Appropriate Use of Antibiotics in Acute Pancreatitis: A Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: While selective use of antibiotics for infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) in acute pancreatitis (AP) is recommended, studies indicate a high rate of inadequate treatment. METHODS: A search of PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases was conducted, focusing on primary research and meta-analyses. Data were categorized based on core concepts, and a narrative synthesis was performed. RESULTS: The search identified a total of 1016 publications. After evaluating 203 full texts and additional sources from the grey literature, 80 studies were included in the review. The answers obtained were: (1) Preventive treatment does not decrease the incidence of IPN or mortality. Given the risks of bacterial resistance and fungal infections, antibiotics should be reserved for highly suspected or confirmed IPN; (2) The diagnosis of IPN does not always require microbiological samples, as clinical suspicion or computed tomography signs can suffice. Early diagnosis and treatment may be improved by using biomarkers such as procalcitonin and novel microbiological methods; (3) When indicated, early initiation of antibiotics is a key determinant in reducing mortality associated with IPN; (4) Antibiotics with good penetration into pancreatic tissue covering Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria should be used. Routine antifungal therapy is not recommended; (5) The step-up approach, including antibiotics, is the standard for IPN management; (6) Antibiotic duration should be kept to a minimum and should be based on the quality of source control and patient condition. CONCLUSIONS: Early antibiotic therapy is essential for the treatment of IPN, but prophylactic antibiotics are not recommended in AP. High-quality randomized controlled trials are required to better understand the role of antibiotics and antifungals in AP management.

Surgical Infection Reduction Program of the Observatory of Surgical Infection (PRIQ-O): Delphi prioritization and consensus document on recommendations for the prevention of surgical site infection.

Surgical site infection is the most frequent and avoidable complication of surgery, but clinical guidelines for its prevention are insufficiently followed. We present the results of a Delphi consensus carried out by a panel of experts from 17 Scientific Societies with a critical review of the scientific evidence and international guidelines, to select the measures with the highest degree of evidence and facilitate their implementation. Forty measures were reviewed and 53 recommendations were issued. Ten main measures were prioritized for inclusion in prevention bundles: preoperative shower; correct surgical hand hygiene; no hair removal from the surgical field or removal with electric razors; adequate systemic antibiotic prophylaxis; use of minimally invasive approaches; skin decontamination with alcoholic solutions; maintenance of normothermia; plastic wound protectors-retractors; intraoperative glove change; and change of surgical and auxiliary material before wound closure.

What have we learned from the surveys of the AEC, AECP and the Observatory of Infection in Surgery? Compliance with postoperative infection prevention measures and comparison with the AEC recommendations.

Before planning improvement strategies, it is crucial to know the degree of implementation of preventative measures for postoperative infection. The aggregated results of 3 surveys carried out by the Observatory of Infection in Surgery to members of 11 associations of surgeons and perioperative nurses are presented. The questions were aimed to determine the knowledge of the scientific evidence, personal beliefs and the actual use of the main measures. Of 2295 respondents, 45.1% did not receive feedback on the infection rate of their unit. Insufficient knowledge of some of the main prevention recommendations and some disturbing rates of use were observed. The preferred strategies to improve compliance with preventive guidelines and their degree of implementation were investigated. A gap between scientific evidence and clinical practice in the prevention of infection in different surgical specialties was confirmed.

Author Correction: Combined quantification of procalcitonin and HLA-DR improves sepsis detection in surgical patients.

A correction to this article has been published and is linked from the HTML and PDF versions of this paper. The error has not been fixed in the paper.

Combined quantification of procalcitonin and HLA-DR improves sepsis detection in surgical patients.

Early recognition of sepsis is a key factor to improve survival to this disease in surgical patients, since it allows prompt control of the infectious source. Combining pro-inflammatory and immunosupression biomarkers could represent a good strategy to improve sepsis detection. Here we evaluated the combination of procalcitonin (PCT) with gene expression levels of HLA-DRA to detect sepsis in a cohort of 154 surgical patients (101 with sepsis and 53 with no infection). HLA-DRA expression was quantified using droplet digital PCR, a next-generation PCR technology. Area under the receiver operating curve analysis (AUROC) showed that the PCT/HLA-DRA ratio outperformed PCT to detect sepsis (AUROC [CI95%], p): PCT: 0.80 [0.73-0.88], <0.001; PCT/HLA-DRA: 0.85 [0.78-0.91], <0.001. In the multivariate analysis, the ratio showed a superior ability to predict sepsis compared to that of PCT (OR [CI 95%], p): PCT/HLA-DRA: 7.66 [1.82-32.29], 0.006; PCT: 4.21 [1.15-15.43] 0.030. Multivariate analysis was confirmed using a new surgical cohort with 74 sepsis patients and 21 controls: PCT/HLA-DRA: 34.86 [1.22-995.08], 0.038; PCT: 5.52 [0.40-75.78], 0.201. In conclusion, the combination of PCT with HLA-DRA is a promising strategy for improving sepsis detection in surgical patients.

Is there a case for selective, rather than routine, preoperative laryngoscopy in thyroid surgery?

BACKGROUND: According to some authors, routine preoperative laryngoscopy should be the standard of care in all patients undergoing thyroid surgery. The rationale for this approach is (I) the risk that a patient has a preoperative vocal cord palsy (VCP) without symptoms; (II) the presence of VCP preoperatively is suggestive of invasive malignancy; (III) it is relevant for the use of intraoperative nerve monitoring; and (IV) surgical strategy may be better defined if a paralysed vocal cord is detected preoperatively. METHODS: This is a review of studies of patients who underwent routine preoperative laryngoscopy to anticipate preoperative VCP and that evaluated related risk factors, including previous surgery, voice function complaints, and a diagnosis of malignancy. The estimated risk of sustaining preoperative VCF in the absence of these factors was determined. The relevant current guidelines from different professional bodies are also addressed. RESULTS: The level of evidence that supports routine preoperative laryngoscopy is weak. The risk of harboring preoperative VCP in the absence of previous neck or other risk-related surgery, advanced malignancy or voice symptoms is very low (0.5% of cases). CONCLUSIONS: Selective rather than routine use of preoperative laryngoscopy may be acceptable provided that the risk of undetected paralysis is as low as can be reasonably ascertained from the available literature.

Adrenalectomy for solid tumor metastases: results of a multicenter European study.

BACKGROUND: We assessed the results of adrenalectomy for solid tumor metastases in 317 patients recruited from 30 European centers. METHODS: Patients with histologically proven adrenal metastatic disease and undergoing complete removal(s) of the affected gland(s) were eligible. RESULTS: Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) was the most frequent tumor type followed by colorectal and renal cell carcinoma. Adrenal metastases were synchronous (≤6 months) in 73 (23%) patients and isolated in 213 (67%). The median disease-free interval was 18.5 months. Laparoscopic resection was used in 46% of patients. Surgery was limited to the adrenal gland in 73% of patients and R0 resection was achieved in 86% of cases. The median overall survival was 29 months (95% confidence interval, 24.69-33.30). The survival rates at 1, 2, 3, and 5 years were 80%, 61%, 42%, and 35%, respectively. Patients with renal cancer showed a median survival of 84 months, patients with NSCLC 26 months, and patients with colorectal cancer 29 months (P = .017). Differences in survival between metachronous and synchronous lesions were also significant (30 vs. 23 months; P = .038). CONCLUSION: Surgical removal of adrenal metastasis is associated with long-term survival in selected patients.

Morbidity following thyroid surgery: does surgeon volume matter?

PURPOSE: The aim of our study was to analyze the relationship between surgeon volume and morbidity in patients operated on by surgeons with endocrine specialization (EndS group) and those operated on by general surgeons (GenS group) in a single tertiary institution. METHODS: We present the results of a prospective cohort study of all patients undergoing thyroid surgery in our institution between January 2008 and January 2010, all of whom attended for follow-up for at least 12 months. We assessed pre- and postoperative recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) function by laryngoscopy. We monitored serum calcium concentrations in all patients until these values were normal without vitamin D and oral calcium supplementation. RESULTS: We studied 225 patients: 30 in the GenS group (six surgeons performing <5 procedures per surgeon per year) and 195 in the EndS group (two surgeons performing >40 procedures per surgeon per year). The total number of exposed RLN was 46 and 325, respectively. The incidence of RLN palsy persisting beyond 12 months was higher in the GenS group (2/46 vs. 1/325 exposed RLNs, p = 0.04). The incidence of hypocalcaemia persisting beyond 12 months (bilateral procedures) was also higher in the GenS group (3/16 vs. 3/130 patients, p = 0.028). CONCLUSIONS: Morbidity in terms of permanent RLN palsy and hypocalcaemia was less frequent among patients operated on by endocrine-dedicated surgeons. Differences in surgical volume and specialized training in neck endocrine surgery may explain these variations in morbidity.