Prophylactic application of closed-incision NPWT in aseptic surgery - a review of literature.

Negative pressure wound therapy is a generally accepted method of treating septic or secreting wounds. In contrast to that, postoperative application of negative pressure wound therapy to primarily closed surgical wounds is referred to as closed-incision negative-pressure wound therapy (Ci-NPWT). According to available sources, wounds after prophylactic application of Ci-NPWT show lower complication rates, especially wound infections, and dehiscence. The literature confirms that the Ci-NPWT technique improves healing of all surgical wounds, both septic and aseptic.

Is abdominal pain after an injury just an injury? Case report of rare aspiration pneumonia with lung gangrene and peritoneal response in a 5-year-old child.

Although pneumonia presents a relatively common diagnosis, it does not always present with classic clinical symptoms, nor does it follow a regular course without complications. The presented case describes a rare case of aspiration necrotizing pneumonia, which despite intensive therapy, progressed to lung gangrene and required a lung lobectomy. Another peculiarity is that the correct diagnosis was established only after the onset of abdominal pain, surprisingly by a trauma surgeon. This case emphasizes the necessity of a thorough general examination and draws attention to a rare, but conservatively intractable necrotizing pneumonia complicated by lung gangrene.

Surgical drainage, the origins and where we are today.

The use of drains in surgery has a rich history. Since ancient times, drainage has experienced a long progress, and its development has continued all the way to the present era. Both the indications for drainage and the material of surgical drains have changed over the last 2500 years. Indeed, drainage as we know today, was not always a practice so common or generally so well accepted, as it is today. The current concept of surgical drainage has witnessed not only periods of success, but also dead ends and mistakes of both science and medicine.

Laparoscopic Repair Modality of Perforated Peptic Ulcer: Less Is More?

Perforation, per se, presents the most serious complication of peptic ulcer disease with a mortality rate that cannot be underestimated. Surgery is the only treatment option, which can be performed laparoscopically or via conventional laparotomy. The present study aimed to compare the short-term outcomes of laparoscopy and laparotomy techniques in the surgical treatment of peptic ulcer perforation. A retrospective study design was structured to compare the perioperative and short-term postoperative outcomes of 102 patients who had undergone laparoscopic and conventional repair of the perforated peptic ulcer over a six-year interval (January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2021). Of these, 44 (43.1%) had undergone laparoscopic repair while 58 (56.9%) had surgical repair via conventional laparotomy. The operative time and length of hospital stay were comparable in both subgroups (p=0.984 and p =0.585). Nevertheless, 30-day postoperative morbidity was significantly higher in the open surgery subgroup (75.9% vs. 59.1%, p= 0.032). The risk of relaparotomy was similar in both study subgroups; however, suture dehiscence as a reason for surgical revision was significantly more frequent in the laparoscopic subgroup (13.6% vs 3.4%). Of note, the mortality rate in the laparoscopic group of patients was 13.6%, and in the laparotomy group 41.4%. The laparoscopic approach to peptic ulcer perforation is the procedure of choice for low-risk patients. Conventional surgery seems to be associated with a significantly higher incidence of severe postoperative complications and mortality. However, the higher mortality in these patients is probably related to their worse initial clinical condition.

Post-Kidney Transplantation Results After Circulatory or Brain Death Without Pre-Mortem Heparin Administration.

BACKGROUND Kidney donation after circulatory death (DCD) follows confirmation of death using cardiorespiratory criteria, while donation after brain death (DBD) uses neurological criteria. DBD and DCD donors are the main sources of grafts for transplantation. This retrospective cohort study from a single center in the Czech Republic aimed to compare 5-year post-transplantation outcomes after DCD and DBD transplantation without pre-mortem heparin administration. MATERIAL AND METHODS A total of 227 recipients with matched donors enrolled in the transplantation program at our institution between 2015 and 2019 were analyzed. Following the application of the inclusion criteria, 99 recipients and 94 matched donors were finally included in the study. RESULTS The duration of cold ischemia (median 961 vs 1100 min, P=0.028) and the perfusion with the preservation solution (median 11 vs 22 min, P<0.001) was statistically significantly shorter in DBD than in DCD grafts. The 1-year survival rates were 97.5% (95% CI 94.1-100.0%) and 90.0% (95% CI: 77.8-100.0%) for DBD and DCD recipients, respectively. The 3-year survival rates were 91.9 (95% CI: 86.0-98.4) and 90.0 (95% CI: 77.8-100.0) for the DBD and DCD groups, respectively. The overall difference in survival between the 2 groups of patients was not statistically significant (P=0.750) nor was disease-free survival (P=0.370). CONCLUSIONS This retrospective study from a single center showed similar 5-year results after kidney transplantation for DCD and DBD donors without pre-mortem heparin administration, including the time to graft failure and patient survival.