Outpatient Non-operative Management of Uncomplicated Acute Appendicitis: A Non-inferiority Study.

INTRODUCTION: Non-operative management (NOM) of uncomplicated acute appendicitis is a well-established alternative to upfront surgery. The administration of intravenous broad-spectrum antibiotics is usually performed in hospital, and only one study described outpatient NOM. The aim of this multicentre retrospective non-inferiority study was to evaluate both safety and non-inferiority of outpatient compared to inpatient NOM in uncomplicated acute appendicitis. METHODS: The study included 668 consecutive patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Patients were treated according to the surgeon's preference: 364 upfront appendectomy, 157 inpatient NOM (inNOM), and 147 outpatient NOM (outNOM). The primary endpoint was the 30-day appendectomy rate, with a non-inferiority limit of 5%. Secondary endpoints were negative appendectomy rate, 30-day unplanned emergency department (ED) visits, and length of stay. RESULTS: 30-day appendectomies were 16 (10.9%) in the outNOM group and 23 (14.6%) in the inNOM group (p = 0.327). OutNOM was non-inferior to inNOM with a risk difference of-3.80% 97.5% CI (- 12.57; 4.97). No difference was found between inNOM and outNOM groups for the number of complicated appendicitis (3 vs. 5) and negative appendectomy (1 vs. 0). Twenty-six (17.7%) outNOM patients required an unplanned ED visit after a median of 1 (1-4) days. In the outNOM group, the mean cumulative in-hospital stay was 0.89 (1.94) days compared with 3.94 (2.17) days in the inNOM group (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Outpatient NOM was non-inferior to inpatient NOM with regard to the 30-day appendectomy rate, while a shorter hospital stay was found in the outNOM group. Further, studies are required to confirm these findings.

Biliary Sepsis Due to Recurrent Acute Calculus Cholecystitis (ACC) in a High Surgical-Risk Elderly Patient: An Unexpected Complication.

Acute calculus cholecystitis (ACC) is increasing in frequency within an ageing population, in which biliary tract infection, including cholecystitis and cholangitis, is the second most common cause of sepsis, with higher morbidity and mortality rates. Patient's critical conditions, such as septic shock or anaesthesiology contraindication, may be reasons to avoid laparoscopic cholecystectomy-the first-line treatment of ACC-preferring gallbladder drainage. It can aid in patient's stabilization with also the benefit of identifying the causative organism to establish a targeted antibiotic therapy, especially in patients at high risk for antimicrobial resistance such as healthcare-associated infection. Nevertheless, a recent randomized clinical trial showed that laparoscopic cholecystectomy can reduce the rate of major complications compared with percutaneous catheter drainage in critically ill patients too. On the other hand, among the possibilities to control biliary sepsis in non-operative management of ACC, according to recent meta-analysis, endoscopic gallbladder drainage showed better clinical success rate, and it is gaining popularity because of the potential advantage of allowing gallstones clearance to reduce recurrences of ACC. However, complications that may arise, although rare, can worsen an already weak clinical condition, as happened to the high surgical-risk elderly patient taken into account in our case report.

Follow-up strategies for patients with splenic trauma managed non-operatively: the 2022 World Society of Emergency Surgery consensus document.

BACKGROUND: In 2017, the World Society of Emergency Surgery published its guidelines for the management of adult and pediatric patients with splenic trauma. Several issues regarding the follow-up of patients with splenic injuries treated with NOM remained unsolved. METHODS: Using a modified Delphi method, we sought to explore ongoing areas of controversy in the NOM of splenic trauma and reach a consensus among a group of 48 international experts from five continents (Africa, Europe, Asia, Oceania, America) concerning optimal follow-up strategies in patients with splenic injuries treated with NOM. RESULTS: Consensus was reached on eleven clinical research questions and 28 recommendations with an agreement rate ≥ 80%. Mobilization after 24 h in low-grade splenic trauma patients (WSES Class I, AAST Grades I-II) was suggested, while in patients with high-grade splenic injuries (WSES Classes II-III, AAST Grades III-V), if no other contraindications to early mobilization exist, safe mobilization of the patient when three successive hemoglobins 8 h apart after the first are within 10% of each other was considered safe according to the panel. The panel suggests adult patients to be admitted to hospital for 1 day (for low-grade splenic injuries-WSES Class I, AAST Grades I-II) to 3 days (for high-grade splenic injuries-WSES Classes II-III, AAST Grades III-V), with those with high-grade injuries requiring admission to a monitored setting. In the absence of specific complications, the panel suggests DVT and VTE prophylaxis with LMWH to be started within 48-72 h from hospital admission. The panel suggests splenic artery embolization (SAE) as the first-line intervention in patients with hemodynamic stability and arterial blush on CT scan, irrespective of injury grade. Regarding patients with WSES Class II blunt splenic injuries (AAST Grade III) without contrast extravasation, a low threshold for SAE has been suggested in the presence of risk factors for NOM failure. The panel also suggested angiography and eventual SAE in all hemodynamically stable adult patients with WSES Class III injuries (AAST Grades IV-V), even in the absence of CT blush, especially when concomitant surgery that requires change of position is needed. Follow-up imaging with contrast-enhanced ultrasound/CT scan in 48-72 h post-admission of trauma in splenic injuries WSES Class II (AAST Grade III) or higher treated with NOM was considered the best strategy for timely detection of vascular complications. CONCLUSION: This consensus document could help guide future prospective studies aiming at validating the suggested strategies through the implementation of prospective trauma databases and the subsequent production of internationally endorsed guidelines on the issue.

Forecasting outcomes after cholecystectomy in octogenarian patients.

BACKGROUND: Although gallstone disease increases with aging, elderly patients are less likely to undergo cholecystectomy. This is because age itself is a negative predictor after cholecystectomy. The ACS-NSQIP risk calculator can therefore help surgeons decide whether to operate or not. However, little is known about the accuracy of this model outside the ACS National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the ability of the ACS-NSQIP model to predict the clinical outcomes of patients aged 80 years or older undergoing elective or emergency cholecystectomy. STUDY DESIGN: The study focused on 263 patients over 80 years of age operated on between 2010 and 2019: 174 were treated as emergencies because of acute cholecystitis (66.2%). Outcomes evaluated are those predicted by the ACS-NSQIP calculator within 30 days of surgery. The ACS-NSQIP model was tested for both discrimination and calibration. Differences among observed and expected outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: When considering all patients, the discrimination of mortality was very high, as it was that of severe complications. Considering only the elective cholecystectomies, the discrimination capacity of ACS-NSQIP risk calculator has consistently worsened in each outcome while it remains high considering the emergency cholecystectomies. In the evaluation of the emergency cholecystectomy, the model showed a very high discriminatory ability and, more importantly, it showed an excellent calibration. Comparisons between main outcomes showed small or even negligible differences between observed and expected values. CONCLUSION: The results of the present study suggest that clinical decisions on cholecystectomy in a patient aged 80 years or older should be assisted through the ACS-NSQIP model.

The Relationship between Timing of Pretransplant Kidney Biopsy, Graft Loss, and Survival in Kidney Transplantation: An Italian Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION: Kidney biopsy is performed to assess if an extended criteria graft can be used for transplantation. It may be performed before or after cross-clamping during organ procurement. This study aims to evaluate whether the timing of biopsy may modify cold ischemia times (CIT) and/or graft outcomes. METHODS: Kidney transplants performed in our center from January 2007 to December 2017 were analyzed. Grafts with preimplantation kidney biopsy were included. Biopsies were performed during surgical back table (ex situ kidney biopsy [ESKB]) until 2012 and since then before the aortic cross-clamping (in situ kidney biopsy [ISKB]). To overcome biases owing to different distributions, a propensity score model was developed. The study population consists in 322 patients, 115 ESKB, and 207 ISKB. RESULTS: CIT was significantly lower for ISKB (730 min ISKB vs. 840 min ESKB, p value = 0.001). In both crude (OR 0.27; 95% confidence interval, 95% CI 0.12-0.60; p value = 0.002) and adjusted analyses (OR 0.37; 95% CI 0.14-0.94; p value = 0.039), ISKB was associated with a reduced odd of graft loss when compared to ESKB. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Performing preimplantation kidney biopsy during the recovery, prior to the aortic cross-clamping, may be a strategy to reduce CIT and improve transplant outcomes.

Surgical site infection prevention and management in immunocompromised patients: a systematic review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: Immunocompromised patients are at higher risk of surgical site infection and wound complications. However, optimal management in the perioperative period is not well established. Present systematic review aims to analyse existing strategies and interventions to prevent and manage surgical site infections and other wound complications in immunocompromised patients. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was conducted. RESULTS: Literature review shows that partial skin closure is effective to reduce SSI in this population. There is not sufficient evidence to definitively suggest in favour of prophylactic negative pressure wound therapy. The use of mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) and calcineurin inhibitors (CNI) in transplanted patient needing ad emergent or undeferrable abdominal surgical procedure must be carefully and multidisciplinary evaluated. The role of antibiotic prophylaxis in transplanted patients needs to be assessed. CONCLUSION: Strict adherence to SSI infection preventing bundles must be implemented worldwide especially in immunocompromised patients. Lastly, it is necessary to elaborate a more widely approved definition of immunocompromised state. Without such shared definition, it will be hard to elaborate the needed methodologically correct studies for this fragile population.