Perioperative and oncologic outcomes of interval colectomy performed by acute care surgeons after stenting as a bridge to surgery for left-sided malignant colonic obstruction are non-inferior to the outcomes of colorectal surgeons in the elective setting: single center experience.

PURPOSE: To analyze if perioperative and oncologic outcomes with stenting as a bridge to surgery (SEMS-BS) and interval colectomy performed by acute care surgeons for left-sided occlusive colonic neoplasms (LSCON) are non-inferior to those obtained by colorectal surgeons for non-occlusive tumors of the same location in the full-elective context. METHODS: From January 2011 to January 2021, patients with LSCON at University Regional Hospital in Málaga (Spain) were directed to a SEMS-BS strategy with an interval colectomy performed by acute care surgeons and included in the study group (SEMS-BS). The control group was formed with patients from the Colorectal Division elective surgical activity dataset, matching by ASA, stage, location and year of surgery on a ratio 1:2. Stages IV or palliative stenting were excluded. Software SPSS 23.0 was used to analyze perioperative and oncologic (defined by overall -OS- and disease free -DFS-survival) outcomes. RESULTS: SEMS-BS and control group included 56 and 98 patients, respectively. In SEMS-BS group, rates of technical/clinical failure and perforation were 5.35% (3/56), 3.57% (2/56) and 3.57% (2/56). Surgery was performed with a median interval time of 11 days (9-16). No differences between groups were observed in perioperative outcomes (laparoscopic approach, primary anastomosis rate, morbidity or mortality). As well, no statistically significant differences were observed in OS and DFS between groups, both compared globally (OS:p < 0.94; DFS:p < 0.67, respectively) or by stages I-II (OS:p < 0.78; DFS:p < 0.17) and III (OS:p < 0.86; DFS:p < 0.70). CONCLUSION: Perioperative and oncologic outcomes of a strategy with SEMS-BS for LSCON are non-inferior to those obtained in the elective setting for non-occlusive neoplasms in the same location. Technical and oncologic safety of interval colectomy performed on a semi-scheduled situation by acute care surgeons is absolutely warranted.

Impact of blood amylase peak over vascular graft thrombosis in pancreas transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Vascular graft thrombosis (VGT) is still the achuilles heel in pancreas transplantation (PT); it is the main cause of nonimmunologic graft loss. Early diagnosis is essential to avoid transplantectomy. The aim of our study was to analyze the peak amylase during the first 3 days after PT as risk factor for VGT. METHODS: This retrospective study included 58 pancreas transplants in 55 patients from January 2007 to November 2011. They underwent an anticoagulation protocol based on unfractionated heparin and low-molecular-weight heparin. The technique consisted of enteric drainage and systemic venous drainage. The primary endpoint was VGT with consideration of multiple relevant variables. The maximum amylase level was determined during the first 3 days after transplantation. A receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to establish a cutoff point as (mean plus one standard deviation; 745 mg/dL), calculating the sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values. RESULTS: Recipient characteristics were 71% males with an overall mean age of 39 years (range, 23-55) and body mass index 24 (range, 19-36). The donor sex was similar. Mean donor age was 32 years with occurrences of hypotension in 9%, cerebrovascular brain death in 46%. Mean ischemia time was 10 hours and 45 minutes. Mean blood amylase peak was 395 mg/dL. Seven VGT cases were diagnosed during the postoperative period including six with complete thrombosis requring transplantectomy. Bivariate analysis showed the group of subjects with amylase levels above 745 mg/dL to display on eight-fold greater risk for VGT (odds ratio = 8.6; P = .032). The area under the curve of blood amylase peak during the first 3 days to detect VGT was 0.630 (95% confidence interval 0.41-0.84). CONCLUSIONS: A blood amylase peak above 745 mg/dL in the first 3 days after transplantation was associated with risk for VGT.

Conservative approach versus urgent appendectomy in surgical management of acute appendicitis with abscess or phlegmon.

BACKGROUND: Surgical management of acute appendicitis with appendiceal abscess or phlegmon remains controversial. We studied the results of initial conservative treatment (antibiotics and percutaneous drainage if necessary, with or without interval appendectomy) compared with immediate surgery. METHODS: We undertook an observational, retrospective cohort study of patients with a clinical and radiological diagnosis of acute appendicitis with an abscess or phlegmon, treated in our hospital between January 1997 and March 2009. Patients younger than 14, with severe sepsis or with diffuse peritonitis were excluded. A study group of 15 patients with acute appendicitis complicated with an abscess or phlegmon underwent conservative treatment. A control group was composed of the other patients, who all underwent urgent appendectomy, matched for age and later randomized 1:1. The infectious risk stratification was established with the National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance System (NNIS) index. Dependent variables were hospital stay and surgical site infection. Analysis was with SPSS, with p < 0.05 considered significant. RESULTS: Interval appendectomy was performed in 7 study group patients. Surgical site infection episodes were more frequent in the control group (6 vs. 0, p < 0.001). A greater percentage of high risk patients (NNIS ≥ 2) was identified in the control group (80 vs. 28.7%, p < 0.03), mostly related with contaminated or dirty procedures in this group (p < 0.001). No significant difference between groups was found in hospital stay. CONCLUSION: Initial conservative treatment should be considered the best therapeutic choice for acute appendicitis with abscess or phlegmon.

Resultados del tratamiento conservador inicial y de la cirugía urgente en la apendicitis aguda evolucionada / No disponible

Introducción: Existe controversia acerca del tratamiento idóneo de la apendicitis aguda evolucionada en forma de absceso o flemón. Realizamos un estudio para la evaluación de resultados del tratamiento conservador inicial (antibiótico y drenaje percutáneo si se precisa, con/sin apendicectomía diferida) y del tratamiento quirúrgico urgente. Método: Estudio observacional analítico de cohortes retrospectivas. Criterios de inclusión: pacientes con diagnóstico clínico y radiológico de apendicitis aguda evolucionada en forma de absceso o flemón, tratados en nuestro hospital entre enero 1997 y marzo 2009, excluyendo pacientes pediátricos, con sepsis grave o peritonitis difusa. En 15 pacientes con apendicitis complicada con absceso o flemón (cohorte de estudio) se indicó tratamiento conservador inicial. El grupo control se obtuvo del resto de pacientes (en todos ellos se indicó apendicectomía urgente) mediante un matching por edad y asignación aleatoria posterior (1:1). La estratificación del riesgo infeccioso se determinó mediante el índice National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance System (NNIS). Variables resultado: estancia global e infección de sitio quirúrgico. Se consideraron de relevancia estadística niveles de significación < 0,05. Resultados: En 7 pacientes del grupo de estudio se indicó apendicectomía diferida. La incidencia de episodios de infección de sitio quirúrgico fue significativamente mayor en el grupo control (6 vs. 0, p < 0,001). Un mayor porcentaje de pacientes con NNIS de alto riesgo (>= 2) se objetivó en el grupo control (80% vs. 28,7%, p < 0,03). El item determinante fue el carácter contaminado o sucio de las apendicectomías urgentes (p < 0,001). La estancia global no mostró diferencias significativas entre grupos. Conclusión: El tratamiento conservador inicial constituye la mejor alternativa terapéutica para la apendicitis aguda evolucionada(AU)

Background: Surgical management of acute appendicitis with appendiceal abscess or phlegmon remains controversial. We studied the results of initial conservative treatment (antibiotics and percutaneous drainage if necessary, with or without interval appendectomy) compared with immediate surgery. Methods: We undertook an observational, retrospective cohort study of patients with a clinical and radiological diagnosis of acute appendicitis with an abscess or phlegmon, treated in our hospital between January 1997 and March 2009. Patients younger than 14, with severe sepsis or with diffuse peritonitis were excluded. A study group of 15 patients with acute appendicitis complicated with an abscess or phlegmon underwent conservative treatment. A control group was composed of the other patients, who all underwent urgent appendectomy, matched for age and later randomized 1:1. The infectious risk stratification was established with the National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance System (NNIS) index. Dependent variables were hospital stay and surgical site infection. Analysis was with SPSS, with p < 0.05 considered significant. Results: Interval appendectomy was performed in 7 study group patients. Surgical site infection episodes were more frequent in the control group (6 vs. 0, p < 0.001). A greater percentage of high risk patients (NNIS >= 2) was identified in the control group (80 vs. 28.7%, p < 0.03), mostly related with contaminated or dirty procedures in this group (p < 0.001). No significant difference between groups was found in hospital stay. Conclusion: Initial conservative treatment should be considered the best therapeutic choice for acute appendicitis with abscess or phlegmon(AU)

Adverse effects on the lipid profile of immunosuppressive regimens: tacrolimus versus cyclosporin measured using C2 levels.

Immunosuppression has improved graft and recipient survival in transplantation but is accompanied by several adverse effects like dyslipidemia and cardiovascular disease. Herein, we performed an observational, descriptive study to analyze the relationship of dyslipemia (hypercholesterolemia [hypercho] and hypertriglyceridemia [hypertg]) and cardiovascular disease with two different immunosuppressive regimens in liver transplantation: cyclosporine treatment based upon C2 levels (CsA2) and tacrolimus (Tac), both in combination with steroids. Seventy-four liver transplantation patients were included during a 2-year period: 35 with CsA2 and 39 with Tac. The mean follow-up was 40 months. There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of age, gender, Model for End-stage Liver Disease Score, Child stage, and indication for transplantation. The distribution of patients with HyperCho and HyperTg was independent of the immunosuppressive agent (P = NS), both in a global and in a stratified analysis at 6, 12, 24, and 60 months. The analysis of cardiovascular events revealed no differences between the groups (CsA2 14.3%; Tac 18.9%; P = NS). We suggest that CsA monitoring using C2 levels shows a safety profile similar to that of Tac with regard to the development of dyslipidemia and cardiovascular events.

Influence of immunosuppression and effect of hepatitis C virus on new onset of diabetes mellitus in liver transplant recipients.

INTRODUCTION: New-onset posttransplantation diabetes mellitus (PTDM), with an incidence of 10% to 30%, increased graft and patient morbidity and mortality. Such causal factors as age, obesity, therapy, immunosuppression, and hepatitis C virus (HCV) contribute to this disease. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine the incidence of PTDM and impaired fasting glucose (IFG) concentration in transplant recipients to define the causal variables. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study included 127 patients. Patients with pretransplantation diabetes and those with less than 6 months of follow-up were excluded. A descriptive observational study to assess the association between PTDM and IFG and the immunosuppression therapy used was performed by monitoring the potential confounding variables of age, obesity, and HCV. RESULTS: During mean follow-up of 73.7 months (range, 7-120 mo), 93 patients received cyclosporine A (CyA) and 34 received tacrolimus (Tac) therapy. Thirty patients (23.6%) developed PTDM or IFG including 15 (16%; PTDM, six IFG, nine) in the CyA group and 15 (PTDM, seven; IFG, eight) in the Tacrolimus group (P = .001; odds ratio [OR], 4.1). They were homogeneous with respect to confounding variables except for HCV (P = .01). Of the 55 patients with HCV infection, 12 developed PTDM or IFG, including three in the CyA group and nine in the tacrolimus group (P = .03; OR, 7.7), whereas in the 72 patients without HCV infection, the CyA or tacrolimus association with PTDM or IFG was significant (P = .05), Mantel-Haenszel test; OR, 4.9). The interaction between HCV and immunosuppression therapy was primarily produced in the IFG group (HCV-positive; P = .008; OR, 8). CONCLUSION: We observed an association between the use of tacrolimus and the development of PTDM or IFG. There is greater risk in HCV-positive patients, in particular in relation to IFG. The choice of immunosuppressive treatment might be decided on the basis of the patient's pretransplantation status.