Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros










Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Trauma Surg Acute Care Open ; 6(1): e000662, 2021.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34079912

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Infection control in patients with perforated peptic ulcers (PPU) commonly includes empiric antifungals (AF). We investigated the variation in the use of empiric AF and explored the association between their use and the subsequent development of organ space infection (OSI). METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of a multicenter, case-control study of patients treated for PPU at nine institutions between 2011 and 2018. Microbiology and utilization of empiric AF, defined as AF administered within 24 hours from the index surgery, were recorded. Patients who received empiric AF were compared with those who did not. The primary outcome was OSI and secondary outcome was OSI with growth of Candida spp. A logistic regression was used to adjust for differences between the two cohorts. RESULTS: A total of 554 patients underwent a surgical procedure for PPU and had available timing of AF administration. The median age was 57 years and 61% were male. Laparoscopy was used in 24% and omental patch was the most common procedure performed (78%). Overall, 239 (43%) received empiric AF. There was a large variation in the use of empiric AF among participating centers, ranging from 25% to 68%. The overall incidence of OSI was 14% (77/554) and was similar for patients who did or did not receive empiric AF. The adjusted OR for development of OSI for patients who received empiric AF was 1.04 (95% CI 0.64 to 1.70), adjusted p=0.86. The overall incidence of OSI with growth of Candida spp was 5% and was similar for both groups (adjusted OR 1.29, 95% CI 0.59 to 2.84, adjusted p=0.53). CONCLUSION: For patients undergoing surgery for PPU, the use of empiric AF did not yield any significant clinical advantage in preventing OSI, even those due to Candida spp. Use of empiric AF in this setting is unnecessary. STUDY TYPE: Original article, case series. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

2.
Am J Surg ; 218(6): 1060-1064, 2019 12.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31537324

RESUMEN

RCTs showed benefits in Lap repair of perforated peptic ulcer (PPU). The SWSC Multi-Center Trials Group sought to evaluate whether Lap omental patch repairs compared to Open improved outcomes in PPU in general practice. Data was collected from 9 SWSC Trial Group centers. Demographics, operative time, 30-day complications, length of stay and mortality were included. 461 PATIENTS: Open in 311(67%) patients, Lap in 132(28%) with 20(5%) patients converted from Lap to Open. Groups were similar at baseline. Significant variability was found between centers in their utilization of Lap (0-67%). Complications at 30 days were lower in Lap (18.5% vs. 27.5%, p < 0.05) as was unplanned re-operation (4.7% vs 14%, p < 0.05). Lap reduced LOS (6 vs 8 days, p < 0.001). Ileus was more in Lap (42% vs 18 p < 0.001) operative time was 14 min higher in Lap(p < 0.01) and admission to OR time was 4 h higher in Lap(<0.05). No significant difference readmission or mortality. Our results suggest Lap should be considered a first-line option in suitable PPU patients requiring omental patch repair in centers that have the capacity and resources 24/7.


Asunto(s)
Laparoscopía/métodos , Tiempo de Internación/estadística & datos numéricos , Epiplón/trasplante , Úlcera Péptica Perforada/cirugía , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/prevención & control , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Tempo Operativo , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/estadística & datos numéricos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...