The Longo procedure is thus a simple, safe, and effective method that entails less postoperative pain, more satisfaction, and shorter hospital stay than the standard Milligan-Morgan hemorrhoidectomy.
IntroductionAlthough major changes of the immune system have been described in sepsis, it has never been studied whether these may differ in relation to the type of underlying infection or not. This was studied for the first time.MethodsThe statuses of the innate and adaptive immune systems were prospectively compared in 505 patients. Whole blood was sampled within less than 24 hours of advent of sepsis; white blood cells were stained with monoclonal antibodies and analyzed though a flow cytometer.ResultsExpression of HLA-DR was significantly decreased among patients with severe sepsis/shock due to acute pyelonephritis and intraabdominal infections compared with sepsis. The rate of apoptosis of natural killer (NK) cells differed significantly among patients with severe sepsis/shock due to ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) and hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) compared with sepsis. The rate of apoptosis of NKT cells differed significantly among patients with severe sepsis/shock due to acute pyelonephritis, primary bacteremia and VAP/HAP compared with sepsis. Regarding adaptive immunity, absolute counts of CD4-lymphocytes were significantly decreased among patients with severe sepsis/shock due to community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and intraabdominal infections compared with sepsis. Absolute counts of B-lymphocytes were significantly decreased among patients with severe sepsis/shock due to CAP compared with sepsis.ConclusionsMajor differences of the early statuses of the innate and adaptive immune systems exist between sepsis and severe sepsis/shock in relation to the underlying type of infection. These results may have a major impact on therapeutics.
IntroductionEarly risk assessment is the mainstay of management of patients with sepsis. APACHE II is the gold standard prognostic stratification system. A prediction rule that aimed to improve prognostication by APACHE II with the application of serum suPAR (soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor) is developed.MethodsA prospective study cohort enrolled 1914 patients with sepsis including 62.2% with sepsis and 37.8% with severe sepsis/septic shock. Serum suPAR was measured in samples drawn after diagnosis by an enzyme-immunoabsorbent assay; in 367 patients sequential measurements were performed. After ROC analysis and multivariate logistic regression analysis a prediction rule for risk was developed. The rule was validated in a double-blind fashion by an independent confirmation cohort of 196 sepsis patients, predominantly severe sepsis/septic shock patients, from Sweden.ResultsSerum suPAR remained stable within survivors and non-survivors for 10 days. Regression analysis showed that APACHE II ≥17 and suPAR ≥12 ng/ml were independently associated with unfavorable outcome. Four strata of risk were identified: i) APACHE II <17 and suPAR <12 ng/ml with mortality 5.5%; ii) APACHE II < 17 and suPAR ≥12 ng/ml with mortality 17.4%; iii) APACHE II ≥ 17 and suPAR <12 ng/ml with mortality 37.4%; and iv) APACHE II ≥17 and suPAR ≥12 ng/ml with mortality 51.7%. This prediction rule was confirmed by the Swedish cohort.ConclusionsA novel prediction rule with four levels of risk in sepsis based on APACHE II score and serum suPAR is proposed. Prognostication by this rule is confirmed by an independent cohort.
Our analysis positively validated the use of SOFA score to predict unfavourable outcome and to limit misclassification into lower severity. However, qSOFA score had inadequate sensitivity for early risk assessment.
Patients exposed to a surgical safety checklist experience better postoperative outcomes, but this could simply reflect wider quality of care in hospitals where checklist use is routine.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.