No abstract

Introduction Damage control surgery (DCS) is the classic approach to manage severe trauma and has recently also been considered an appropriate approach to the treatment of critically ill patients with severe intra-abdominal sepsis. The purpose of the present review is to evaluate the outcomes following DCS for Hinchey II–IV complicated acute diverticulitis (CAD). Methods A comprehensive systematic search was undertaken to identify all randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and observational studies, irrespectively of their size, publication status, and language. Adults who have undergone DCS for CAD Hinchey II, III, or IV were included in this review. DCS is compared with the immediate and definitive surgical treatment in the form of HP, colonic resection, and primary anastomosis (RPA) with or without covering stoma or laparoscopic lavage. We searched the following electronic databases: PubMed MEDLINE, Scopus, and ISI Web of Knowledge. The protocol of this systematic review and meta-analysis was published on Prospero (CRD42020144953). Results Nine studies with 318 patients, undergoing DCS, were included. The presence of septic shock at the presentation in the emergency department was heterogeneous, and the weighted mean rate of septic shock across the studies was shown to be 35.1% [95% CI 8.4 to 78.6%]. The majority of the patients had Hinchey III (68.3%) disease. The remainder had either Hinchey IV (28.9%) or Hinchey II (2.8%). Phase I is similarly described in most of the studies as lavage, limited resection with closed blind colonic ends. In a few studies, resection and anastomosis (9.1%) or suture of the perforation site (0.9%) were performed in phase I of DCS. In those patients who underwent DCS, the most common method of temporary abdominal closure (TAC) was the negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) (97.8%). The RPA was performed in 62.1% [95% CI 40.8 to 83.3%] and the 22.7% [95% CI 15.1 to 30.3%]: 12.8% during phase I and 87.2% during phase III. A covering ileostomy was performed in 6.9% [95% CI 1.5 to 12.2%]. In patients with RPA, the overall leak was 7.3% [95% CI 4.3 to 10.4%] and the major anastomotic leaks were 4.7% [95% CI 2.0 to 7.4%]; the rate of postoperative mortality was estimated to be 9.2% [95% CI 6.0 to 12.4%]. Conclusions The present meta-analysis revealed an approximately 62.1% weighted rate of achieving GI continuity with the DCS approach to generalized peritonitis in Hinchey III and IV with major leaks of 4.7% and overall mortality of 9.2%. Despite the promising results, we are aware of the limitations related to the significant heterogeneity of inclusion criteria. Importantly, the low rate of reported septic shock may point toward selection bias. Further studies are needed to evaluate the clinical advantages and cost-effectiveness of the DCS approach.

ASL tumour perfusion measurements are a valuable surrogate parameter for early assessment of response to novel anti-angiogenic therapy.

Background and Objectives: The present study aims to assess the effectiveness and current evidence of the treatment of perirectal bleeding after stapled haemorrhoidopexy. Materials and methods: A systematic literature review was performed that combined the published and the obtained original data after a search of PubMed, Web of Science, and SCOPUS. Results: The present systematic review includes 16 articles with 37 patients. Twelve papers report perirectal and six report intra-abdominal bleeding. Stapled hemorrhoidopexy (SH) was performed in 57% of cases (3 PPH 01 and 15 PPH 03), stapled transanal rectal resection (STARR) in 13%, and for 30% information was not available. The median age was 49 years (±11.43). The sign and symptoms of perirectal bleeding were abdominal pain (43%), pelvic discomfort without rectal bleeding (36%), urinary retention (14%), and external rectal bleeding (21%). The median time to bleeding was 1 day (±1.53 postoperative days), with median hemoglobin at diagnosis 8.8 ± 1.04 g/dL. Unstable hemodynamic was reported in 19%. Computed tomography scan (CT) was the first examination in 77%. Only two cases underwent the abdominal US, but subsequently, a CT scan was also conducted. Non-operative management was performed in 38% (n = 14) with selective arteriography and percutaneous angioembolization in two cases. A surgical treatment was performed in 23 cases—transabdominal surgery (3 colostomies, 1 Hartmann’ procedure, 1 low anterior resection of the rectum, 1 bilateral ligation of internal iliac artery and 1 ligation of vessels located at the rectal wall), transanal surgery (n = 13), a perineal incision in one, and CT-guided paracoccygeal drainage in one. Conclusions: Because of the rarity and lack of experience, no uniform tactic for the treatment of perirectal hematomas exists in the literature. We propose an algorithm similar to the approach in pelvic trauma, based on two main pillars—hemodynamic stability and the finding of contrast CT.

Background and Objectives: The diverticular disease includes a broad spectrum of different “clinical situations” from diverticulosis to acute diverticulitis (AD), with a full spectrum of severity ranging from self-limiting infection to abscess or fistula formation to free perforation. The present work aimed to assess the burden of complicated diverticulitis through a comparative analysis of the hospitalizations based on the national administrative databases. Materials and Methods: A review of the international and national administrative databases concerning admissions for complicated AD was performed. Results: Ten studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. No definition of acute complicated diverticulitis was reported in any study. Complicated AD accounted for approximately 42% and 79% of the hospitalizations. The reported rates of abscess varied between 1% and 10% from all admissions for AD and 5–29% of the cases with complicated AD. An increasing temporal trend was found in one study–from 6% to 10%. The rates of diffuse peritonitis ranged from 1.6% to 10.2% of all hospitalizations and 11% and 47% of the complicated cases and were stable in the time. Conclusions: The available data precluded definitive conclusions because of the significant discrepancy between the included studies. The leading cause was the presence of heterogeneity due to coding inaccuracies in all databases, absence of ICD codes to distinguish the different type of complications, and the lack of coding data about some general conditions such as sepsis, shock, malnutrition, steroid therapy, diabetes, pulmonary, and heart failure.