Value of computed tomography scores in complicated acute diverticulitis.

BACKGROUND: Diverticular disease remains one of the most common conditions in the western world. Up to 25% of patients with diverticular disease require hospitalization, 15-30% of those of which require surgical intervention. CT scoring systems have been proposed as means to drive assessment and stratify patients necessitating hospital intervention. To assess and correlate CT scoring systems with clinical and surgical outcomes. METHODS: Retrospective cohort analysis at a single institution. Single institutional assessment with patients presenting to emergency with a CT diagnosed episode of acute diverticulitis. One hundred and eighty-nine patients were included in the study, 61% of which were male. Patient demographics, comorbidities, medications, biochemistry and inflammatory markers, type of complication following acute diverticulitis, operative/procedural intervention, hospital outcome and mortality were measured. CT scoring systems assessed included modified Hinchey, modified Neff, World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) and modified Siewert scoring systems. RESULTS: Majority of patients had left-sided diverticulitis (91%) with localized air (88%) and pericolic abscess (49%) the most common radiological findings. 28% of patients required radiological and/or surgical management with 12% requiring intensive care unit (ICU) admission. There was a general trend for surgical/radiological intervention as the scores increased in severity. The four scoring systems were found to be statistically significant predictors of any intervention and of ICU admission with minimal statistical differences across the different scoring systems. CONCLUSION: Radiological CT scores for complicated diverticulitis are at best, moderate predictors of clinical and surgical outcomes and may serve to guide management with minimal statistical differences across different scores.

Prophylactic negative pressure wound dressings reduces wound complications following emergency laparotomies: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Wound complications are a common cause of postoperative morbidity and incur significant healthcare costs. Recent studies have shown that negative pressure wound dressings reduce wound complication rates, particularly surgical site infections, after elective laparotomies. The clinical utility of prophylactic negative pressure wound dressings for closed emergency laparotomy incisions remains controversial. This meta-analysis investigated the rates of wound complications after emergency laparotomy when a negative pressure wound dressing was applied. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Registry, Web of Science, and Clinialtrials.gov databases were searched from January 1, 2005, to April 1, 2022. All studies comparing negative pressure wound dressings to standard dressings on closed emergency laparotomy incisions were included. RESULTS: A total of 1,199 (negative pressure wound dressings: 566, standard dressing: 633) patients from 7 (prospective: 4, retrospective: 3) studies were identified. Overall, the surgical site infection (superficial/deep) rate was 13.6% (77/566) vs 25.1% (159/633) in the negative pressure wound dressing versus standard dressing groups, respectively (odds ratio 0.43, 95% confidence interval 0.30-0.62). Wound breakdown (skin/fascial dehiscence) was significantly lower in the negative pressure wound dressing (7.7%) group compared to the standard dressing (16.9%) group (odds ratio 0.36, 95% confidence interval 0.19-0.72). The incidence of overall wound complications was significantly lower in the negative pressure wound dressing (15.9%) group compared to the standard dressing (30.4%) group (odds ratio 0.41, 95% confidence interval 0.28-0.59). No significant differences were found in hospital length-of-stay and readmission rates. CONCLUSION: Prophylactic negative pressure wound dressings for closed emergency laparotomy incisions were associated with a significant reduction in surgical site infections, wound breakdown, and overall wound complications, thus supporting its clinical use.

Early Versus Postoperative Chemical Thromboprophylaxis Is Associated with Increased Bleeding Risk Following Abdominal Visceral Resections: a Multicenter Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Abdominal visceral resections incur relatively higher rates of postoperative bleeding and venous thromboembolism (VTE). While guidelines recommend the use of perioperative chemical thromboprophylaxis, the most appropriate time for its initiation is unknown. Here, we investigated whether early (before skin closure) versus postoperative commencement of chemoprophylaxis affected VTE and bleeding rates following abdominal visceral resection. METHODS: Retrospective review of all elective abdominal visceral resections undertaken between January 1, 2018, and June 30, 2019, across four tertiary-referral hospitals. Major bleeding was defined as the need for blood transfusion, reintervention, or > 20 g/L fall in hemoglobin from baseline. Clinical VTE was defined as imaging-proven symptomatic disease < 30 days post-surgery. RESULTS: A total of 945 cases were analyzed. Chemoprophylaxis was given early in 265 (28.0%) patients and postoperatively in 680 (72.0%) patients. Mean chemoprophylaxis exposure doses were similar between the two groups. Clinical VTE developed in 14 (1.5%) patients and was unrelated to chemoprophylaxis timing. Postoperative bleeding occurred in 71 (7.5%) patients, with 57 (80.3%) major bleeds, requiring blood transfusion in 48 (67.6%) cases and reintervention in 31 (43.7%) cases. Bleeding extended length-of-stay (median (IQR), 12 (7-27) versus 7 (5-11) days, p < 0.001). Importantly, compared to postoperative chemoprophylaxis, early administration significantly increased the risk of bleeding (10.6% versus 6.3%, RR 1.45, 95% CI 1.05-1.93, p = 0.038) and independently predicted its occurrence. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of bleeding following elective abdominal visceral resections is substantial and is higher than the risk of clinical VTE. Compared with early chemoprophylaxis, postoperative initiation reduces bleeding risk without an increased risk of clinical VTE.

Variations in practice of thromboprophylaxis across general surgical subspecialties: a multicentre (PROTECTinG) study of elective major surgeries.

BACKGROUND: Despite guidelines recommending perioperative thromboprophylaxis for patients undergoing general surgery, we have observed significant variations in its practice. This may compromise patient safety. Here, we quantify the heterogeneity of perioperative thromboprophylaxis across all major general surgical operations, and place them in relation to their risk of bleeding and venous thromboembolism. METHODS: Retrospective review of all elective major general surgeries performed between 1 January 2018 and 30 June 2019 across seven Victorian hospitals was conducted. RESULTS: A total of 5912 patients who underwent 6628 procedures were reviewed. Significant heterogeneity was found in the use of chemoprophylaxis, timing of its initiation, type of anticoagulant administered and application of extended chemoprophylaxis. These variations were observed within the same procedure, and between different surgeries and subspecialties. Contrastingly, there was minimal heterogeneity with the use of mechanical thromboprophylaxis. Oesophago-gastric, liver and colorectal cancer resections had the highest thromboembolic risk. Breast, oesophago-gastric, liver, pancreas and colon cancer resections had the highest bleeding risk. CONCLUSION: Perioperative chemoprophylaxis across general surgery is highly variable. This study has highlighted key areas of variance. Our findings also enable surgeons to compare their practices, and provide baseline data to inform future efforts towards optimizing thromboprophylaxis for general surgical patients.

Pre-operative and intra-operative chemical thromboprophylaxis increases bleeding risk following elective cholecystectomy: a multicentre (PROTECTinG) study.

BACKGROUND: Cholecystectomy is commonly performed in general surgery. Despite guidelines recommending chemical thromboprophylaxis in the perioperative period, the most appropriate time for its initiation is unknown. Here, we investigated whether timing of chemoprophylaxis affected venous thromboembolism (VTE) and bleeding rates post-cholecystectomy. METHODS: Retrospective review of all elective cholecystectomies performed between 1 January 2018 and 30 June 2019, across seven Victorian hospitals. Clinical VTE was defined as imaging-proven symptomatic disease within 30 days of surgery. Major bleeding was defined as the need for blood transfusion, surgical intervention or >20 g/L fall in haemoglobin from baseline. RESULTS: A total of 1744 cases were reviewed. Chemoprophylaxis was given early (pre- or intra-operatively), post-operatively or not given in 847 (48.6%), 573 (32.9%) and 324 (18.6%) patients, respectively. This varied significantly between surgeons, fellows, trainees and institutions. Clinical VTE occurred in 5 (0.3%) patients and was not associated with chemoprophylaxis timing. Bleeding occurred in 42 (2.4%) patients. Of this, half were major events, requiring surgical control in 5 (11.9%) patients and blood transfusion in 9 (21.4%) patients. Bleeding also extended length of stay (mean (SD), 3.1 (4.0) versus 1.4 (2.2) days, P < 0.001). One bleeding-related mortality was recorded. Importantly, when compared with post-operative (risk ratio 1.46, 95% confidence interval 1.21-1.62) and no (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.03-1.35) chemoprophylaxis, early usage significantly increased bleeding risk and independently predicted its occurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative chemoprophylaxis is variable among patients undergoing elective cholecystectomy. The rate of clinical VTE post-cholecystectomy is low. Early chemoprophylaxis increases bleeding risk without an appreciable additional protection from VTE.