Non-traumatic rupture of voluminous non-typhoid Salmonella splenic abscess presenting with peritonitis: Case report and review of the literature.

INTRODUCTION AND IMPORTANCE: Splenic abscess (SA) is an uncommon, life-threatening disease with about 600 reported cases in the literature. It is caused by various infective pathogens and generally occurs in immunocompromised patients. SA is a rare complication of non-typhoid Salmonella (NTS) infection. Diagnosis of ruptured SA is a challenge because the absence of specific symptoms and signs. Abdominal computed tomography (CT) scan represents the gold standard in diagnosing of SA. Splenectomy is the treatment of choice of ruptured SA with peritonitis. CASE PRESENTATION: A 26-year-old Caucasian female was admitted to the Emergency Department with a three-day history of abdominal pain and fever. Physical examination revealed severe and generalized abdominal pain on superficial and deep palpation with obvious muscle guarding and rebound tenderness. Abdominal CT scan showed ruptured SA. Laboratory tests reported anemia (hemoglobin 10.4 g/dl). The patient was taken emergently to the operating room for splenectomy. The postoperative course was uneventful, the patient was discharged on the 7th post-operative day. Diagnosis of NTS SA was made by pus cultures. CLINICAL DISCUSSION: SA is a rare complication of NTS infection associated with high morbidity and mortality rates. Although different types of treatment of SA are reported in the literature, splenectomy represents the treatment of choice of ruptured SA. CONCLUSION: NTS SA is difficult to diagnose because of its rarity and non-specific clinical presentation, often fatal if left untreated. Although there is no gold standard for treating SA, splenectomy with peritoneal lavage is mandatory in case of ruptured SA with peritonitis.

Conversion from laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) to one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB): preliminary data from a multicenter retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is the most commonly performed bariatric procedure, while laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) has been for a decade one of the most popular interventions for weight loss. After LSG and LAGB, some patients may require a second surgery due to weight regain or late complications. One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is a promising bariatric procedure, which provides effective long-term weight loss and has a favorable effect on type 2 diabetes. OBJECTIVES: To retrospectively analyze data from 10 Italian centers on conversion from LAGB and LSG to OAGB. SETTING: High-volume centers for bariatric surgery. METHODS: Prospectively collected data from 10 high-volume centers were retrospectively reviewed. Body mass index (BMI), percentage of excess BMI loss, reasons for redo, remission from co-morbidities (hypertension, diabetes, gastroesophageal reflux, and dyslipidemia), and major complications were recorded. RESULTS: Three hundred patients were included in the study; 196 patients underwent conversion from LAGB to OAGB and 104 were converted from LSG. BMI was 45.1 ± 7 kg/m2 at the time of first intervention, 41.8 ± 6.3 kg/m2 at redo time, and 30.5 ± 5.5 kg/m2 at last follow-up appointment. Mean percentage of excess BMI loss was 13.2 ± 28.2 at conversion and 73.4 ± 27.5 after OAGB. Remission rates from hypertension, diabetes, gastroesophageal reflux, and dyslipidemia were 40%, 62.5%, 58.7% and 52%, respectively. Mean follow-up was 20.8 (range, 6-156) months and overall complications rate was 8.6%. CONCLUSION: Our data show that OAGB is a safe and effective revisional procedure after failed restrictive bariatric surgery.

Complications Following the Mini/One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass (MGB/OAGB): a Multi-institutional Survey on 2678 Patients with a Mid-term (5 Years) Follow-up.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, several articles have reported considerable results with the Mini/One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass (MGB/OAGB) in terms of both weight loss and resolution of comorbidities. Despite those positive reports, some controversies still limit the widespread acceptance of this procedure. Therefore, a multicenter retrospective study, with the aim to investigate complications following this procedure, has been designed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: To report the complications rate following the MGB/OAGB and their management, and to assess the role of this approach in determining eventual complications related especially to the loop reconstruction, in the early and late postoperative periods, the clinical records of 2678 patients who underwent MGB/OAGB between 2006 and 2015 have been studied. RESULTS: Intraoperative and early complications rates were 0.5 and 3.1%, respectively. Follow-up at 5 years was 62.6%. Late complications rate was 10.1%. A statistical correlation was found for perioperative bleeding both with operative time (p < 0.001) or a learning curve of less than 50 cases (p < 0.001). A statistical correlation was found for postoperative duodenal-gastro-esophageal reflux (DGER) with a preexisting gastro-esophageal-reflux disease (GERD) or with a gastric pouch shorter than 9 cm, (p < 0.001 and p = 0.001), respectively. An excessive weight loss correlated with a biliopancreatic limb longer than 250 cm (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our results confirm MGB/OAGB to be a reliable bariatric procedure. According to other large and long-term published series, MGB/OAGB seems to compare very favorably, in terms of complication rate, with two mainstream procedures as standard Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGBP) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG).