Is spleen-preserving surgery safe for abdominal trauma?

BACKGROUND: Treatment of splenic trauma is currently based on non-surgical treatment or the use of interventional radiology. The conservative surgery of the spleen in splenic trauma remains marginal. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the safety and efficacy of conservative surgical treatment in splenic trauma. METHOD: A retrospective study was performed over a 16-year period with the intention of recording the diagnostic and therapeutic attitude in a second level hospital, focusing on patients who received conservative splenic surgical treatment for splenic trauma, excluding splenectomies and non-surgical treatment. RESULTS: 110 patients presented splenic trauma. Spleen-sparing surgery was performed in 15 patients. The grades of splenic lesions were: 1 patient with grade I, 1 patient with grade II, 7 patients with grade III and 6 patients with grade IV. Surgical treatment was splenorrhaphy in 5 patients (33%), hemostatic agents and polyglycolic acid mesh in 4 (26%), partial splenectomy with placement of polyglycolic acid mesh in 3 (20%), partial splenectomy in 2 (13%), and electrocautery in 1 (6%). None of the patients initially treated with conservative surgery required posterior splenectomy and no patient died. CONCLUSION: We provide evidence supporting the usefulness and safety of conservative splenic surgery in splenic trauma, which would have its place in grades II, III and IV trauma in health centers that do not have urgent interventional radiology.

ANTECEDENTES: El tratamiento del traumatismo esplénico se basa en medidas conservadoras no quirúrgicas o en el uso de radiología intervencionista. La cirugía conservadora del bazo en el traumatismo esplénico sigue siendo inusual. OBJETIVO: El análisis de seguridad y eficacia del tratamiento quirurgico conservador en el traumatismo esplénico. MÉTODO: Se realizó un estudio retrospectivo durante un período de 16 años con la intención de registrar la actitud diagnóstica y terapéutica en un hospital de segundo nivel, enfocándose en los pacientes que recibieron tratamiento quirúrgico conservador esplénico por traumatismo esplénico, excluyendo esplenectomías y tratamientos no quirúrgicos. RESULTADOS: 110 pacientes presentaron traumatismo esplénico. La cirugía conservadora esplénica se realizó en 15 pacientes. Los grados de lesiones esplénicas fueron: 1 paciente con grado I, 1 paciente con grado II, 7 pacientes con grado III y 6 pacientes con grado IV. El tratamiento quirúrgico fue esplenorrafia en 5 pacientes (33%), agentes hemostáticos y malla de ácido poliglicólico en 4 (26%), esplenectomía parcial con colocación de malla de ácido poliglicólico en 3 (20%), esplenectomía parcial en 2 (13%) y hemostasia con electrocauterio en 1 (6%). Ninguno de los pacientes tratados inicialmente con cirugía conservadora requirió esplenectomía posterior y ningún paciente falleció. CONCLUSIONES: La cirugía conservadora esplénica puede ser útil y segura en traumatismos esplénicos, la cual tendría su lugar en traumatismos de grados II, III y IV en centros hospitalarios en los que no se cuente con radiología intervencionista urgente.

Oncologic colorectal surgical site infection: oral or not oral antibiotic preparation, that is the question.

PURPOSE: Surgical wound infection is the most frequent postoperative complication in abdominal surgery, especially at the colorectal level. The aim of this study is analysing the results of mechanical colon preparation combined with oral antibiotic versus mechanical colon preparation without antibiotic therapy in patients with colorectal cancer undergoing elective surgery. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study had been developed from November 2017 to February 2020. We have included a total of 281 consecutive patients undergoing elective colon and rectal oncological surgeries by the same surgical group using laparoscopic and open approaches. Transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) and transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) approaches were excluded. Exposed patients undergoing colon and rectal cancer surgery received mechanical bowel preparation and oral antibiotics with three doses of neomycin 1 g and erythromycin 500 mg the day before surgery. RESULTS: The primary outcome was reduction in surgical wound infection rates before and after starting the oral antibiotic therapy from 17 to 6% (p < 0.05). As a secondary analysis, we evaluated the anastomotic dehiscence rate, corresponding with a decrease from 12 to 3% (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Mechanical bowel preparation combined with oral antibiotic therapy is still not unanimously carried out in all the medical hospitals. In this report, we show that mechanical bowel preparation in combination with oral antibiotic reduces the risk of surgical wound infection and anastomotic leakage in patients undergoing colon and rectal cancer surgery.

Réplica a «Respuesta a resultados en el tratamiento de traumatismos esplénicos utilizando un protocolo multidisciplinar en 110 pacientes consecutivos en un hospital de nivel ii» / Reply to «Response to management of splenic injuries utilizing a multidisciplinary protocol in 110 consecutive patients at a level II hospital»

No disponible

Resultados en el tratamiento de traumatismos esplénicos utilizando un protocolo multidisciplinar en 110 pacientes consecutivos en un hospital de nivel II / Management of Splenic Injuries Utilizing a Multidisciplinary Protocol in 110 Consecutive Patients at a Level II Hospital

INTRODUCCIÓN: El tratamiento no operatorio (TNO) de los traumatismos esplénicos es el manejo de elección en pacientes estables hemodinámicamente. El objetivo del presente estudio fue valorar la tasa de fracaso del TNO tras la implantación de un protocolo multidisciplinar para las lesiones esplénicas y comparar los resultados con la literatura. MÉTODOS: Estudio retrospectivo, de 16 años de duración. Se registró el manejo de estas lesiones según nuestro protocolo hospitalario, datos demográficos, presión arterial, frecuencia respiratoria, Escala de Coma de Glasgow, Revised Trauma Score, Injury Severy Score, gradación de las lesiones según la American Association for the Surgery of Trauma, fracaso del TNO, morbimortalidad. RESULTADOS: Se incluyó a 110 pacientes: 90 (81,8%) varones (81,8%), 20 (18,2%) mujeres; edad media de 37 años; 106 (96,5%) casos fueron contusos y 4 (3,5%) penetrantes por arma blanca. El diagnóstico se estableció mediante ECO/TAC. La clasificación de la American Association for the Surgery of Trauma fue: 14 (13%) pacientes fueron grado I; 24 (22%) grado II; 34 (31%) grado III; 37 (34%) grado IV. Se realizó laparotomía de urgencia en 54 pacientes: 37 por lesiones grado IV y en 17 por inestabilidad hemodinámica. En 56 pacientes se instauró TNO, cirugía conservadora en 16 y esplenectomía en 38. Diez pacientes presentaron complicaciones postoperatorias: 7 en el grupo de esplenectomía, 2 en el grupo de cirugía conservadora y uno en el de TNO (que requirió intervención por fracaso en TNO). La mortalidad fue de un paciente. Estancia media: 22,8 días; TNO 17,6 días; cirugía conservadora 29; esplenectomía 22,4 días. CONCLUSIONES: Si bien continuamos con una estancia hospitalaria elevada, nuestros resultados son comparables a los de la literatura. La implantación consensuada del protocolo contribuyó al cambio hacia TNO

INTRODUCTION: Non-operative treatment (NOM) of splenic trauma is the management of choice in hemodynamically stable patients. The aim of the present study was to assess the failure rate of NOM after implementation of a multidisciplinary protocol for splenic injuries compared to literature results. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed over a 16-year period. Patient data and management of splenic trauma was recorded according to our hospital protocol: demographic data, blood pressure, respiratory rate, Glasgow Coma Scale(GCS), Revised Trauma Score(RTS), Injury Severity Score(ISS), injury grade according to the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma(AAST), failure of NOM, morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: One hundred ten patients were included: 90(81.8%) men, 20 (18.2%) women; mean age 37 years; 106(96.5%) cases were blunt and four(3.5%) penetrating by knife. The diagnosis was established by US/CT. AAST classification: 14(13%) grade I; 24 (22%) grade II; 34 (31%) grade III; 37(34%) grade IV. Emergency laparotomy was performed in 54 patients: 37 due to grade IV injuries, 17 due to hemodynamic instability. NOM was utilized in 56 patients, spleen-preserving surgery in 16, and splenectomy in 38. Ten patients had postoperative complications: seven in the splenectomy group, two in the spleen-preserving surgery group, and one in the NOM group. One patient died. Average hospital stay: 22.8 days- NOM 17.6 days, conservative surgery 29 days, splenectomy 22.4 days. CONCLUSIONS: Although we continue with a high hospital stay, the literature reports support our results. The implementation of the protocol by consensus contributed to the change towards NOM

Endometriosis colónica que simula tumor carcinoide cecal / Colonic endometriosis mimicking a caecal carcinoid tumour

No disponible

Management of Splenic Injuries Utilizing a Multidisciplinary Protocol in 110 Consecutive Patients at a Level II Hospital. / Resultados en el tratamiento de traumatismos esplénicos utilizando un protocolo multidisciplinar en 110 pacientes consecutivos en un hospital de nivel II.

INTRODUCTION: Non-operative treatment (NOM) of splenic trauma is the management of choice in hemodynamically stable patients. The aim of the present study was to assess the failure rate of NOM after implementation of a multidisciplinary protocol for splenic injuries compared to literature results. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed over a 16-year period. Patient data and management of splenic trauma was recorded according to our hospital protocol: demographic data, blood pressure, respiratory rate, Glasgow Coma Scale(GCS), Revised Trauma Score(RTS), Injury Severity Score(ISS), injury grade according to the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma(AAST), failure of NOM, morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: One hundred ten patients were included: 90(81.8%) men, 20(18.2%) women; mean age 37 years; 106(96.5%) cases were blunt and four(3.5%) penetrating by knife. The diagnosis was established by US/CT. AAST classification: 14(13%) grade I; 24(22%) grade II; 34(31%) grade III; 37(34%) grade IV. Emergency laparotomy was performed in 54 patients: 37 due to grade IV injuries, 17 due to hemodynamic instability. NOM was utilized in 56 patients, spleen-preserving surgery in 16, and splenectomy in 38. Ten patients had postoperative complications: seven in the splenectomy group, two in the spleen-preserving surgery group, and one in the NOM group. One patient died. Average hospital stay: 22.8 days- NOM 17.6 days, conservative surgery 29 days, splenectomy 22.4 days. CONCLUSIONS: Although we continue with a high hospital stay, the literature reports support our results. The implementation of the protocol by consensus contributed to the change towards NOM.

Perforación intestinal de localización inusual / Intestinal perforation in unusual location

No disponible

Intestinal perforation in unusual location.

Meckel's diverticulum is the most frequent congenital gastrointestinal malformation and the clinical presentation varies from the absence of symptoms to intestinal obstruction or secondary perforation due to a foreign body. When reviewing the literature we found an interesting article by Fonseca et al., which describes the perforation of a Meckel's diverticulum by a fishbone. In this case, no imaging tests were used for diagnosis as there was a high clinical suspicion of a Meckel's diverticulitis. Recently, we had a similar patient to the one described by Fonseca et al.