Aortoenteric Fistula through a Thrombosed Graft.

BACKGROUND Aortoenteric fistula is a dreadful and uncommon complication after abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Continuous friction against the intestine and the aortic graft along with local inflammation is thought to be the major cause of aortoenteric fistula formation, although it is unexpected to have fistula formation with a thrombosed aortic graft. CASE REPORT Here, we report a case of an aortoenteric fistula between a thrombosed aortoiliac bypass graft and the duodenum in a 75-year-old male patient who presented with a 2-month history of melena. In this case, the aortoduodenal fistula was repaired with excision of the aortic graft, proximal and distal oversewing of the aorta, omental flap coverage, pyloric exclusion and loop gastrojejunostomy creation. CONCLUSIONS An aortoenteric fistula can form through a thrombosed graft. Since this is not an expected route of fistula formation, there may be a delay in identification.

The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Severity Grade is valid and generalizable in adhesive small bowel obstruction.

BACKGROUND: The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) anatomic severity grading system for adhesive small bowel obstruction (ASBO) was validated at a single institution. We aimed to externally validate the AAST ASBO grading system using the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma multi-institutional small bowel obstruction prospective observational study. METHODS: Adults (age ≥ 18) with (ASBO) were included. Baseline demographics, physiologic parameters (heart rate, blood pressure, respiratory rate), laboratory tests (lactate, hemoglobin, creatinine, leukocytosis), imaging findings, operative details, length of stay, and Clavien-Dindo complications were collected. The AAST ASBO grades were assigned by two independent reviewers based on imaging findings. Kappa statistic, univariate, and multivariable analyses were performed. RESULTS: There were 635 patients with a mean (±SD) age of 61 ± 17.8 years, 51% female, and mean body mass index was 27.5 ± 8.1. The AAST ASBO grades were: grade I (n = 386, 60.5%), grade II (n = 135, 21.2%), grade III (n = 59, 9.2%), grade IV (n = 55, 8.6%). Initial management included: nonoperative (n = 385; 61%), laparotomy (n = 200, 31.3%), laparoscopy (n = 13, 2.0%), and laparoscopy converted to laparotomy (n = 37, 5.8%). An increased median [IQR] AAST ASBO grade was associated with need for conversion to an open procedure (2 [1-3] vs. 3 [2-4], p = 0.008), small bowel resection (2 [2-2] vs. 3 [2-4], p < 0.0001), postoperative temporary abdominal closure (2 [2-3] vs. 3 [3-4], p < 0.0001), and stoma creation (2 [2-3] vs. 3 [2-4], p < 0.0001). Increasing AAST grade was associated with increased anatomic severity noted on imaging findings, longer duration of stay, need for intensive care, increased rate of complication, and higher Clavien-Dindo complication grade. CONCLUSION: The AAST ASBO severity grading system has predictive validity for important clinical outcomes and allows for standardization across institutions, providers, and future research focused on optimizing preoperative diagnosis and management algorithms. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic, level III.

Outcomes of complicated appendicitis: Is conservative management as smooth as it seems?

BACKGROUND: This study characterized the failure rate of non-operative management (NOM) for complicated appendicitis (CA; perforation, abscess, phlegmon), and compared outcomes among patients undergoing acute appendectomy (AA), elective interval appendectomy (EIA), and unplanned appendectomy after failing to improve with NOM. METHODS: Adults treated at one facility between 2007 and 2014 were retrospectively studied. RESULTS: Ninety-five patients presented with CA. Sixty individuals underwent AA. The remaining 35 patients initially underwent NOM: 14 underwent EIA, nine (25.7%) failed NOM, 12 never underwent surgery. All patients failing NOM had an open operation with most (55.6%) requiring bowel resection. AA and EIA were comparable in surgical approach, bowel resection and post-operative readmission. However, AA demonstrated a lower incidence of bowel resection (3.3% vs 17.1%, P = 0.048) when compared to all patients initially undergoing NOM. CONCLUSIONS: Due to the high incidence of failed NOM and the morbidity associated with failure, AA may be appropriate for CA.

Multi-institutional, prospective, observational study comparing the Gastrografin challenge versus standard treatment in adhesive small bowel obstruction.

INTRODUCTION: Existing trials studying the use of Gastrografin for management of adhesive small bowel obstruction (SBO) are limited by methodological flaws and small sample sizes. We compared institutional protocols with and without Gastrografin (GG), hypothesizing that a SBO management protocol utilizing GG is associated with lesser rates of exploration, shorter length of stay, and fewer complications. METHODS: A multi-institutional, prospective, observational study was performed on patients appropriate for GG with adhesive SBO. Exclusion criteria were internal/external hernia, signs of strangulation, history of abdominal/pelvic malignancy, or exploration within the past 6 weeks. Patients receiving GG were compared to patients receiving standard care without GG. RESULTS: Overall, 316 patients were included (58 ± 18 years; 53% male). There were 173 (55%) patients in the GG group (of whom 118 [75%] successfully passed) and 143 patients in the non-GG group. There were no differences in duration of obstipation (1.6 vs. 1.9 days, p = 0.77) or small bowel feces sign (32.9% vs. 25.0%, p = 0.14). Fewer patients in the GG protocol cohort had mesenteric edema on CT (16.3% vs. 29.9%; p = 0.009). There was a lower rate of bowel resection (6.9% vs. 21.0%, p < 0.001) and exploration rate in the GG group (20.8% vs. 44.1%, p < 0.0001). GG patients had a shorter duration of hospital stay (4 IQR 2-7 vs. 5 days IQR 2-12; p = 0.036) and a similar rate of complications (12.5% vs. 17.9%; p = 0.20). Multivariable analysis revealed that GG was independently associated with successful nonoperative management. CONCLUSION: Patients receiving Gastrografin for adhesive SBO had lower rates of exploration and shorter hospital length of stay compared to patients who did not receive GG. Adequately powered and well-designed randomized trials are required to confirm these findings and establish causality. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, level III.