation), including secondary peritonitis, were included. Elective laparotomies and colo-colonic anastomoses were excluded. Due to the etiology, traumatic perforation, in-vitro, and animal studies were excluded.
RESULTS
This review identified 26 studies of small-bowel anastomosis in peritonitis with a total of 2807 patients. This population included a total of 889 small-bowel/right colonic resections with anastomoses, and 242 enterostomies. All studies, except two, were retrospective reviews or case series. The overall mortality rates were 0-20% and anastomotic leakage rates 0-36%. After performing a risk of bias evaluation there was no basis for conducting a meta-analysis. The quality of evidence was rated as low.
CONCLUSION
There was no evidence to refute performing a primary small-bowel anastomosis in acute laparotomy with peritonitis. There is currently insufficient evidence to label peritonitis as a risk factor for anastomotic leakage in acute care laparotomy with small-bowel resection.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
The review was registered with the PROSPERO register of systematic reviews on 14/07/2020 with the ID: CRD42020168670.
Topics: Animals; Humans; Anastomosis, Surgical; Anastomotic Leak; Enterostomy; Peritonitis; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 36526812
DOI: 10.1007/s00068-022-02192-7