Evidence before this study: Acute appendicitis is the most common general surgical emergency in children. Its diagnosis remains challenging and children presenting with acute right iliac fossa (RIF) pain may be admitted for clinical observation or undergo normal appendicectomy (removal of a histologically normal appendix). A search for external validation studies of risk prediction models for acute appendicitis in children was performed on MEDLINE and Web of Science on 12 January 2017 using the search terms ["appendicitis" OR "appendectomy" OR "appendicectomy"] AND ["score" OR "model" OR "nomogram" OR "scoring"]. Studies validating prediction models aimed at differentiating acute appendicitis from all other causes of RIF pain were included. No date restrictions were applied. Validation studies were most commonly performed for the Alvarado, Appendicitis Inflammatory Response Score (AIRS), and Paediatric Appendicitis Score (PAS) models. Most validation studies were based on retrospective, single centre, or small cohorts, and findings regarding model performance were inconsistent. There was no high quality evidence to guide selection of the optimum model and threshold cutoff for identification of low-risk children in the UK and Ireland. Added value of this study: Most children admitted to hospital with RIF pain do not undergo surgery. When children do undergo appendicectomy, removal of a normal appendix (normal appendicectomy) is common, occurring in around 1 in 6 children. The Shera score is able to identify a large low-risk group of children who present with acute RIF pain but do not have acute appendicitis (specificity 44%). This low-risk group has an overall 1 in 30 risk of acute appendicitis and a 1 in 270 risk of perforated appendicitis. The Shera score is unable to achieve a sufficiently high positive predictive value to select a high-risk group who should proceed directly to surgery. Current diagnostic performance of ultrasound is also too poor to select children for surgery. Implications of all the available evidence: Routine pre-operative risk scoring could inform shared decision making by doctors, children, and parents by supporting safe selection of lowrisk patients for ambulatory management, reducing unnecessary admissions and normal appendicectomy. Hospitals should ensure seven-day-a-week availability of ultrasound for medium and high-risk patients. Ultrasound should be performed by operators trained to assess for acute appendicitis in children. For children in whom diagnostic uncertainty remains following ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or low-dose computed tomography (CT) are second-line investigations.
Subcutaneous fat necrosis, though a rare phenomenon, can occur in patients of all ages. In newborns, it is an uncommon, self-limited panniculitis of traumatic origin, while in adults it is most commonly encountered among women presenting to breast clinics following a trivial or unnoticed injury sustained long ago. An acute presentation of fat necrosis as a large mass, however, is quite unusual and that may confuse the observer. History of trauma gives a clue to the diagnosis. We report an interesting case of traumatic subcutaneous fat necrosis because of massage therapy in a 66-year-old lady.
IntroductionExtralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE) is relatively new surgical technique for low rectal cancers. It is a more radical approach than conventional abdominoperineal excision (APE) with potentially better oncological outcome. The aim of this study was to analyse short term results of ELAPE compared with conventional abdominoperineal excision.MethodsData were collected prospectively for 72 patients who underwent abdominoperineal excision (APE) for low rectal carcinomas from 2010 to 2014. Of these 24 patients underwent ELAPE with biological prosthetic mesh used to close the perineal defect.ResultsThe median age of patients was 68 (37–87). Positive circumferential resection margin (1/24 vs. 8/48) and Intra operative perorations (0/24 vs. 6/48) compared favourably with ELAPE.ConclusionsShort term results from this study support that ELAPE has better oncological outcome.
We demonstrate a technique to facilitate the insertion of extraction baskets into the common bile duct using the cholangiography catheter as a guide. The 'basket-in-catheter' (BIC) technique for transcystic CBD exploration is easier and safer than inserting the basket alone.
IntroductionUnexplained lactic acidosis (LA) in a critically ill patient often prompts investigations to rule out any reversible intra-abdominal cause. Equivocal results can lead to an emergency laparotomy (EL) with subsequent high morbidity and mortality rates. Our objective was to determine the clinical impact of urgent diagnostic laparoscopy (UDL) in such patients.MethodsThis was a descriptive single-centre cohort study. UDL on 28 consecutive critically ill patients with unexplained LA who were referred to a single surgeon over 16 years period were analysed. UDL was proformed either at bedside or in theatre without prior computerised tomography (CT) scan. Patient's demographics, ASA grade, referral route and intraoperative findings were analysed.ResultsEighteen patients underwent bedside UDL in the critical care setting and further 10 had UDL in theatre. Fourteen patients had normal UDL, out of these 10 had LA secondary to low cardiac output states. Fourteen patients had positive UDL findings. Seven patients had features of mesenteric ischaemia, two had gangrenous gallbladder, two had hepatic ischaemia, one patient had acute pancreatitis, one had gangrenous uterus and one had gastric volvulus. Five of the 14 patients with positive UDL were converted to laparotomy for definitive management. In total, of the 28 patients in the cohort, 23 patients avoided EL.ConclusionUDL is useful and feasible investigation for unexplained LA in the critically ill patients and it can avoid unnecessary EL in many patients. We would recommend the use of UDL as a safe and feasible investigation in such patients.
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.