Laparoscopy for abdominal emergencies

LapEmerge trial: study protocol for a laparoscopic approach for emergency colon resection-a multicenter, open label, randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Due to faster recovery and lower morbidity rates, laparoscopy has become the gold standard in elective colorectal surgery for both the benign and malignant forms of the disease. A substantial proportion of colorectal operations are, however, carried out in emergency settings, and most of the emergency resections are still performed open. The aim of this study is to compare the laparoscopic versus open approach for emergency colorectal surgery.

METHOD/DESIGN

This is a multicenter prospective randomized controlled trial including adult patients presenting with a condition requiring emergency colorectal resection.

DISCUSSION

Previous studies cautiously recommend wider use of laparoscopy in emergency colorectal resections, but all earlier reports are retrospective, are mostly single-center studies, and have limited numbers of patients. Laparoscopy may involve some unpredictable risks that have not yet been reported because of the infrequent use of the techniqueded to assess the safety of laparoscopy as well as the advantages and disadvantages of open compared with laparoscopic emergency surgery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Trial registration number:  ClinicalTrials.gov   NCT05005117 . Registered on August 12, 2021.

Cesena guidelines: WSES consensus statement on laparoscopic-first approach to general surgery emergencies and abdominal trauma

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy is widely adopted across nearly all surgical subspecialties in the elective setting. Initially finding indication in minor abdominal emergencies, it has gradually become the standard approach in the majority of elective general surgery procedures. Despite many technological advances and increasing acceptance, the laparoscopic approach remains underutilized in emergency general surgery and in abdominal trauma. Emergency laparotomy continues to carry a high morbidity and mortality. In recent years, there has been a growing interest from emergency and trauma surgeons in adopting minimally invasive surgery approaches in the acute surgical setting. The present position paper, supported by the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), aims to provide a review of the literature to reach a consensus on the indications and benefits of a laparoscopic-first approach in patients requiring emergency abdominal surgery for general surgery emergencies or abdominal trauma.

METHODS

This position paper was developed according to the WSES methodology. A steering committee performed the literature review and drafted the position paper. An international panel of 54 experts then critically revised the manuscript and discussed it in detail, to develop a consensus on a position statement.

RESULTS

A total of 323 studies (systematic review and meta-analysis, randomized clinical trial, retrospective comparative cohort studies, case series) have been selected from an initial pool of 7409 studies. Evidence demonstrates several benefits of the laparoscopic approach in stable patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery for general surgical emergencies or abdominal trauma. The selection of a stable patient seems to be of paramount importance for a safe adoption of a laparoscopic approach. In hemodynamically stable patients, the laparoscopic approach was found to be safe, feasible and effective as a therapeutic tool or helpful to identify further management steps and needs, resulting in improved outcomes, regardless of conversion. Appropriate patient selection, surgeon experience and rigorous minimally invasive surgical training, remain crucial factors to increase the adoption of laparoscopy in emergency general surgery and abdominal trauma.

CONCLUSIONS

The WSES expert panel suggests laparoscopy as the first approach for stable patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery for general surgery emergencies and abdominal trauma.

Assessing and managing frailty in emergency laparotomy: a WSES position paper

Many countries are facing an aging population. As people live longer, surgeons face the prospect of operating on increasingly older patients. Traditional teaching is that with older age, these patients face an increased risk of mortality and morbidity, even to a level deemed too prohibitive for surgery. However, this is not always true. An active 90-year-old patient can be much fitter than an overweight, sedentary 65-year-old patient with comorbidities. Recent literature shows that frailty-an age-related cumulative decline in multiple physiological systems, is therefore a better predictor of mortality and morbidity than chronological age alone. Despite recognition of frailty as an important tool in identifying vulnerable surgical patients, many surgeons still shun objective tools. The aim of this position paper was to perform a review of the existing literature and to provide recommendations on emergency laparotomy and in frail patients. This position paper was reviewed by an international expert panel composed of 37 experts who were asked to critically revise the manuscript and position statements. The position paper was conducted according to the WSES methodology. We shall present the derived statements upon which a consensus was reached, specifying the quality of the supporting evidence and suggesting future research directions.

Prognostic factors in patients with acute mesenteric ischemia-novel tools for determining patient outcomes

BACKGROUND

Acute mesenteric ischemia (AMI) is a devastating disease with poor prognosis. Due to the multitude of underlying factors, prediction of outcomes remains poor. We aimed to identify factors governing diagnosis and survival in AMI and develop novel prognostic tools.

METHODS

This monocentric retrospective study analyzed patients with suspected AMI undergoing imaging between January 2014 and December 2019. Subgroup analyses were performed for patients with confirmed AMI undergoing surgery. Nomograms were calculated based on multivariable logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Five hundred and thirty-nine patients underwent imaging for clinically suspected AMI, with 216 examinations showing radiological indication of AMI. Intestinal necrosis (IN) was confirmed in 125 undergoing surgery, 58 of which survived and 67 died (median 9 days after diagnosis, IQR 22). Increasing age, ASA score, pneumatosis intestinalis, and dilated bowel loops were significantly associated with presence of IN upon radiological suspicion. In contrast, decreased pH, elevated creatinine, radiological atherosclerosis, vascular occlusion (versus non-occlusive AMI), and colonic affection (compared to small bowel ischemia only) were associated with impaired survival in patients undergoing surgery. Based on the identified factors, we developed two nomograms to aid in prediction of IN upon radiological suspicion (C-Index = 0.726) and survival in patients undergoing surgery for IN (C-Index = 0.791).

CONCLUSION

As AMI remains a condition with high mortality, we identified factors predicting occurrence of IN with suspected AMI and survival when undergoing surgery for IN. We provide two new tools, which combine these parameters and might prove helpful in treatment of patients with AMI.

Laparoscopic versus open emergent colectomy for ischemic colitis: a propensity score-matched comparison

Introduction

Laparoscopic colectomy is rarely performed for ischemic colitis. The aim of this propensity score-matched study was to compare preoperative characteristics, intraoperative details and short-term outcomes for emergent laparoscopic colectomy versus the traditional open approach for patients with ischemic colitis.

Methods

Retrospective review of 96 patients who underwent emergent colectomy for ischemic colitis between January 2011 and December 2020 (39 via laparoscopy, 57 via laparotomy) was performed. We compared short-term outcomes after using a one-to-one ratio and nearest-neighbor propensity score matching to obtain similar preoperative and intraoperative parameters in each group.

Results

Patients in the open group experienced more surgical site complications (52.6% vs. 23.0%, p = 0.004), more intra-abdominal abscesses (47.3% vs. 17.9%, p = 0.003), longer need for ventilator support (20 days vs. 0 days, p < 0.001), more major complications (77.2% vs. 43.5%, p = 0.001), higher mortality (49.1% vs. 20.5%, p = 0.004), and longer hospital stay (32 days vs. 19 days, p = 0.001). After propensity score matching (31 patients in each group), patients undergoing open (vs. laparoscopy) had more surgical site complications (45.1% vs. 19.4%, p = 0.030) and required longer ventilator support (14 vs. 3 days, p = 0.039). After multivariate analysis, Charlson Comorbidity Index (p = 0.024), APACHE II score (p = 0.001), and Favier’s classification (p = 0.023) were independent predictors of mortality.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic emergent colectomy for ischemic colitis is feasible and is associated with fewer surgical site complications and better respiratory function, compared to the open approach.

Antimicrobial Challenge in Acute Care Surgery

The burden of infections in acute care surgery (ACS) is huge. Surgical emergencies alone account for three million admissions per year in the United States (US) with estimated financial costs of USD 28 billion per year. Acute care facilities and ACS patients represent boost sanctuaries for the emergence, development and transmission of infections and multi-resistant organisms. According to the World Health Organization, healthcare-associated infections affected around 4 million cases in Europe and 1.7 million in the US alone in 2011 with 39,000 and 99,000 directly attributable deaths, respectively. In this scenario, antimicrobial resistance arose as a public-health emergency that worsens patients’ morbidity and mortality and increases healthcare costs. The optimal patient care requires the application of comprehensive evidence-based policies and strategies aiming at minimizing the impact of healthcare associated infections and antimicrobial resistance, while optimizing the treatment of intra-abdominal infections. The present review provides a snapshot of two hot topics, such as antimicrobial resistance and systemic inflammatory response, and three milestones of infection management, such as source control, infection prevention, and control and antimicrobial stewardship.

Laparoscopic Co-surgeon Ventriculoperitoneal Shunt Placement Versus Single Surgeon Mini Laparotomy

Introduction: Ventriculoperitoneal (VP) shunt placement is one of the most common treatments for pediatric hydrocephalus. However, device failures often occur, requiring operative revision of either the intraventricular or intraperitoneal shunt catheters. Historically, shunt placement was performed via laparotomy, but there has been a trend towards laparoscopic-assisted placement of the intraperitoneal portion of the shunt. We examined the outcomes of laparoscopic-assisted versus open VP shunt placement utilizing a local institutional retrospective review.

Methods: Single institution 2012-2017 retrospective review of all cases was performed. Patients were divided into two groups - laparoscopic and open. Thirty-day outcomes, patient age, surgery performed, surgical control time (SCT), length of stay (LOS), and readmission were analyzed. 

Results: Cohort analysis inclusion criteria included 188 patients. The cohort analysis showed both decreased laparoscopic-assisted SCT (56.4 vs 32.1 min, p<0.0001) and postop complications (16.7% vs 7.1%, p<0.07). There was no significant difference in surgical site infection or readmission rates. 

Conclusion: Local analysis show advantages for laparoscopic-assisted VP shunt placement over open single surgeon techniques with decreased SCT, LOS, and unplanned interventions.

Laparoscopy is associated with decreased all-cause mortality in patients undergoing emergency general surgery procedures in a regional health system

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of laparoscopic surgery for common emergency general surgery (EGS) procedures within an integrated Acute Care Surgery (ACS) network. We hypothesized that laparoscopy would be associated with improved outcomes.

METHODS

Our integrated health care system's EGS registry created from AAST EGS ICD-9 codes was queried from January 2013 to October 2015. Procedures were grouped as laparoscopic or open. Standard descriptive and univariate tests were performed, and a multivariable logistic regression controlling for open status, age, BMI, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), trauma tier, and resuscitation diagnosis was performed. Laparoscopic procedures converted to open were identified and analyzed using concurrent procedure billing codes across episodes of care.

RESULTS

Of 60,604 EGS patients identified over the 33-month period, 7280 (12.0%) had an operation and 6914 (11.4%) included AAST-defined EGS procedures. There were 4813 (69.6%) surgeries performed laparoscopically. Patients undergoing a laparoscopic procedure tended to be younger (45.7 ± 18.0 years vs. 57.2 ± 17.6, p < 0.001) with similar BMI (29.7 ± 9.0 kg/m² vs. 28.8 ± 8.3, p < 0.001). Patients in the laparoscopic group had lower mean CCI score (1.6 ± 2.3 vs. 3.4 ± 3.2, p ≤ 0.0001). On multivariable analysis, open surgery had the highest association with inpatient mortality (OR 8.67, 4.23-17.75, p < 0.0001) and at all time points (30-, 90-day, 1-, 3-year). At all time points, conversion to open was found to be a statistically significant protective factor.

CONCLUSION

Use of laparoscopy in EGS is common and associated with a decreased risk of all-cause mortality at all time points compared to open procedures. Conversion to open was protective at all time points compared to open procedures.

Minimally invasive surgery in emergency surgery: a WSES survey

BACKGROUND

The diffusion of minimally invasive surgery in emergency surgery still represents a developing challenge. Evidence about the use of minimally invasive surgery shows its feasibility and safety; however, the diffusion of these techniques is still poor. The aims of the present survey were to explore the diffusion and variations in the use of minimally invasive surgery among surgeons in the emergency setting.

METHODS

This is a web-based survey administered to all the WSES members investigating the diffusion of minimally invasive surgery in emergency. The survey investigated personal characteristics of participants, hospital characteristics, personal confidence in the use of minimally invasive surgery in emergency, limitations in the use of it and limitations to prosecute minimally invasive surgery in emergency surgery. Characteristics related to the use of minimally invasive surgery were studied with a multivariate ordinal regression.

RESULTS

The survey collected a total of 415 answers; 42.2% of participants declared a working experience > 15 years and 69.4% of responders worked in tertiary level center or academic hospital. In primary emergencies, only 28,7% of participants declared the use of laparoscopy in more than 50% of times. Personal confidence with minimally invasive techniques was the highest for appendectomy and cholecystectomy. At multivariate ordinal regression, a longer professional experience, the use of laparoscopy in major elective surgery and bariatric surgery expertise were related to a higher use of laparoscopy in emergency surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

The survey shows that minimally invasive techniques in emergency surgery are still underutilized. Greater focus should be placed on the development of dedicated training in laparoscopy among emergency surgeons.

Laparoscopy in Emergency: Why Not? Advantages of Laparoscopy in Major Emergency: A Review

A laparoscopic approach is suggested with the highest grade of recommendation for acute cholecystitis, perforated gastroduodenal ulcers, acute appendicitis, gynaecological disorders, and non-specific abdominal pain (NSAP). To date, the main qualities of laparoscopy for these acute surgical scenarios are clearly stated: quicker surgery, faster recovery and shorter hospital stay. For the remaining surgical emergencies, as well as for abdominal trauma, the role of laparoscopy is still a matter of debate. Patients might benefit from a laparoscopic approach only if performed by experienced teams and surgeons which guarantee a high standard of care. More precisely, laparoscopy can limit damage to the tissue and could be effective for the reduction of the overall amount of cell debris, which is a result of the intensity with which the immune system reacts to the injury and the following symptomatology. In fact, these fragments act as damage-associated molecular patterns (DAMPs). DAMPs, as well as pathogen associated molecular patterns (PAMPs), are recognised by both surface and intracellular receptors of the immune cells and activate the cascade which, in critically ill surgical patients, is responsible for a deranged response. This may result in the development of progressive and multiple organ dysfunctions, manifesting with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), coagulopathy, liver dysfunction and renal failure. In conclusion, none of the emergency surgical scenarios preclude laparoscopy, provided that the surgical tactic could ensure sufficient cleaning of the abdomen in addition to resolving the initial tissue damage caused by the “trauma”.

A retrospective comparison of outcomes for open vs. laparoscopic surgical techniques in pediatric ulcerative colitis

Background

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is an aggressive disease in the pediatric population and a cause of significant, lifelong morbidity. The aim of this study is to compare surgical complications in pediatric patients undergoing laparoscopic vs. open surgical treatment for UC.

Methods

We queried the Kids' Inpatient Database (KID) for all cases of UC undergoing surgical treatment in 2009 and 2012. We identified patients who received total colectomy without proctectomy (n=413) or total proctocolectomy (n=196) and performed univariate and multivariate analyses comparing laparoscopic vs. open procedures.

Results

In pediatric UC patients undergoing total colectomy without proctectomy, open procedures were associated with more complications than laparoscopic, including fluid and electrolyte disorders (40% vs. 28%), surgical wound dehiscence (6% vs. 2%), septicemia (18% vs. 2%), and gastrointestinal disorders (16% vs. 7%) among others, all P<0.05. Likewise, in patients with UC undergoing total proctocolectomy, there were more complications in open vs. laparoscopic technique, including increased transfusion requirements (25% vs. 7%, P=0.001) and significantly more gastrointestinal upset, including nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea (11% vs. 1%, P=0.003). In multivariate analysis, patients who underwent total colectomy with or without proctectomy had an increased risk of experiencing any complication when their procedure was performed in an open or non-elective fashion (all odds ratio >2.4; all P<0.001).

Conclusions

The laparoscopic approach was associated with significantly lower rates of surgical complications in pediatric patients undergoing total colectomy with or without proctectomy for UC. These findings demonstrate that laparoscopic technique compares favorably, and may be preferable, to the open approach in selected pediatric patients with UC.

The Role of Relaparoscopy in the Management of Early Bariatric Surgery Complications and 30-Day Outcome: a Tertiary Centre Experience

The laparoscopic approach for dealing with bariatric complications has become the gold standard of modern practice. The aim of this study is to assess the role of relaparoscopy as a diagnostic and therapeutic approach towards managing complications and improving 30-day outcome.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database was conducted in a tertiary bariatric unit. Data were collected on all bariatric surgical procedures performed between March 2013 and March 2019. Any patient who was returned to theatre for a suspected serious complication was identified and their outcome studied.

RESULTS

Over the 5-year study period, the total number of operations performed was 1660 (981 laparoscopic gastric bypass (LRYGB), 612 laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and 67 revisional bariatric operations). Early postoperative complications (in hospital or within 30 days of surgery) that lead to reoperation were recorded in 33 patients (1.9%). These complications occurred after LRYGB in 26 patients (2.65%) and LSG in 7 patients (1.14%), respectively. Anastomotic leaks occurred in 1.1% of LRYGB, whilst 0.6% of patients have jejuno-jejunostomy obstruction. Obstruction at the gastro-jejunostomy anastomosis occurred in one patient. Following LSG, one mortality was recorded following bleeding from the staple line (0.06%) and five patients (0.3%) had leaks from the staple line. Thirty-one reoperations were performed laparoscopically, and two were converted to the open approach, whilst 2 operations were planned as open from the outset.

CONCLUSION

Relaparoscopy is an effective and safe approach to the management of clinically or radiologically suspected early complications after bariatric surgery. Graphical abstract.

Perforation on the superior side of duodenum is a risk factor of laparoscopic primary repair for duodenal ulcer perforation

Purpose

Primary repair is the standard surgical method for treating duodenal ulcer perforations, with very good results usually anticipated because of the simplicity of the associated surgical techniques. Therefore, this study aimed to analyze the risk factors that affect laparoscopic primary repair outcomes for duodenal ulcer perforation.

Methods

Between June 2010 and June 2020, 124 patients who underwent laparoscopic primary repair for duodenal ulcer perforations were reviewed. Early surgical outcomes were evaluated and risk factors for postoperative complications were assessed.

Results

All surgeries were performed laparoscopically without open conversion. Multivariate analysis showed that the elderly (over 70 years), and perforations that needed more than 2 stitches for closure were risk factors for overall postoperative complications. Perforations that needed more than 2 stitches and perforations on the superior side of the duodenum were major risk factors for severe postoperative complications. Severe postoperative complications occurred in 6 of the patients, and 1 of them died of multiorgan failure.

Conclusion

Based on our results, we suggest that laparoscopic primary repair can be safely performed in duodenal ulcer perforation. However, more careful surgery and postoperative care are needed to improve the surgical outcomes of patients who need more than 2 stitches to close their perforation or who have perforations on the superior side of the duodenum.

Duet laparoscopic repair with knotless barbed sutures for treatment of perforated peptic ulcer: reality in general surgery with lacking of manpower

Background

Perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) is a fatal complication of peptic ulcer disease, which requires emergency surgery. Laparoscopic repair is the widely accepted and effective method for the treatment of PPU. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of duet laparoscopic repair of PPU with knotless barbed sutures.

Methods

From January 2013 to May 2019, 40 patients with PPU underwent laparoscopic primary repair and omentopexy at the Dankook University Hospital. The operative outcomes and complications of patients undergoing surgery using continuous suturing with absorbable knotless barbed sutures (group A, n=15) were compared with those undergoing surgery with conventional interrupted sutures (group B, n=25).

Results

The mean operative time was significantly shorter in group A than group B (84.4±39.8 vs. 104.2±49.4 min, P<0.001). There were no differences in other operative outcomes or postoperative complications (group A vs. group B, 20.0% vs. 24.0%, respectively; P=0.249) between the two groups. The mean operation time spent for laparoscopic sutures and omentopexy was 22.7 minutes.

Conclusions

The findings of the current study, albeit performed retrospectively at a single institution, suggested that duet laparoscopic repair of PPU with knotless barbed sutures might be considered as an alternative option, especially in hospitals lacking manpower.

An Overview of Gastroduodenal Perforation

Gastroduodenal perforation may be spontaneous or traumatic and the majority of spontaneous perforation is due to peptic ulcer disease. Improved medical management of peptic ulceration has reduced the incidence of perforation, but still remains a common cause of peritonitis. The classic sub-diaphragmatic air on chest x-ray may be absent and computed tomography scan is a more sensitive investigation in the stable patient. The management of perforated peptic ulcer disease is still a subject of debate. The majority of perforated peptic ulcers are caused by Helicobacter pylori, so definitive surgery is not usually required. Perforated peptic ulcer is an indication for operation in nearly all cases except when the patient is asymptomatic or unfit for surgery. However, non-operative management has a significant incidence of intra-abdominal abscesses and sepsis. Primary closure is achievable in traumatic perforation, but the management follows the Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS) principles.

A critical review of the safety of minimally invasive surgery in the era of COVID-19

BACKGROUND

The Corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected surgical practice around the world. While several abdominal emergencies can be managed effectively and safely using minimally invasive surgery (MIS), the safety of using MIS amid the COVID-19 pandemic has been debated. MIS, including laparoscopy and robotic surgery, is considered an aerosol-generating procedure and some recent research demonstrated possible spread of the virus through aerosol. This review assessed the available evidence on the safety of MIS in the COVID-19 era, explored the possible precautions to be taken when using MIS to prevent exposure of the operating team to infection, and highlighted the recommendations of several surgical societies in this regard.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Electronic databases, Google Scholar, and pre-print archives were searched for evidence on airborne transmission of COVID-19 and the safety of MIS amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Recommendations of recognized surgical societies were also searched. The available evidence was summarized in a narrative manner.

RESULTS

Limited data on the possibility of airborne transmission of COVID-19 were found. The studies that reported on the presence of the SARS-COV-2 in the air samples of patients with COVID-19 had conflicting results. Several precautions to minimize the presumed risk of exposure of the operation room staff to COVID-19 were devised.

CONCLUSION

According to the available evidence and recommendations of different surgical societies, MIS may be used in the treatment of acute abdominal emergency. However, considerable caution should be taken to avoid the presumed risk of aerosolization of the virus particles during the procedure, which may expose the operating staff to the risk of COVID-19.

Laparoscopy: A Better Approach for Perforated Duodenal Ulcer

Background

Laparoscopic surgery is becoming the gold standard for most abdominal surgeries in recent times. Laparoscopic repair of perforated duodenal ulcer (PDU), however, is still an area of debate. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic repair of PDU versus open repair.

Methods

In this cross-sectional study, patients were consecutively sampled. Out of 101 patients with clinically diagnosed PDU, 36 patients underwent laparoscopic Graham patch repair and 65 underwent open Graham patch repair in a tertiary care academic hospital. Open repair was via upper midline incision, and laparoscopic repair by the three-port technique. The following stages were calculated: operative time, duration of postoperative analgesia, time taken to mobilize, and patient length of stay after the operation.

Results

The mean operative time was somewhat longer in the laparoscopy group compared to the open repair group (74.01 vs 56.17 minutes, respectively). Mean postoperative analgesia requirement, time taken to mobilize, and hospital stay were significantly shorter after laparoscopy than after open repair (1.21 days, 9.32 hours, and 3.12 days vs 3.83 days, 16.20 hours, and 4.85 days, respectively). Three patients (8%) in the laparoscopy group and 35 (54%) in the open repair group had postoperative complications.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic repair of PDU is a safe approach and better than open repair in terms of operative time with the right level of expertise only, postoperative analgesia requirement, mobilization, duration of hospital stay, and incidence of postoperative respiratory and wound complications.

[Minimally invasive interventions in emergency large bowel surgery]

The current trends in the treatment of various surgical diseases of large bowel using minimally invasive operations are reviewed in the manuscript. It is shown that laparoscopy is currently possible in most cases for urgent large bowel diseases.

Advantage of laparoscopic peritoneal toileting in acute peritonitis with unclear etiology: A case report with inspiring outcome (with video)

INTRODUCTION

Acute peritonitis is a surgical emergency and is conventionally managed with exploratory laparotomy in many centers, but laparoscopy is not contraindicated in such conditions. Operative management remains a cornerstone treatment in peritonitis irrespective of the primary pathology.

PRESENTATION OF CASE

A 32-years-old man was admitted with acute diffuse peritonitis. As he was clinically stable, we proceeded with conservative treatment and diagnostic workup. He did not respond by 24 h and CT imaging showed ascites, but no definite diagnosis could be made. Diagnostic laparoscopy was performed, thorough peritoneal toileting was done but surprisingly the etiology was unclear. Following laparoscopy, he responded well with an uneventful recovery.

DISCUSSION

Timely proper evaluation and correct intervention are a paramount concern for the positive outcome. Regarding the most effective operative approach (laparotomy or laparoscopy) in acute peritonitis remains controversial in the literature and laparoscopy has been considered as a relative contraindication. However, the laparoscopy is gaining wider acceptance as the limitations of laparoscopy are declining rapidly. We experienced a case of extensive peritonitis with unclear etiology which we managed successfully by laparoscopy.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic approach in peritonitis is effective and helpful for accurate diagnosis and to minimize the hazards of an unnecessary laparotomy. This case report might encourage many surgeons to consider laparoscopic approach in peritonitis with confidence and to perform further studies.

Insight into the methodology and uptake of EAES guidelines: a qualitative analysis and survey by the EAES Consensus & Guideline Subcommittee

BACKGROUND

Over the past 25 years, the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) has been issuing clinical guidance documents to aid surgical practice. We aimed to investigate the awareness and use of such documents among EAES members. Additionally, we conceptually appraised the methodology used in their development in order to propose a bundle of actions for quality improvement and increased penetration of clinical practice guidelines among EAES members.

METHODS

We invited members of EAES to participate in a web-based survey on awareness and use of these documents. Post hoc analyses were performed to identify factors associated with poor awareness/use and the reported reasons for limited use. We further summarized and conceptually analyzed key methodological features of clinical guidance documents published by EAES.

RESULTS

Three distinct consecutive phases of methodological evolvement of clinical guidance documents were evident: a "consensus phase," a "guideline phase," and a "transitional phase". Out of a total of 254 surgeons who completed the survey, 72% percent were aware of EAES guidelines and 47% reported occasional use. Young age and trainee status were associated with poor awareness and use. Restriction by colleagues was the primary reason for limited use in these subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

The methodology of EAES clinical guidance documents is evolving. Awareness among EAES members is fair, but use is limited. Dissemination actions should be directed to junior surgeons and trainees.

Novel approach to intraoperative peritoneal lavage with an extracorporeal stirring method in laparoscopic surgery for generalized peritonitis: Preliminary results

INTRODUCTION

The primary concern with laparoscopic intraoperative peritoneal lavage (IOPL) for generalized peritonitis relates to the difficulty and uncertainty in ensuring adequate washout of contaminated fluid. Here, we describe a new method of laparoscopy-assisted IOPL.

METHODS

We performed emergency surgery in 10 patients with generalized peritonitis necessitating IOPL. A small wound retractor was inserted into the abdominal cavity through an incision and elevated to raise the abdominal wall. More than 3-L saline was injected via the retractor at one time. The abdomen was manually shaken by pressure from outside the body. Contaminated fluid was removed with a long suction device through the retractor. This procedure was repeated until the fluid was confirmed to be transparent by laparoscopy, and then drains were placed.

RESULTS

Median lavage time was 23.5 minutes (range, 15-34 minutes), and volume of lavage fluid was 19 L (range, 10-20 L). Median time to resumption of fluid intake was 3 days (range, 1-12 days), time to food intake was 6 days (range, 3-14 days), and time to first bowel movement was 5 days (range, 3-10 days). Median duration of antibiotic use was 8.5 days (range, 5-15 days). Complications were one case of antibiotic-induced rash, two cases of paralytic ileus, and one case of pelvic abscess. All patients recovered well without additional surgical intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

This new approach to laparoscopy-assisted IOPL was feasible for these patients with generalized peritonitis. This procedure enabled corpus lavage to be performed in a similarly short time to open surgery but with less invasiveness. Further research is needed to confirm indications and long-term outcomes.

Retrograde open superior mesenteric artery stenting: a novel approach to managing occluded ilio-superior mesenteric artery grafts

Acute mesenteric ischaemia (AMI) can be treated either by open bypass grafting or occasionally by antegrade endovascular stenting. We present a patient with symptoms of AMI, in the early postoperative period, following thrombosis of an iliac to superior mesenteric bypass to treat chronic mesenteric ischaemia. A hybrid technique combining open surgery with a retrograde endovascular approach was performed. This allowed for direct visualisation of the bowel and immediate revascularisation of the mesenteric circulation.

Extending the Indication for Laparoscopic Surgery in Patients With Pan-Peritonitis

BACKGROUND

There have been reports of favorable results in patients with peritonitis who underwent laparoscopic surgery. The present study evaluated the outcomes of laparoscopic surgery in patients with pan-peritonitis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We enrolled 148 patients who underwent open and laparoscopic surgery for pan-peritonitis between January 2015 and December 2017 at Hanyang University Guri Hospital. Patients with appendicitis or cholecystitis were excluded from this study because of the simplicity of the technique and the favorable postoperative prognosis. Surgical outcomes including open conversion, morbidity, mortality, risk, and prognostic factors were evaluated.

RESULTS

During the study period, 125 patients (84.5%) underwent laparoscopic surgery. The conversion to open surgery occurred in 7 (5.3%) patients. In the laparoscopic surgery group, 27 patients (21.6%) experienced postoperative complications, and 6 died (4.8%). Multivariate analysis showed that age of older than 75 years was a risk factor for postoperative complications. Especially, preoperative shock (<90 mm Hg) and a longer time from symptom onset (over 2 d) to surgery were prognostic factors for postoperative mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of our results and experiences, we believe that laparoscopic surgery is applicable to surgery of pan-peritonitis. And, preoperative shock and longer time from onset are prognostic factors of mortality in laparoscopic group. Therefore, we are confident that careful patient selection and specialized laparoscopic team should be considered in order to have best results.

The role of emergency laparoscopic colectomy for complicated sigmoid diverticulits: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Nowadays sigmoidectomy is recommended as "gold standard" treatment for generalized purulent or faecal peritonitis from sigmoid perforated diverticulitis. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess effectiveness and safety of laparoscopic access versus open sigmoidectomy in acute setting.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs published in PubMed, SCOPUS and Web of Science.

RESULTS

The search yielded four non-RCTs encompassing 436 patients undergoing either laparoscopic (181 patients, 41.51%) versus open sigmoid resection (255 patients, 58.49%). All studies reported ASA scores, but only four studies reported other severity scoring systems (Mannheim Peritonitis Index, P-POSSUM). Level of surgical expertise was reported in only one study. Laparoscopy improves slightly the rates of overall post-operative complications and post-operative hospital stay, respectively (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.80 and MD -6.53, 95% CI -16.05 to 2.99). Laparoscopy did not seem to improve the other clinical outcomes: rate of Hartmann's vs anastomosis, operating time, reoperation rate and postoperative 30-day mortality.

CONCLUSION

In this review four prospective studies were included, over 20 + year period, including overall 400 + patients. This meta-analysis revealed significant advantages associated with a laparoscopic over open approach to emergency sigmoidectomy in acute diverticulitis in terms of postoperative complication rates, although no differences were found in other outcomes. The lack of hemodynamic data and reasons for operative approach hamper interpretation of the data suggesting that patients undergoing open surgery were sicker and these results must be considered with extreme caution and this hypothesis requires confirmation by future prospective randomised controlled trials.

Use of minimally invasive surgery in emergency general surgery procedures

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has demonstrated superior outcomes in many elective procedures. However, its use in emergency general surgery (EGS) procedures is not well characterized. The purpose of this study was to examine the trends in utilization and outcomes of MIS techniques in EGS over the past decade.

METHODS

The 2007-2016 ACS-NSQIP database was utilized to identify patients undergoing emergency surgery for four common EGS diagnoses: appendicitis, cholecystitis/cholangitis, peptic ulcer disease, and small bowel obstruction. Trends over time were described. Preoperative risk factors, operative characteristics, outcomes, morbidity, and trends were compared between MIS and open approaches using univariate and multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

During the 10-year study period, 190,264 patients were identified. The appendicitis group was the largest (166,559 patients) followed by gallbladder disease (9994), bowel obstruction (6256), and peptic ulcer disease (366). Utilization of MIS increased over time in all groups (p < 0.001). There was a concurrent decrease in mean days of hospitalization in each group: appendectomy (2.4 to 2.0), cholecystectomy (5.7 to 3.2), peptic ulcer disease (20.3 to 11.7), and bowel obstruction (12.9 to 10.5); p < 0.001 for all. On multivariate analysis, use of MIS techniques was associated with decreased odds of 30-day mortality, surgical site infection, and length of hospital stay in all groups (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of MIS techniques in these four EGS diagnoses has increased in frequency over the past 10 years. When adjusted for preoperative risk factors, use of MIS was associated with decreased odds of wound infection, death, and length of stay. Further studies are needed to determine if increased access to MIS techniques among EGS patients may improve outcomes.

[Early clinical care strategy for severely injured patients with abdominal trauma]

BACKGROUND

The presence of abdominal injuries has a major impact on the mortality of severely injured patients. For injuries that require surgery, laparotomy is still the gold standard for early surgical care; however, there is increasing evidence that laparoscopy may be an alternative in the early clinical care of polytrauma patients.

OBJECTIVE

The present registry-based study analyzed the utilization and the outcome of laparoscopy in severely injured patients with abdominal trauma in Germany.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 12,447 patients retrieved from the TraumaRegister DGU^® (TR-DGU) was performed. The primary inclusion criteria were an injury severity score (ISS) ≥ 9 and an abbreviated injury scale (AIS) [abdomen] ≥ 1. The included patients were grouped according to early treatment management: (1) laparoscopy, (2) laparotomy and (3) non-operative management (NOM). Finally, group-specific patient characteristics and outcome were analyzed.

RESULTS

The majority of patients were treated by NOM (52.4%, n = 6069), followed by laparotomy (50,6%, n = 6295) and laparoscopy (0.7%, n = 83). The majority of laparoscopies were performed in patients with an AIS [abdomen] ≤ 3 (86.7%). The ISS of the laparoscopy group was significantly lower compared to that of the laparotomy and NOM groups (ISS 23.4 vs. 34.5 vs. 28.2, respectively, p ≤ 0.001). The standardized mortality rate (SMR), defined as the ratio between observed and expected mortality, was lowest in the patients receiving laparoscopy followed by laparotomy and NOM (SMR 0.688 vs. 0.931 vs. 0.932, respectively, p-value = 0.2128) without achieving statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

Despite being rarely employed the data indicate the effectiveness of laparoscopy for the early treatment of severely injured, hemodynamically stable patients with an AIS [abdomen] ≤ 3.

Safety and feasibility of laparoscopic reoperation for treatment of anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery

INTRODUCTION

The safety and feasibility of laparoscopic reoperation for anastomotic leakage remain unclear.

METHODS

A total of 3321 patients underwent laparoscopic surgery for primary colorectal cancer at a tertiary referral center from September 2002 to May 2016. Of these, 31 patients who underwent reoperation for treatment of anastomotic leakage were enrolled in this study and divided into two reoperation groups: laparoscopic (n = 15) and open (n = 16). Data regarding patient demographics, operative outcomes, morbidity, length of hospital stay, mortality, and stoma closure after reoperation in the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

No significant difference was observed in the primary surgery procedure between the two groups. Estimated blood loss (1 vs 9 mL, P = 0.020), total postoperative complications (26.7% vs 68.8%, P = 0.032), wound infection (0.0% vs 31.2%, P = 0.043), and postoperative hospital stay (18 vs 31 days, P = 0.017) were significantly better in the laparoscopic group than in the open group. Although the rate of stoma closure after reoperation was higher in the laparoscopic group, the difference was not significant (86.7% vs 62.5%, P = 0.220).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic reoperation exhibited better short-term outcomes than open reoperation for selected patients with anastomotic leakage.

Acute Gut Ischemia

Acute mesenteric ischemia is a surgical emergency commonly caused by embolic or thrombotic occlusion of the superior mesenteric artery. Prompt diagnosis, fluid resuscitation, systemic anticoagulation, and mesenteric revascularization are key tenants to the treatment of this lethal condition. Revascularization can be performed via open thromboembolectomy or surgical bypass, endovascular techniques, or a hybrid approach of the 2. Despite technological advancements, mortalities remain high, and the plan of care and revascularization should be based on the patient's clinical status and available medical center resources.

Early results of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy in comparison with the conventional: Does it have any impact on quality of life?

Background

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the standard treatment for gallbladder diseases. In recent times, single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy(SILC) has developed as a less invasive alternative technique to conventional laparoscopy. In the literature, many studies have compared SILC and conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC) procedures but a limited number of studies have compared the two techniques with regard to quality of life (QOL). The choice of surgical procedure was effected by QOL of the patients. The effects of SILC on QOL remain unclear. In this study, we aimed to compare the effects of conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC) and single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) procedures on the clinical outcomes and quality of life of patients by short-term follow-up evaluation.

Material and methods

In this study, 142 patients who underwent cholecystectomy operations with either technique underwent SILC and CLC were evaluated. The quality of life index in the patients was measured with short form 36 (SF 36) test.

Results

The results of mean operative time, length of stay and complication rate for SILC and CLC were similar. The postoperative health-related quality of life (HRQOL) scores were not significantly different between the SILC and CLC patients but only physical functioning score were higher in SILC patients.

Conclusions

SILC is a safe and effective alternative to CLC. To detect the effects of SILC on HRQOL, we need long-term prospective comparative studies.

Use of oxidized regenerated cellulose to achieve hemostasis during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a retrospective cohort analysis

OBJECTIVE

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the first-choice treatment for symptomatic cholelithiasis. Though generally safe, this procedure is not without complications, with bleeding the most frequent cause of conversion to open cholecystectomy. Oxidized regenerated cellulose (ORC) added to conventional hemostatic strategies, is widely used to control bleeding during surgery despite limited evidence supporting its use. This retrospective study analyzed patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy in an Italian center over a 16-month period, between October 2014 and February 2016, who experienced uncontrollable bleeding despite the use of conventional hemostatic strategies, requiring the addition of ORC gauze (Emosist®).

RESULTS

Of the 530 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy, 24 (4.5%) had uncontrollable bleeding from the liver bed. Of these, 62.5% had acute cholecystitis and 33.3% chronic cholecystitis; 1 patient was diagnosed with gallbladder carcinoma, postoperatively. Most patients had comorbidities, 16.7% had liver cirrhosis, and 37.5% used oral anticoagulants. The application of ORC rapidly controlled bleeding in all patients. Patients were discharged after a mean duration of 2.2 days. ORC was easy to use and well tolerated. Bleeding complications remain a relevant issue in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. ORC was able to promptly stop bleeding not adequately controlled by conventional methods and appears, therefore, to be a useful hemostat.

A network meta-analysis of comparison of operative time and complications of laparoscopy, laparotomy, and laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy for endometrial carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The endometrial carcinoma (EC) is the most frequently occurring female genital cancer. The authors performed this network meta-analysis to compare operative time and the incidence of bowel injury and wound infection of 3 operative approaches (laparoscopy, laparotomy, and laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy [LAVH]) in the treatment of EC.

METHODS

The Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Embase databases were searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for EC from the day of databases establishment to February 2017 were included. Direct and indirect evidences were combined to calculate the combined weighted mean difference (WMD) or odd ratio values and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) value of 3 operative approaches in the treatment of EC.

RESULTS

A total of 9 qualified RCTs were included into the study. The results showed that laparotomy had a shorter-operative time than LAVH (WMD = -40.36, 95% confidence interval = -75.03 to -2.57). However, there was no significant difference in the incidence of bowel injury and wound infection among 3 operative approaches. Besides, the SUCRA values indicated that laparotomy had the shortest operative time but the incidence of bowel injury and wound infection was relatively higher.

CONCLUSION

The results from this study indicate that laparotomy had highest incidence of bowel injury and wound infection but shortest operative time among 3 operative approaches in the treatment of EC.

Evaluating the Relevance of the 2013 Tokyo Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Cholecystitis

BACKGROUND

The 2013 Tokyo Guidelines (TG13) are used to diagnose, grade severity, and guide management of acute cholecystitis (AC). The aim of our study was to verify the diagnostic criteria, severity assessment, and management protocols based on the TG13.

STUDY DESIGN

Our prospectively maintained emergency general surgery registry was used to review patients who had a surgical consultation for right upper quadrant pain (from 2013 to 2015). Diagnosis and severity were graded based on TG13 and compared with pathology reports. Our institutional management protocols were compared with TG13.

RESULTS

Nine hundred and fifty-two patients were analyzed, of which 857 had biliary diseases. Mean age was 42 ± 18 years and 67% were female. Seven hundred and seventy-nine had a cholecystectomy, 15 underwent cholecystostomy tube placement, and 63 patients were managed conservatively. Only 4% were febrile on presentation and 51% of patients had leukocytosis. Fifty-nine percent of patients did not have any signs of AC on ultrasonography. The TG13 criteria had a sensitivity of 53% for diagnosing AC (definitive 27%, suspected 26%, and undiagnosed 47%) when compared with the final pathology report; 92.5% of patients with grade I, 93% with grade II, and even 64% with grade III, underwent cholecystectomy safely at our institute. There were no differences in complication rates (3.7% vs 4.7%; p = 0.81), return to operating room rates (0.6% vs 0.7%; p = 0.95), or mortality rates (0.3% vs 0%; p = 0.96) between grade I and grade II patients who underwent early cholecystectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

The TG13 diagnostic criteria lack sensitivity and missed more than half of the patients with AC, as many patients lack clinical signs (fever and leukocytosis). The TG13 recommendations for conservative management and delayed cholecystectomy in grade II and grade III disease are not warranted.

Value of diagnostic and therapeutic laparoscopy for patients with blunt abdominal trauma: A 10-year medical center experience

Laparoscopy has been used for the diagnosis and treatment for hemodynamically stable patients with penetrating abdominal trauma. This study evaluated whether diagnostic and therapeutic laparoscopy can be used as effectively in select patients with blunt abdominal trauma. All hemodynamically stable patients undergoing operations for blunt abdominal trauma over a 10-year period (2006–2015) at a tertiary medical center were included. Patients undergoing laparotomy were categorized as group A. Patients who underwent laparoscopy were categorized as group B. The clinical outcomes of the 2 groups were compared. There were 139 patients in group A and 126 patients in group B. Group A patients were more severely injured (mean injury severity score of 23.3 vs. 18.9, P < .001) and had a higher frequency of traumatic brain injuries (25.2% vs. 14.3%, P = .039). The sensitivity and specificity of diagnostic laparoscopy for patients in group B was 99.1% and 100.0%, respectively. No non-therapeutic laparotomies were performed in group B, and the success rate of therapeutic laparoscopy was 92.0% (103/112) for patients with significant intra-abdominal injuries. Patients in the 2 groups had similar perioperative and postoperative outcomes in terms of operation times, blood loss, blood transfusion requirements, mortality, and complications (all, P > .05). Laparoscopy is a feasible and safe tool for the diagnosis and treatment of hemodynamically stable patients with blunt abdominal trauma who require surgery.

[Perforated duodenal ulcer in high risk patients]

AIM

To improve the outcomes in patients with perforated duodenal ulcers.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Cohort study included 456 patients with perforated duodenal ulcer. High risk of mortality was determined in 9% of patients (n=40) considering Boey diagnostic criteria (1982, 1987). There were 19 women and 21 men aged 59±2.8 years.

RESULTS

Perforated duodenal ulcer was followed by overall mortality near 3.8%. In high risk group this value was 17.5% (7 out of 40 patients) while expected mortality was 45.5-100% in these patients in view of Boey criteria. The main causes of death were multiple organ failure, pulmonary embolism and acute myocardial infarction.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive surgery including step-by-step procedures (mini-laparotomy, laparoscopy and navigation) are the key to improve the outcomes in patients with perforated duodenal ulcer.

Reoperation after laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Does the laparoscopic approach have any advantages?

INTRODUCTION

The laparoscopic approach in colorectal complications is controversial because of its difficulty. However, it has been proven that it can provide advantages over open surgery. The aim of this study is to compare laparoscopic approach in reoperations for complications after colorectal surgery with the open approach taking into account the severity of the patient prior to reoperation.

METHODS

Patients who underwent laparoscopic colorectal surgery from January 2006 to December 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients requiring urgent surgical procedures for complications in the postoperative period were divided in two groups: laparoscopic surgery (LS) and open surgery (OS). To control clinical severity prior to reoperation, The Mannheim Peritonitis Index (MPI) was calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 763 patients were studied, 40 required urgent surgery (24 OS/16 LS). More ileostomies were performed in the LS group (68.7% vs. 29.2%) and more colostomies in the OS group (37.5% vs. 6.2%), p<0.05. MPI was higher in OS group (27.31±6.47 [19-35] vs. 18.36±7.16 [11-24], p<0.001). Hospital stay after re-intervention, oral tolerance and surgical wound infection, were favorable in LS (p<0.05 in all cases). In patients with MPI score ≤26, laparoscopic approach showed shorter hospital stay after re-intervention, less stay in the critical care unit after re-intervention, earlier start of oral tolerance and less surgical wound infection (p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

A laparoscopic approach in re-intervention for complications after laparoscopic colorectal surgery associates a faster recovery reflected in a shorter hospital stay, earlier start of oral tolerance and a lower abdominal wall complication rate in patients with low severity index.

Comparative Analysis of Laparoscopic and Open Approaches in Emergency Abdominal Surgery

The objective of this study was to evaluate usage and outcomes of emergency laparoscopic versus open surgery at a single tertiary academic center. Over a three-year period 165 patients were identified retrospectively using National Surgical Quality Improvement Program results. Appendectomies and cholecystectomies were excluded. Open and laparoscopic approaches were compared regarding preoperative and operative characteristics, the development of postoperative complications, 30-day mortality, and length of hospital stay. Indications for operation were similar between groups. Patients who underwent open surgery had more severe comorbidities and higher ASA class. Laparoscopy was associated with reduced complication rates, operative time, length of stay, and discharges to skilled nursing facilities on univariate analysis. In a multivariate model, surgical approach was not associated with the development of complications. Older age, dependent status, and dyspnea were predictors of conversion from attempted laparoscopic to open approaches.

Laparoscopic approaches to complicated diverticulitis

BACKGROUND

The objective of this article is to review the evolving role of laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of complicated diverticulitis.

PURPOSE

The authors attempted to give readers a concise insight into the evidence available in the English language literature. This study does not offer a systematic review of the topic, rather it highlights the role of laparoscopy in the treatment of complicated diverticulitis.

CONCLUSIONS

New level 1 evidence suggest that observation rather than elective resection following nonoperative management of diverticulitis with abscess and/or extraluminal air is not below the standard of care. Implementation of nonoperative management may result in increased prevalence of sigmoid strictures.

Laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer: simple closure versus omentopexy

BACKGROUND

This report presents our experience with laparoscopic repair performed in 118 consecutive patients diagnosed with a perforated peptic ulcer (PPU). We compared the surgical outcome of simple closure with modified Cellan-Jones omentopexy and report the safety and benefit of simple closure.

METHODS

From January 2010 to December 2014, 118 patients with PPU underwent laparoscopic repair with simple closure (n = 27) or omentopexy (n = 91). Charts were retrospectively reviewed for demographic characteristics and outcome. The data were compared by Fisher's exact test, Mann-Whitney U test, Pearson's chi-square test, and the Kruskal-Wallis test. The results were considered statistically significant if P < 0.05.

RESULTS

No patients died, whereas three incurred leakage. After matching, the simple closure and omentopexy groups had similarity in sex, systolic blood pressure, pulse rate, respiratory rate, Boey score, Charlson comorbidity index, Mannheim peritonitis index, and leakage. There were statistically significant differences in age, length of hospital stay, perforated size, and operating time. Comparison of the operating time in the ≤4.0 mm and 5.0-12 mm groups revealed that the simple closure took less time than omentopexy in both groups (≤4.0 mm, 76 versus 133 minutes, P < 0.0001; 5.0-12 mm, 97 versus 139.5 minutes; P = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to the omentopexy, laparoscopic simple closure is a safe procedure and shortens the operating time.

Comparison of peritoneal closure versus non-closure in laparoscopic trans-abdominal preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair with coated mesh

BACKGROUND

Peritoneal closure during laparoscopic trans-abdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) inguinal hernia repair has been the standard of care to prevent bowel obstruction due to adhesions generated by contact with mesh. However, with newer coated meshes, leaving the peritoneal layer open may be safe. While many studies compare methods of peritoneal flap closure, there is a deficit of literature reporting the outcomes of non-closure.

METHODS

A retrospective comparison of peritoneal flap closure versus non-closure during primary laparoscopic TAPP inguinal hernia repair with coated mesh was performed for all patients at Baystate Medical Center meeting inclusion criteria between January 2005 and August 2016. Primary outcome was any procedure-related adverse outcome following repair. Secondary outcomes included operative time, resolution of pre-operative pain and/or gastrointestinal symptoms, and hernia recurrence.

RESULTS

Of 231 patients, 55 (24%) underwent peritoneal flap closure and 176 (76%) underwent non-closure. Demographic, comorbidity, and hernia characteristics were comparable between groups with the exception of obesity (p = 0.01), current smoking status (p = 0.05) and hernia side [p = 0.04 (left), 0.0003 (right)]. Mean operative time was higher in the closure group than non-closure (98.1 ± 37.1 min vs. 76.8 ± 32.9, p < 0.0001). No cases were converted to open. Average follow-up was 21.6 ± 23.8 months. Ninety-three percent of closure patients had documented resolution of pre-operative pain versus 94.0% of non-closure (p = 0.81). The closure group experienced a higher percentage of post-operative complications, though this did not reach significance (5.5 vs. 2.3%; p = 0.36). Compared to the closure group, the non-closure groups experienced similar post-operative pain (3.6 vs. 1.2%; p = 0.24) and recurrence rate (1.8 vs. 4.0%; p = 0.68). There were no bowel obstructions, surgical site infections, unplanned readmissions, or unplanned re-operations.

CONCLUSIONS

Equivalent patient outcomes were seen for both procedure types post-operatively and during follow-up. Operative times were significantly shorter for non-closure patients. Larger study population and longer follow-up is necessary to evaluate true long-term complication rates in flap non-closure.

Minimally Invasive Surgery for Complicated Diverticulitis

Recent guidelines recommend an individualized approach to recurrent uncomplicated diverticulitis, reflecting research showing that non-operative treatment is safe. Thus, the majority of operations for diverticulitis in the future may be for complicated indications. A laparoscopic approach may be used for both acute and chronic complicated diverticulitis in appropriate patients, as described in the American and European guidelines. However, a safe approach to minimally invasive surgery requires recognition when conditions deteriorate or are not suited to laparoscopy as well as knowledge of a variety of technical maneuvers that elucidate difficult anatomy and facilitate resection. Primary anastomosis with or without diversion can be performed safely, and ileostomy reversal is significantly less morbid than Hartmann's (colostomy) reversal. Success in laparoscopy can be achieved with the use of adjunct techniques and technologies, including ureteral stents, hand ports, and hybrid approaches. When completed successfully, a laparoscopic approach has been shown to confer decreased ileus, length of stay, post-operative pain, surgical site infection, and ventral hernia compared to an open approach.

[Perforated peptic ulcer closure: laparoscopic or open?]

AIM

To compare laparoscopic and open closure of perforated peptic ulcer (PPU).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study included 153 patients who underwent PPU suturing. 78 patients underwent laparoscopic closure (laparoscopic group) and open suturing via upper midline laparotomy was performed in 75 cases (open group). Surgery time, postoperative pain severity, time of analgesics intake, postoperative complications, hospital-stay and and cosmetic effect were compared.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic PPU closure may be effective and accessible in experienced endoscopic surgeon. It significantly reduces postoperative pain severity, need for analgesics, incidence of postoperative complications and provides excellent cosmetic effect. However, there is greater time of surgery compared with open intervention. There were no significant differences in hspital-stay between groups.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic PPU suturing can be considered a good alternative to open surgery. Further researches are needed for standardization, assessment of safety, real advantages and disadvantages of laparoscopic technique.

Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage or surgical resection for acute perforated sigmoid diverticulitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage (LPL) has been proposed as an alternative, less invasive technique in the treatment of acute perforated sigmoid diverticulitis (APSD). The aim of this meta-analysis is to compare the effectiveness of LPL versus surgical resection (SR) in terms of morbidity and mortality in the management of APSD.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was conducted for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LPL versus SR in the treatment of APSD. The end points included peri-operative mortality, severe adverse events, overall mortality, post-operative abscess, percutaneous reinterventions, reoperation, operative time, postoperative stay, and readmissions.

RESULTS

Three RCTs with a total of 372 patients, randomised to either LPL or SR were included. There was no significant difference in peri-operative mortality between LPL and SR (OR 1.356, 95% CI 0.365 to 5.032, p = 0.649), or serious adverse events (OR = 1.866, 95% CI = 0.680 to 5.120, p = 0.226). The LPL required significantly less time to complete than SR (WMD = -72.105, 95% CI = -88.335 to -55.876, p < 0.0001). The LPL group was associated with a significantly higher rate of postoperative abscess formation (OR = 4.121, 95% CI = 1.890 to 8.986, p = 0.0004) and subsequent percutaneous interventions (OR = 5.414, 95% CI 1.618 to 18.118, p = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage is a safe and quick alternative in the management of APSD. In comparison to SR, LPL results in higher rates of postoperative abscess formation requiring more percutaneous drainage interventions without any difference in perioperative mortality and serious morbidity.