Posterior Approach to the Popliteal to Peroneal Bypass.

Critical limb ischemia (CLI) is a clinical syndrome related to peripheral artery disease (PAD) that is marked by ischemic rest pain or tissue loss such as nonhealing ulcers or gangrene. Without revascularization CLI carries a 30-50% risk of major limb amputation within 1 year. Initial surgical revascularization is recommended for patients with CLI who have a greater than 2-year life expectancy. We present the case of a 92-year-old male with severe peripheral artery disease with gangrene of bilateral toes who underwent right popliteal to distal peroneal bypass via the posterior approach using ipsilateral reversed GSV. The posterior approach provides excellent exposure and should be considered in distal surgical revascularization where the popliteal artery serves as inflow and distal peroneal artery as target outflow vessel.

Acute Colonic Pseudo-obstruction: Colonoscopy Versus Neostigmine First?

INTRODUCTION: Neostigmine (NEO) and decompressive colonoscopy (COL) are two efficacious treatment modalities for acute colonic pseudo-obstruction (ACPO). We hypothesize that a COL first strategy is associated with better outcomes compared to a NEO first strategy. METHODS: A single-center retrospective analysis was performed from 2013 to 2020. Patients ≥18 y with a diagnosis of ACPO were included. The outcome was a composite measure of acute operative intervention, 30-day readmission with ACPO, and 30-day ACPO-related mortality. A P-value of ≤ 0.05 indicated statistical significance. RESULTS: Of 910 encounters in 849 patients, 50 (5.5%) episodes of ACPO in 39 patients were identified after exclusion of one patient with colon perforation on presentation. The median (interquartile range) age was 68 (62-84) y. NEO and COL were administered in 21 and 25 episodes, respectively. In 16 (32%) episodes, no NEO or COL was administered. When patients were given NEO first, COL or additional NEO was required in 12/18 (67%) compared with a COL first strategy where a second COL and/or NEO was given in 5/16 (32%) (P = 0.05). Both strategies had similar outcomes (NEO, 4/18 versus COL, 4/16, P = 0.85). Twenty-two (44%) episodes had an early intervention (≤48 h) with NEO and/or COL. There was no difference in outcome between those that received an early intervention and those who did not (5/22 versus 5/28, P = 0.71). CONCLUSIONS: For patients failing conservative measures, a COL first approach was associated with fewer subsequent interventions, but with similar composite outcomes compared to a NEO first approach. Early (≤48 h) intervention with NEO and/or COL was not associated with improved outcomes.

Open Abdomen after Two Trauma Laparotomies: Do Diuretics Help?

Data are lacking regarding the use of diuretics in facilitating closure of the open abdomen (OA). For patients with an OA after 2 laparotomies, we hypothesized that diuretic use was associated with a higher rate of primary fascial closure than no diuretic use. A retrospective review of patients with trauma laparotomies over 7 years was performed. Primary fascial closure (PFC) was defined as apposition of fascial edges without interposition mesh. Of 321 patients, 30 (9%) remained with an OA after 2 laparotomies. Prior to the third laparotomy, median cumulative fluid balance was +12.6 L. Thirteen (43%) received diuretics. Primary fascial closure rates were similar for diuretic use vs no diuretic (38% vs 59%, P = .46). Primary fascial closure was not associated with age (P = .2), gender (P = 0.7), cumulative fluid balance (P = .3), or units of packed cells (P = .4). Diuretic use in trauma patients with an OA after 2 laparotomies was not associated with successful PFC.