Surgical site infection (SSI) continues to be an issue in abdominal surgery, especially for contaminated (class III) and dirty-infected (class IV) wounds. Vacuum sealing drainage (VSD) was reported effective in the management of various types of wounds or skin grafts. Our goal was to investigate the efficacy of prophylactic VSD to better orient their medicosurgical care of high-risk incisions following laparotomy in a pediatric population.A total of 331 pediatric patients with contaminated (class III) and dirty-infected (class IV) wounds following emergency laparotomy were retrospectively reviewed between January 2005 and January 2013. Among them, 111 cases were placed with prophylactic VSD when incisions were closed. Clinical outcomes, including, overall surgical site complication, device effectiveness, and mean postoperative LOS were evaluated based on VSD usage or not.VSD was applied for an average of 5.8 days (range, 5–7 days), with 3 to 15 mL sucked fluid. The overall SSIs rate was 3% for patients with prophylactic VSD and 17% for patients with convention dressing (OR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.10–0.71, P = 0.004). In patients with prophylactic VSD, only 1 of 96 wound developed postoperative incision dehiscence, which is significant reduced compared with patients for conventional dressings (OR, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.01–0.95; P = 0.017) (Table 2). It also exhibited a decreased mean postoperative LOS (P < 0.001) for prophylactic VSD over conventional dressings.Our study demonstrated beneficial postoperative clinical effects of prophylactic VSD for high-risk laparotomy incisions following emergency laparotomy, such as shorter length of hospitalization, which may be attributed to the reduced overall SSIs rate.
This study was conducted to assess the clinical advantages of early enteral nutrition (EEN) in pediatric patients who underwent surgery with gastrointestinal (GI) anastomosis.EEN has been associated with clinical benefits in various aspect of surgical intervention, including GI function recovery and postoperative complications reduction. Evaluable data documenting clinical advantages with EEN for pediatric patients after surgery with GI anastomosis are limited.We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 575 pediatric patients undergoing surgical intervention with GI anastomosis. Among them, 278 cases were managed with EEN and the remaining cases were set as late enteral nutrition (LEN) group. Propensity score (PS) matching was conducted to adjust biases in patient selection. Enteral feeding related complications were evaluated with symptoms, including serum electrolyte abnormalities, abdominal distention, abdominal cramps, and diarrhea. Clinical outcomes, including GI function recovery, postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, and postoperative follow-up, were assessed according to EEN or LEN.Following PS matching, the baseline variables of the 2 groups were more comparable. There were no differences in the incidence of enteral feeding-related complications. EEN was associated with postoperative GI function recovery, including time to first defecation (3.1 ± 1.4 days for EEN vs 3.8 ± 1.0 days for LEN, risk ratio [RR], 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.43–1.08, P = .042). A lower total episodes of complication, including infectious complications and major complications were noted in patients with EEN than in patients with LEN (117 [45.9%] vs 137 [53.7%]; OR, 0.73, 95% CI 0.52–1.03, P = .046). Mean postoperative length of stay in the EEN group was 7.4 ± 1.8 days versus 9.2 ± 1.4 days in the LEN group (P = .007). Furthermore, the incidence of adhesive small bowel obstruction was lower for patients with laxative administration compared with control, but no significant difference was attained (P = .092)EEN was safe and associated with clinical benefits, including shorten hospital stay, and reduced overall postoperative complications on pediatric patients undergoing GI anastomosis.
The aim of this study was to explore the impact of 3% hypertonic saline (HS) intragastric administration for patients who underwent upper gastrointestinal surgery.During the postoperative period, 3% HS has been suggested as a means to improve the intestinal edema and reduce gastrointestinal complications.The medical records of 111 patients with HS intragastric administration following upper gastrointestinal surgery and 268 patients, served as control, were reviewed retrospectively. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for selected baseline variables. Clinical outcomes, including early gastrointestinal function recovery, postoperative complications, and length of hospital stay, were compared according to the HS intragastric administration or not.HS intragastric administration was associated with prompt postoperative gastrointestinal function recovery, including first flatus (risk ratio [RR], 1.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.89–1.65; P = 0.048) and feeding within 3 postoperative days (RR (95% CI), 0.57 (0.49–0.77); P = 0.036). Early ileus occurred in 25 of 108 patients with HS treatment versus 36 of 108 patients without HS treatment (RR (95% CI), 1.43 (0.63–2.15); P = 0.065). The patients with HS experienced a lower overall postoperative complication (odds ratio [OD] 0.57; 95% CI, 0.33–1.09; P = 0.063), including trend toward a decrease for infectious complications (15[13.9] vs 23[21.3]; P = 0.11; OD, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.29–1.22). There was a decreased incidence of anastomotic leakage (1[0.9] vs 7[6.5]; P = 0.033) and postoperative ileuas (5[4.6%] vs 11[10.2%]; P = 0.096) in the HS administration patients.Our study demonstrated beneficial postoperative clinical effects of HS intragastric administration in patients who had undergone upper gastrointestinal surgery, such as prompt postoperative gastrointestinal function recovery and reduced overall postoperative complications, which may be attributed to a reduced intestinal edema.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.