Intra-abdominal infections survival guide: a position statement by the Global Alliance For Infections In Surgery.

Intra-abdominal infections (IAIs) are an important cause of morbidity and mortality in hospital settings worldwide. The cornerstones of IAI management include rapid, accurate diagnostics; timely, adequate source control; appropriate, short-duration antimicrobial therapy administered according to the principles of pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics and antimicrobial stewardship; and hemodynamic and organ functional support with intravenous fluid and adjunctive vasopressor agents for critical illness (sepsis/organ dysfunction or septic shock after correction of hypovolemia). In patients with IAIs, a personalized approach is crucial to optimize outcomes and should be based on multiple aspects that require careful clinical assessment. The anatomic extent of infection, the presumed pathogens involved and risk factors for antimicrobial resistance, the origin and extent of the infection, the patient's clinical condition, and the host's immune status should be assessed continuously to optimize the management of patients with complicated IAIs.

Are Surgeons Going to Be Left Holding the Bag? Incisional Hernia Repair and Intra-Peritoneal Non-Absorbable Mesh Implant Complications.

Ventral incisional hernias are common indications for elective repair and frequently complicated by recurrence. Surgical meshes, which may be synthetic, bio-synthetic, or biological, decrease recurrence and, resultingly, their use has become standard. While most patients are greatly benefited, mesh represents a permanently implanted foreign body. Mesh may be implanted within the intra-peritoneal, preperitoneal, retrorectus, inlay, or onlay anatomic positions. Meshes may be associated with complications that may be early or late and range from minor to severe. Long-term complications with intra-peritoneal synthetic mesh (IPSM) in apposition to the viscera are particularly at risk for adhesions and potential enteric fistula formation. The overall rate of such complications is difficult to appreciate due to poor long-term follow-up data, although it behooves surgeons to understand these risks as they are the ones who implant these devices. All surgeons need to be aware that meshes are commercial devices that are delivered into their operating room without scientific evidence of efficacy or even safety due to the unique regulatory practices that distinguish medical devices from medications. Thus, surgeons must continue to advocate for more stringent oversight and improved scientific evaluation to serve our patients properly and protect the patient-surgeon relationship as the only rationale long-term strategy to avoid ongoing complications.

European society for trauma and emergency surgery member-identified research priorities in emergency surgery: a roadmap for future clinical research opportunities.

BACKGROUND: European Society for Trauma and Emergency Surgery (ESTES) is the European community of clinicians providing care to the injured and critically ill surgical patient. ESTES has several interlinked missions - (1) the promotion of optimal emergency surgical care through networked advocacy, (2) promulgation of relevant clinical cognitive and technical skills, and (3) the advancement of scientific inquiry that closes knowledge gaps, iteratively improves upon surgical and perioperative practice, and guides decision-making rooted in scientific evidence. Faced with multitudinous opportunities for clinical research, ESTES undertook an exercise to determine member priorities for surgical research in the short-to-medium term; these research priorities were presented to a panel of experts to inform a 'road map' narrative review which anchored these research priorities in the contemporary surgical literature. METHODS: Individual ESTES members in active emergency surgery practice were polled as a representative sample of end-users and were asked to rank potential areas of future research according to their personal perceptions of priority. Using the modified eDelphi method, an invited panel of ESTES-associated experts in academic emergency surgery then crafted a narrative review highlighting potential research priorities for the Society. RESULTS: Seventy-two responding ESTES members from 23 countries provided feedback to guide the modified eDelphi expert consensus narrative review. Experts then crafted evidence-based mini-reviews highlighting knowledge gaps and areas of interest for future clinical research in emergency surgery: timing of surgery, inter-hospital transfer, diagnostic imaging in emergency surgery, the role of minimally-invasive surgical techniques and Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols, patient-reported outcome measures, risk-stratification methods, disparities in access to care, geriatric outcomes, data registry and snapshot audit evaluations, emerging technologies interrogation, and the delivery and benchmarking of emergency surgical training. CONCLUSIONS: This manuscript presents the priorities for future clinical research in academic emergency surgery as determined by a sample of the membership of ESTES. While the precise basis for prioritization was not evident, it may be anchored in disease prevalence, controversy around aspects of current patient care, or indeed the identification of a knowledge gap. These expert-crafted evidence-based mini-reviews provide useful insights that may guide the direction of future academic emergency surgery research efforts.

The open abdomen in trauma, acute care, and vascular and endovascular surgery: comprehensive, expert, narrative review.

BACKGROUND: The open abdomen is an innovation that greatly improved surgical understanding of damage control, temporary abdominal closure, staged abdominal reconstruction, viscera and enteric fistula care, and abdominal wall reconstruction. This article provides an evidence-informed, expert, comprehensive narrative review of the open abdomen in trauma, acute care, and vascular and endovascular surgery. METHODS: A group of 12 international trauma, acute care, and vascular and endovascular surgery experts were invited to review current literature and important concepts surrounding the open abdomen. RESULTS: The open abdomen may be classified using validated systems developed by a working group in 2009 and modified by the World Society of the Abdominal Compartment Syndrome-The Abdominal Compartment Society in 2013. It may be indicated in major trauma, intra-abdominal sepsis, vascular surgical emergencies, and severe acute pancreatitis; to facilitate second look laparotomy or avoid or treat abdominal compartment syndrome; and when the abdominal wall cannot be safely closed. Temporary abdominal closure and staged abdominal reconstruction methods include a mesh/sheet, transabdominal wall dynamic fascial traction, negative pressure wound therapy, and hybrid negative pressure wound therapy and dynamic fascial traction. This last method likely has the highest primary fascial closure rates. Direct peritoneal resuscitation is currently an experimental strategy developed to improve primary fascial closure rates and reduce complications in those with an open abdomen. Primary fascial closure rates may be improved by early return to the operating room; limiting use of crystalloid fluids during the surgical interval; and preventing and/or treating intra-abdominal hypertension, enteric fistulae, and intra-abdominal collections after surgery. The majority of failures of primary fascial closure and enteroatmospheric fistula formation may be prevented using effective temporary abdominal closure techniques, providing appropriate resuscitation fluids and nutritional support, and closing the abdomen as early as possible. CONCLUSION: Subsequent stages of the innovation of the open abdomen will likely involve the design and conduct of prospective studies to evaluate appropriate indications for its use and effectiveness and safety of the above components of open abdomen management.

Source control in emergency general surgery: WSES, GAIS, SIS-E, SIS-A guidelines.

Intra-abdominal infections (IAI) are among the most common global healthcare challenges and they are usually precipitated by disruption to the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. Their successful management typically requires intensive resource utilization, and despite the best therapies, morbidity and mortality remain high. One of the main issues required to appropriately treat IAI that differs from the other etiologies of sepsis is the frequent requirement to provide physical source control. Fortunately, dramatic advances have been made in this aspect of treatment. Historically, source control was left to surgeons only. With new technologies non-surgical less invasive interventional procedures have been introduced. Alternatively, in addition to formal surgery open abdomen techniques have long been proposed as aiding source control in severe intra-abdominal sepsis. It is ironic that while a lack or even delay regarding source control clearly associates with death, it is a concept that remains poorly described. For example, no conclusive definition of source control technique or even adequacy has been universally accepted. Practically, source control involves a complex definition encompassing several factors including the causative event, source of infection bacteria, local bacterial flora, patient condition, and his/her eventual comorbidities. With greater understanding of the systemic pathobiology of sepsis and the profound implications of the human microbiome, adequate source control is no longer only a surgical issue but one that requires a multidisciplinary, multimodality approach. Thus, while any breach in the GI tract must be controlled, source control should also attempt to control the generation and propagation of the systemic biomediators and dysbiotic influences on the microbiome that perpetuate multi-system organ failure and death. Given these increased complexities, the present paper represents the current opinions and recommendations for future research of the World Society of Emergency Surgery, of the Global Alliance for Infections in Surgery of Surgical Infection Society Europe and Surgical Infection Society America regarding the concepts and operational adequacy of source control in intra-abdominal infections.

Complex duodenal fistulae: a surgical nightmare.

INTRODUCTION: A common feature of external duodenal fistulae is the devastating effect of the duodenal content rich in bile and pancreatic juice on nearby tissues with therapy-resistant local and systemic complications. This study analyzes the results of different management options with emphasis on successful fistula closure rates. METHODS: A retrospective single academic center study of adult patients treated for complex duodenal fistulas over a 17-year period with descriptive and univariate analyses was performed. RESULTS: Fifty patients were identified. First line treatment was surgical in 38 (76%) cases and consisted of resuture or resection with anastomosis combined with duodenal decompression and periduodenal drainage in 36 cases, rectus muscle patch, and surgical decompression with T-tube in one each. Fistula closure rate was 29/38 (76%). In 12 cases, the initial management was nonoperative with or without percutaneous drainage. The fistula was closed without surgery in 5/6 patients (1 patient died with persistent fistula). Among the remaining 6 patients eventually operated, fistula closure was achieved in 4 cases. There was no difference in successful fistula closure rates among initially operatively versus nonoperatively managed patients (29/38 vs. 9/12, p = 1.000). However, when considering eventually failed nonoperative management in 7/12 patients, there was a significant difference in the fistula closure rate (29/38 vs. 5/12, p = 0.036). The overall in-hospital mortality rate was 20/50 (40%). CONCLUSIONS: Surgical closure combined with duodenal decompression in complex duodenal leaks offers the best chance of successful outcome. In selected cases, nonoperative management can be tried, accepting that some patients may require surgery later.

The unrestricted global effort to complete the COOL trial.

BACKGROUND: Severe complicated intra-abdominal sepsis (SCIAS) has an increasing incidence with mortality rates over 80% in some settings. Mortality typically results from disruption of the gastrointestinal tract, progressive and self-perpetuating bio-mediator generation, systemic inflammation, and multiple organ failure. A further therapeutic option may be open abdomen (OA) management with negative peritoneal pressure therapy (NPPT) to remove inflammatory ascites and attenuate the systemic damage from SCIAS, although there are definite risks of leaving the abdomen open whenever it might possibly be closed. This potential therapeutic paradigm is the rationale being assessed in the Closed Or Open after Laparotomy (COOL trial) ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03163095 ). Initially, the COOL trial received Industry sponsorship; however, this funding mandated the use of a specific trademarked and expensive NPPT device in half of the patients allocated to the intervention (open) arm. In August 2022, the 3 M/Acelity Corporation without consultation but within the terms of the contract canceled the financial support of the trial. Although creating financial difficulty, there is now no restriction on specific NPPT devices and removing a cost-prohibitive intervention creates an opportunity to expand the COOL trial to a truly global basis. This document describes the evolution of the COOL trial, with a focus on future opportunities for global growth of the study. METHODS: The COOL trial is the largest prospective randomized controlled trial examining the random allocation of SCIAS patients intra-operatively to either formal closure of the fascia or the use of the OA with an application of an NPPT dressing. Patients are eligible if they have free uncontained intraperitoneal contamination and physiologic derangements exemplified by septic shock OR severely adverse predicted clinical outcomes. The primary outcome is intended to definitively inform global practice by conclusively evaluating 90-day survival. Initial recruitment has been lower than hoped but satisfactory, and the COOL steering committee and trial investigators intend with increased global support to continue enrollment until recruitment ensures a definitive answer. DISCUSSION: OA is mandated in many cases of SCIAS such as the risk of abdominal compartment syndrome associated with closure, or a planned second look as for example part of "damage control"; however, improved source control (locally and systemically) is the most uncertain indication for an OA. The COOL trial seeks to expand potential sites and proceed with the evaluation of NPPT agnostic to device, to properly examine the hypothesis that this treatment attenuates systemic damage and improves survival. This approach will not affect internal validity and should improve the external validity of any observed results of the intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: National Institutes of Health ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03163095 ).

Potential for intestinal transplantation after acute mesenteric ischemia in patients aged less than 70 years: A population-based study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Acute mesenteric ischemia (AMI) has a high mortality rate due to the development of bowel necrosis. Patients are often ruled outside active care if a large proportion of small bowel is necrotic. With the development of treatment for short bowel syndrome (SBS) and intestinal transplantation methods, long-term survival is possible even after extensive small bowel resections. This study aims to assess the incidence of SBS and potentially suitable candidates for intestinal transplantation among patients treated for AMI. METHODS: This population-based retrospective study comprised patients aged less than 70 years and diagnosed with AMI between January 2006 and October 2020 in Helsinki and Uusimaa health care district, Finland. RESULTS: Altogether, AMI was diagnosed in 711 patients, of whom 133 (19%) were aged below 70. An intervention was performed in 110 (83%) patients. Of these 133 patients, 16 (12%) were ruled outside active treatment due to extensive small bowel necrosis at exploratory laparotomy, of whom 6 (5%) were potentially suitable for intestinal transplantation. Two patients were considered as potential candidates for intestinal transplantation at bowel resection but died of AMI. Nine (7%) patients needed parenteral nutrition after resection, and two of them (2%) developed SBS. Only one patient needed long-term parenteral nutrition after hospital discharge. This patient remained dependent on parenteral nutrition but died before evaluation of intestinal transplantation could be carried out while the other patient was able to return to enteral nutrition. CONCLUSIONS: A small number of patients with AMI below 70 years of age are potentially eligible for intestinal transplantation.

Surgical management of acute appendicitis during the European COVID-19 second wave: safe and effective.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic drove acute care surgeons to pivot from long established practice patterns. Early safety concerns regarding increased postoperative complication risk in those with active COVID infection promoted antibiotic-driven non-operative therapy for select conditions ahead of an evidence-base. Our study assesses whether active or recent SARS-CoV-2 positivity increases hospital length of stay (LOS) or postoperative complications following appendectomy. METHODS: Data were derived from the prospective multi-institutional observational SnapAppy cohort study. This preplanned data analysis assessed consecutive patients aged ≥ 15 years who underwent appendectomy for appendicitis (November 2020-May 2021). Patients were categorized based on SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity: no infection, active infection, and prior infection. Appendectomy method, LOS, and complications were abstracted. The association between SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity and complications was determined using Poisson regression, while the association with LOS was calculated using a quantile regression model. RESULTS: Appendectomy for acute appendicitis was performed in 4047 patients during the second and third European COVID waves. The majority were SARS-CoV-2 uninfected (3861, 95.4%), while 70 (1.7%) were acutely SARS-CoV-2 positive, and 116 (2.8%) reported prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. After confounder adjustment, there was no statistically significant association between SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity and LOS, any complication, or severe complications. CONCLUSION: During sequential SARS-CoV-2 infection waves, neither active nor prior SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with prolonged hospital LOS or postoperative complication. Despite early concerns regarding postoperative safety and outcome during active SARS-CoV-2 infection, no such association was noted for those with appendicitis who underwent operative management.

Clinical practice selectively follows acute appendicitis guidelines.

INTRODUCTION: Acute appendicitis is a common surgical emergency, and the standard approach to diagnosis and management has been codified in several practice guidelines. Adherence to these guidelines provides insight into independent surgical practice patterns and institutional resource constraints as impediments to best practice. We explored data from the recent ESTES SnapAppy observational cohort study to determine guideline compliance in contemporary practice to identify opportunities to close evidence-to-practice gaps. METHODS: We undertook a preplanned analysis of the ESTES SnapAppy observational cohort study, identifying, at a patient level, congruence with, or deviation from WSES Jerusalem guidelines for the diagnosis and management of acute appendicitis and the Surviving Sepsis Campaign in our cohort. Compliance was then correlated with the incidence of postoperative complications. RESULTS: Four thousand six hundred and thirteen (4613) consecutive adult and adolescent patients with acute appendicitis were followed from date of admission (November 1, 2020, and May 28, 2021) for 90 days. Patient-level compliance with guideline elements allowed patients to be grouped into those with full compliance (all 5 elements: 13%), partial compliance (1-4 elements: 87%) or noncompliance (0 elements: 0.2%). We identified an excess postoperative complication rate in patients who received noncompliant and partially compliant care, compared with those who received fully guideline-compliant care (36% and 16%, versus 7.3%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The observed diagnostic and treatment practices of the participating institutions displayed variability in compliance with key recommendations from existing guidelines. In general, practice was congruent with recommendations for preoperative antibiotic surgical site infection prophylaxis administration, time to surgery, and operative approach. However, there remains opportunities for improvement in the choice of diagnostic imaging modality, postoperative antibiotic stewardship to timely discontinue prophylactic antibiotics, and the implementation of ambulatory treatment pathways for uncomplicated appendicitis in the healthy young adult.

Acute mesenteric ischemia: updated guidelines of the World Society of Emergency Surgery.

Acute mesenteric ischemia (AMI) is a group of diseases characterized by an interruption of the blood supply to varying portions of the intestine, leading to ischemia and secondary inflammatory changes. If untreated, this process may progress to life-threatening intestinal necrosis. The incidence is low, estimated at 0.09-0.2% of all acute surgical admissions, but increases with age. Although the entity is an uncommon cause of abdominal pain, diligence is required because if untreated, mortality remains in the range of 50%. Early diagnosis and timely surgical intervention are the cornerstones of modern treatment to reduce the high mortality associated with this entity. The advent of endovascular approaches in parallel with modern imaging techniques is evolving and provides new treatment options. Lastly, a focused multidisciplinary approach based on early diagnosis and individualized treatment is essential. Thus, we believe that updated guidelines from World Society of Emergency Surgery are warranted, in order to provide the most recent and practical recommendations for diagnosis and treatment of AMI.

Postoperative pain management in non-traumatic emergency general surgery: WSES-GAIS-SIAARTI-AAST guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Non-traumatic emergency general surgery involves a heterogeneous population that may present with several underlying diseases. Timeous emergency surgical treatment should be supplemented with high-quality perioperative care, ideally performed by multidisciplinary teams trained to identify and handle complex postoperative courses. Uncontrolled or poorly controlled acute postoperative pain may result in significant complications. While pain management after elective surgery has been standardized in perioperative pathways, the traditional perioperative treatment of patients undergoing emergency surgery is often a haphazard practice. The present recommended pain management guidelines are for pain management after non-traumatic emergency surgical intervention. It is meant to provide clinicians a list of indications to prescribe the optimal analgesics even in the absence of a multidisciplinary pain team. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An international expert panel discussed the different issues in subsequent rounds. Four international recognized scientific societies: World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), Global Alliance for Infection in Surgery (GAIS), Italian Society of Anesthesia, Analgesia Intensive Care (SIAARTI), and American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST), endorsed the project and approved the final manuscript. CONCLUSION: Dealing with acute postoperative pain in the emergency abdominal surgery setting is complex, requires special attention, and should be multidisciplinary. Several tools are available, and their combination is mandatory whenever is possible. Analgesic approach to the various situations and conditions should be patient based and tailored according to procedure, pathology, age, response, and available expertise. A better understanding of the patho-mechanisms of postoperative pain for short- and long-term outcomes is necessary to improve prophylactic and treatment strategies.

Editor's Choice - Epidemiology, Diagnostics, and Outcomes of Acute Occlusive Arterial Mesenteric Ischaemia: A Population Based Study.

OBJECTIVE: The exact incidence and outcomes of acute occlusive arterial mesenteric ischaemia (AMI) are unclear as most studies include only patients diagnosed correctly while alive. The aim of this study was to assess the incidence, mortality, and diagnostics of AMI by also including patients diagnosed post-mortem. METHODS: This retrospective study comprised patients diagnosed with AMI either alive or post-mortem between 2006 and 2015 within a healthcare district serving 1.6 million inhabitants. Key exclusion criteria were venous or non-obstructive ischaemia. RESULTS: A total of 470 patients were included in the study of which 137 (29%) were diagnosed post-mortem. The most common misdiagnoses on those not diagnosed alive were unspecified infection (n = 19, 17%), gastrointestinal bleeding (n = 13, 11%), and ileus (n = 13, 11%). Of those diagnosed alive (n = 333), 187 (56%) underwent active surgical or endovascular treatment. During the 2006 - 2015 period, the overall incidence of AMI was 3.05 (95% CI 2.78 - 3.34)/100 000 person years and 26.66 (95% CI 24.07 - 29.45) for those aged 70 years or more. The mean autopsy rate during the study period was 29% for the overall population (32% during 2006 - 2010 and 25% during 2011 - 2015) and 18% for those aged 70 years or more. Overall, the 90-day mortality was 83% in all patients. The ninety day mortality decreased, being 87% during the first period (2006 - 2010) and 79% during the second period (2011 - 2015) (p = .029), while at the same time the proportion of patients diagnosed alive rose from 71% to 80% (p = .030) and the number of endovascular revascularisations rose from 1% to 5% (p = .022). CONCLUSION: A significant proportion of patients with AMI are not diagnosed alive, which is reflected in the mortality rates. Post-mortem examinations and autopsy rate data continue to be key factors in epidemiological studies on AMI.

Prophylactic retrorectus mesh versus no mesh in midline emergency laparotomy closure for prevention of incisional hernia (PREEMER): study protocol for a multicentre, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite the fact that emergency midline laparotomy is a risk factor for an incisional hernia, active research on hernia prevention in emergency settings is lacking. Different kinds of meshes and mesh positions have been studied in elective abdominal surgery, but no randomized controlled trials in emergency settings have been published thus far. METHOD: The PREEMER trial (registration number NCT04311788) is a multicentre, patient- and assessor-blinded, randomized controlled trial to be conducted in six hospitals in Finland. A total of 244 patients will be randomized at a 1 : 1 ratio to either the retrorectus mesh group, featuring a self-gripping prophylactic mesh, or to the no mesh (control) group, both closed by small-stitch 4 : 1 closure with continuous slowly absorbable monofilament suturing. The primary outcome of the PREEMER trial is the incidence of incisional hernia 2 years after surgery, which will be detected clinically and/or radiologically. Secondary outcomes are the Comprehensive Complication Index score, incidence of surgical-site infections and fascial dehiscence within 30 days of surgery; the incisional hernia repair rate and mesh- or hernia-related reoperations within the 2- and 5-year follow-ups; the incidence of incisional hernia within the 5-year follow-up; and quality of life measured by RAND-36, the Activities Assessment Scale and the PROMIS questionnaire within 30 days and 2 and 5 years from surgery. Additionally, health-economic explorative measures will be explored. CONCLUSION: The PREEMER trial will provide level 1 evidence on incisional hernia prevention in an emergency setting. REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04311788 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov). Registered 7 March 2020.

Acute abdomen in the immunocompromised patient: WSES, SIS-E, WSIS, AAST, and GAIS guidelines.

Immunocompromised patients are a heterogeneous and diffuse category frequently presenting to the emergency department with acute surgical diseases. Diagnosis and treatment in immunocompromised patients are often complex and must be multidisciplinary. Misdiagnosis of an acute surgical disease may be followed by increased morbidity and mortality. Delayed diagnosis and treatment of surgical disease occur; these patients may seek medical assistance late because their symptoms are often ambiguous. Also, they develop unique surgical problems that do not affect the general population. Management of this population must be multidisciplinary.This paper presents the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), Surgical Infection Society Europe (SIS-E), World Surgical Infection Society (WSIS), American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST), and Global Alliance for Infection in Surgery (GAIS) joined guidelines about the management of acute abdomen in immunocompromised patients.

The implementation of a pathway and care bundle for the management of acute occlusive arterial mesenteric ischemia reduced mortality.

BACKGROUND: Acute mesenteric ischemia (AMI) is a disease with high mortality and requires a multidisciplinary approach for effective management. A pathway and care bundle were developed and implemented with the objective to reduce mortality. The aim of this retrospective comparative study was to analyze the effects of the pathway on patient management and outcome. METHODS: All consecutive patients operated in a secondary and tertiary referral center because of occlusive arterial AMI were identified between 2014 and April 2020. The pathway aimed to increase overall awareness, and hasten and improve diagnostics and management. Patients treated before implementation of the pathway (pregroup, years 2014-2017) were compared with patients treated using the pathway (postgroup, May 2018 to April 2020). Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to compare the groups. RESULTS: There were 78 patients in the pregroup and 67 patients in the postgroup with comparable baseline characteristics and disease acuity. The postgroup was more often diagnosed with contrast-enhanced computed tomography (58 [74%] vs. 63 [94%], p = 0.001) and had shorter mean in-hospital delay to operating room (7 hours [interquartile range, 3.5-12.5] vs. 3 hours [interquartile range, 2-11], p = 0.023). Revascularization was done more often in the postgroup (53 [68%] vs. 56 [84%], p = 0.030) especially using endovascular treatment (26 [33%] vs. 43 [64%], p < 0.001). Thirty-day mortality was lower in the postgroup (23 [51%] vs. 17 [25%], p = 0.001). Being managed in the postgroup remained as a protective factor (odds ratio, 0.32; 95% confidence interval, 0.14-0.75; p = 0.008) for 30-day mortality in the multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: Implementing a pathway and care bundle resulted in enhanced regional and in-hospital awareness of AMI, more appropriate computed tomography imaging, shorter in-hospital delays, increased number of revascularizations, and, hence, lower mortality. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management, level IV.

World Society of Emergency Surgery-American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Guidelines for management of Clostridioides (Clostridium) difficile infection in surgical patients: An executive summary.

ABSTRACT: In the last three decades, the dramatic worldwide increase in incidence and severity of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) (formerly Clostridium difficile infection) has made CDI a global public health challenge. Surgery is a known risk factor for development of CDI yet surgery is also a treatment option in severe cases of CDI. The World Society of Emergency Surgery guidelines for management of CDI in surgical patients were published in 2015. In 2019, the guidelines were revised and updated according to the grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation methodology. This executive summary is intended to consolidate knowledge on the management of CDI focusing on aspects that a general and emergency surgeon should know about the prevention and the management of CDI, by providing a practical and concise version of the original guidelines.

Diagnosis and treatment of acute appendicitis: 2020 update of the WSES Jerusalem guidelines.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Acute appendicitis (AA) is among the most common causes of acute abdominal pain. Diagnosis of AA is still challenging and some controversies on its management are still present among different settings and practice patterns worldwide. In July 2015, the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) organized in Jerusalem the first consensus conference on the diagnosis and treatment of AA in adult patients with the intention of producing evidence-based guidelines. An updated consensus conference took place in Nijemegen in June 2019 and the guidelines have now been updated in order to provide evidence-based statements and recommendations in keeping with varying clinical practice: use of clinical scores and imaging in diagnosing AA, indications and timing for surgery, use of non-operative management and antibiotics, laparoscopy and surgical techniques, intra-operative scoring, and peri-operative antibiotic therapy. METHODS: This executive manuscript summarizes the WSES guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of AA. Literature search has been updated up to 2019 and statements and recommendations have been developed according to the GRADE methodology. The statements were voted, eventually modified, and finally approved by the participants to the consensus conference and by the board of co-authors, using a Delphi methodology for voting whenever there was controversy on a statement or a recommendation. Several tables highlighting the research topics and questions, search syntaxes, and the statements and the WSES evidence-based recommendations are provided. Finally, two different practical clinical algorithms are provided in the form of a flow chart for both adults and pediatric (< 16 years old) patients. CONCLUSIONS: The 2020 WSES guidelines on AA aim to provide updated evidence-based statements and recommendations on each of the following topics: (1) diagnosis, (2) non-operative management for uncomplicated AA, (3) timing of appendectomy and in-hospital delay, (4) surgical treatment, (5) intra-operative grading of AA, (6) ,management of perforated AA with phlegmon or abscess, and (7) peri-operative antibiotic therapy.