The open abdomen and temporary abdominal closure systems--historical evolution and systematic review

A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Wittmann Patch-Assisted Abdominal Closure Compared to Planned Ventral Hernia in Management of the Open Abdomen

BACKGROUND

Inability to achieve primary fascial closure after damage control laparotomy is a frequently encountered problem by acute care and trauma surgeons. This study aims to compare the cost-effectiveness of Wittmann patch-assisted closure to the planned ventral hernia closure.

METHODS

A literature review was performed to determine the probabilities and outcomes for Wittmann patch-assisted primary closure and planned ventral hernia closure techniques. Average utility scores were obtained by a patient-administered survey for the following: rate of successful surgeries (uncomplicated abdominal wall closure), surgical site infection, wound dehiscence, abdominal hernia and enterocutaneous fistula. A visual analogue scale (VAS) was utilized to assess the survey responses and then converted to quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Total cost for each strategy was calculated using Medicare billing codes. A decision tree was generated with rollback and incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) analyses. Sensitivity analyses were performed to account for uncertainty.

RESULTS

Wittmann patch-assisted closure was associated with higher clinical effectiveness of 19.43 QALYs compared to planned ventral hernia repair (19.38), with a relative cost reduction of US$7777. Rollback analysis supported Wittmann patch-assisted closure as the more cost-effective strategy. The resulting negative ICUR of -156,679.77 favored Wittmann patch-assisted closure. Monte Carlo analysis demonstrated a confidence of 96.8% that Wittmann patch-assisted closure was cost-effective.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates using the Wittmann patch-assisted closure strategy as a more cost-efficient management of the open abdomen compared to the planned ventral hernia approach.

Damage Control Laparotomy and Management of the Open Abdomen

Management of the open abdomen has been used for decades by general surgeons. Techniques have evolved over those decades to improve control of infection, fluid loss, and improve the ability to close the abdomen to avoid hernia formation. The authors explore the history, indications, and techniques of open abdomen management in multiple settings. The most important considerations in open abdomen management include the reason for leaving the abdomen open, prevention and mitigation of ongoing organ dysfunction, and eventual plans for abdominal closure.

Optimal tentative abdominal closure for open abdomen: a multicenter retrospective observational study (OPTITAC study)

BACKGROUND

Primary fascia closure is often difficult following an open abdomen (OA). While negative-pressure wound therapy (NPWT) is recommended to enhance successful primary fascia closure, the optimal methods and degree of negative pressure remain unclear. This study aimed to elucidate optimal methods of NPWT as a tentative abdominal closure for OA to achieve primary abdominal fascia closure.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A multicenter, retrospective, cohort study of adults who survived OA greater than 48 h was conducted in 12 institutions between 2010 and 2022. The achievement of primary fascia closure and incidence of enteroatmospheric fistula were examined based on methods (homemade, superficial NPWT kit, or open-abdomen kit) or degrees of negative pressure (<50, 50-100, or >100 mmHg). A generalized estimating equation was used to adjust for age, BMI, comorbidities, etiology for laparotomy requiring OA, vital signs, transfusion, severity of critical illness, and institutional characteristics.

RESULTS

Of the 279 included patients, 252 achieved primary fascia closure. A higher degree of negative pressure (>100 mmHg) was associated with fewer primary fascia closures than less than 50 mmHg [OR, 0.18 (95% CI: 0.50-0.69), P =0.012] and with more frequent enteroatmospheric fistula [OR, 13.83 (95% CI: 2.30-82.93)]. The methods of NPWT were not associated with successful primary fascia closure. However, the use of the open-abdomen kit was related to a lower incidence of enteroatmospheric fistula [OR, 0.02 (95% CI: 0.00-0.50)].

CONCLUSION

High negative pressure (>100 mmHg) should be avoided in NPWT during tentative abdominal closure for OA.

Vacuum assisted closure with mesh mediated fascial traction of open abdominal wounds and acute fascial dehiscence, a single institution experience

BACKGROUNDS

Laparostomy is a common means of managing surgical catastrophes, but often results in large ventral hernias which prove difficult to repair. It is also associated with high rates of enteric fistula formation. Dynamic methods of managing the open abdomen have been shown to result in higher rates of fascial closure and fewer complications. Recent publications have suggested the addition of chemical components relaxation with botulinum toxin has an added advantage over prior methods.

METHODS

We report on a series of emergent cases managed by the combination of Botulinum toxin A (BTA) mediated chemical relaxation with a modified method of mesh-mediated fascial traction (MMFT) and negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT).

RESULTS

Thirteen cases (nine laparostomies and four fascial dehiscence) were successfully closed in a median of 12 days, using a median of 4 'tightenings', with no clinical herniation detected at follow up so far (median 183 days, IQR 123-292). There were no procedure-related complications, but one death from the underling pathology.

CONCLUSIONS

We report further cases of vacuum assisted mesh-mediated fascial traction (VA-MMFT) utilizing BTA in successfully managing laparostomy and abdominal wound dehiscence and continues the known high rate of successful fascial closure seen when applied in treating the open abdomen.

Severe Acute Pancreatitis Treated with Negative Pressure Wound Therapy System: Influence of Laboratory Markers

(1) Background: An open abdomen is a serious medical condition that requires prompt and effective treatment to prevent complications and improve patient outcomes. Negative pressure therapy (NPT) has emerged as a viable therapeutic option for temporary closure of the abdomen, offering several benefits over traditional methods. (2) Methods: We included 15 patients with pancreatitis who were hospitalized in the I-II Surgery Clinic of the Emergency County Hospital "St. Spiridon" from Iasi, Romania, between 2011-2018 and received NPT. (3) Results: Preoperatively, the mean IAP level was 28.62 mmHg, decreasing significantly postoperatively to 21.31 mmHg. The mean level of the highest IAP value recorded in pancreatitis patients treated with VAC did not differ significantly by lethality (30.31 vs. 28.50; p = 0.810). In vacuum-treated pancreatitis patients with a IAP level > 12, the probability of survival dropped below 50% during the first 7 days of stay in the ICU, so that after 20 days the probability of survival was approximately 20%. IAP enters the determinism of surgery with a sensitivity of 92.3% and a specificity of 99%, the cut-off value of IAP being 15 mmHg. (4) Conclusions: The timing of surgical decompression in abdominal compartment syndrome is very important. Consequently, it is vital to identify a parameter, easy to measure, within the reach of any clinician, so that the indication for surgical intervention can be made judiciously and without delay.

The unrestricted global effort to complete the COOL trial

BACKGROUND

Severe complicated intra-abdominal sepsis (SCIAS) has an increasing incidence with mortality rates over 80% in some settings. Mortality typically results from disruption of the gastrointestinal tract, progressive and self-perpetuating bio-mediator generation, systemic inflammation, and multiple organ failure. A further therapeutic option may be open abdomen (OA) management with negative peritoneal pressure therapy (NPPT) to remove inflammatory ascites and attenuate the systemic damage from SCIAS, although there are definite risks of leaving the abdomen open whenever it might possibly be closed. This potential therapeutic paradigm is the rationale being assessed in the Closed Or Open after Laparotomy (COOL trial) ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03163095 ). Initially, the COOL trial received Industry sponsorship; however, this funding mandated the use of a specific trademarked and expensive NPPT device in half of the patients allocated to the intervention (open) arm. In August 2022, the 3 M/Acelity Corporation without consultation but within the terms of the contract canceled the financial support of the trial. Although creating financial difficulty, there is now no restriction on specific NPPT devices and removing a cost-prohibitive intervention creates an opportunity to expand the COOL trial to a truly global basis. This document describes the evolution of the COOL trial, with a focus on future opportunities for global growth of the study.

METHODS

The COOL trial is the largest prospective randomized controlled trial examining the random allocation of SCIAS patients intra-operatively to either formal closure of the fascia or the use of the OA with an application of an NPPT dressing. Patients are eligible if they have free uncontained intraperitoneal contamination and physiologic derangements exemplified by septic shock OR severely adverse predicted clinical outcomes. The primary outcome is intended to definitively inform global practice by conclusively evaluating 90-day survival. Initial recruitment has been lower than hoped but satisfactory, and the COOL steering committee and trial investigators intend with increased global support to continue enrollment until recruitment ensures a definitive answer.

DISCUSSION

OA is mandated in many cases of SCIAS such as the risk of abdominal compartment syndrome associated with closure, or a planned second look as for example part of "damage control"; however, improved source control (locally and systemically) is the most uncertain indication for an OA. The COOL trial seeks to expand potential sites and proceed with the evaluation of NPPT agnostic to device, to properly examine the hypothesis that this treatment attenuates systemic damage and improves survival. This approach will not affect internal validity and should improve the external validity of any observed results of the intervention.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

National Institutes of Health ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03163095 ).

The unrestricted global effort to complete the COOL trial

BACKGROUND

Severe complicated intra-abdominal sepsis (SCIAS) has an increasing incidence with mortality rates over 80% in some settings. Mortality typically results from disruption of the gastrointestinal tract, progressive and self-perpetuating bio-mediator generation, systemic inflammation, and multiple organ failure. A further therapeutic option may be open abdomen (OA) management with negative peritoneal pressure therapy (NPPT) to remove inflammatory ascites and attenuate the systemic damage from SCIAS, although there are definite risks of leaving the abdomen open whenever it might possibly be closed. This potential therapeutic paradigm is the rationale being assessed in the Closed Or Open after Laparotomy (COOL trial) ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03163095 ). Initially, the COOL trial received Industry sponsorship; however, this funding mandated the use of a specific trademarked and expensive NPPT device in half of the patients allocated to the intervention (open) arm. In August 2022, the 3 M/Acelity Corporation without consultation but within the terms of the contract canceled the financial support of the trial. Although creating financial difficulty, there is now no restriction on specific NPPT devices and removing a cost-prohibitive intervention creates an opportunity to expand the COOL trial to a truly global basis. This document describes the evolution of the COOL trial, with a focus on future opportunities for global growth of the study.

METHODS

The COOL trial is the largest prospective randomized controlled trial examining the random allocation of SCIAS patients intra-operatively to either formal closure of the fascia or the use of the OA with an application of an NPPT dressing. Patients are eligible if they have free uncontained intraperitoneal contamination and physiologic derangements exemplified by septic shock OR severely adverse predicted clinical outcomes. The primary outcome is intended to definitively inform global practice by conclusively evaluating 90-day survival. Initial recruitment has been lower than hoped but satisfactory, and the COOL steering committee and trial investigators intend with increased global support to continue enrollment until recruitment ensures a definitive answer.

DISCUSSION

OA is mandated in many cases of SCIAS such as the risk of abdominal compartment syndrome associated with closure, or a planned second look as for example part of "damage control"; however, improved source control (locally and systemically) is the most uncertain indication for an OA. The COOL trial seeks to expand potential sites and proceed with the evaluation of NPPT agnostic to device, to properly examine the hypothesis that this treatment attenuates systemic damage and improves survival. This approach will not affect internal validity and should improve the external validity of any observed results of the intervention.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

National Institutes of Health ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03163095 ).

The temporary abdominal closure techniques used for trauma patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

The choice of temporary abdominal closure (TAC) method affects the prognosis of trauma patients. Previous studies on TAC are challenging to extrapolate due to data heterogeneity. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and comparison of various TAC techniques.

Methods

We accessed web-based databases for studies on the clinical outcomes of TAC techniques. Recognized techniques, including negative-pressure wound therapy with or without continuous fascial traction, skin tension, meshes, Bogota bags, and Wittman patches, were classified via a method of closure such as skin-only closure vs. patch closure vs. vacuum closure; and via dynamics of treatment like static therapy (ST) vs. dynamic therapy (DT). Study endpoints included in-hospital mortality, definitive fascial closure (DFC) rate, and incidence of intraabdominal complications.

Results

Among 1,065 identified studies, 37 papers comprising 2,582 trauma patients met the inclusion criteria. The vacuum closure group showed the lowest mortality (13%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 6%-19%) and a moderate DFC rate (74%; 95% CI, 67%-82%). The skin-only closure group showed the highest mortality (35%; 95% CI, 7%-63%) and the highest DFC rate (96%; 95% CI, 93%-99%). In the second group analysis, DT showed better outcomes than ST for all endpoints.

Conclusion

Vacuum closure was favorable in terms of in-hospital mortality, ventral hernia, and peritoneal abscess. Skin-only closure might be an alternative TAC method in carefully selected groups. DT may provide the best results; however, further studies are needed.

Retrospective Study of Indications and Outcomes of Open Abdomen with Negative Pressure Wound Therapy Technique for Abdominal Sepsis in a Tertiary Referral Centre

In patients with advanced sepsis from abdominal disease, the open abdomen (OA) technique as part of a damage control surgery (DCS) approach enables relook surgery to control infection, defer intestinal anastomosis, and prevent intra-abdominal hypertension. Limited evidence is available on key outcomes, such as mortality and rate of definitive fascial closure (DFC), which are needed for surgeons to select patients and adequate therapeutic strategies. Abdominal closure with negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) has shown rates of DFC around 90%. We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate in-hospital survival and factors associated with mortality in acute, non-trauma patients treated using the OA technique and NPWT for sepsis from abdominal disease. Fifty consecutive patients treated using the OA technique and NPWT between February 2015 and July 2022 were included. Overall mortality was 32%. Among surviving patients, 97.7% of cases reached DFC, and the overall complication rate was 58.8%, with one case of entero-atmospheric fistula. At univariable analysis, age (p = 0.009), ASA IV status (<0.001), Mannheim Peritonitis Index > 30 (p = 0.001) and APACHE II score (p < 0.001) were associated with increased mortality. At multivariable analysis, higher APACHE II was a predictor of in-hospital mortality (OR 2.136, 95% CI 1.08−4.22; p = 0.029). Although very resource-intensive, DCS and the OA technique are valuable tools to manage patients with advanced abdominal sepsis, allowing reduced mortality and high DFC rates.

Simple suture whipstitch closure is a reasonable option for many patients requiring temporary abdominal closure for blunt or penetrating trauma

Objectives

Multiple temporary abdominal closure (TAC) techniques are currently used to manage the open abdomen (OA) in severely injured trauma patients, with variability in efficacy and cost. We evaluated the clinical outcomes of two commonly used TAC methods: ABTHERA Negative Pressure Therapy System and whipstitch suture closure (WC).

Methods

We conducted a retrospective review of patients who had blunt or penetrating trauma from 2015 to 2021 with OA managed using either ABTHERA, WC, or both. Primary outcomes included overall and intensive care unit length of stay, ventilator days, number of laparotomies, time to definitive fascial closure, and complications (bleeding, evisceration, wound dehiscence, and reoperation). Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to compare baseline characteristics, outcomes, and complications. Potential mediators of the relationship between the type of TAC and outcomes were explored using mediation analyses.

Results

A total of 112 TAC were analyzed; 86 patients had a single type of TAC placement (either WC or ABTHERA), whereas 26 had both types. A majority of patients had blunt trauma in both WC (77%) and ABTHERA (76%) cohorts. There were no differences in baseline characteristics, including injury severity (27.5±12.4 and 27.5±12.0 for ABTHERA and WC, respectively). There was no statistically significant difference among individual complications and overall complications (OR=0.622 (0.274 to 1.412)). No differences were found between the outcomes, and any apparent differences seen were mediated by factors such as a higher number of laparotomies.

Conclusion

WC is a low-cost option for TAC in trauma, with similar clinical outcomes and complications to ABTHERA.

Level of evidence

Level III therapeutic/care management study.

Management of the open abdomen: A systematic review with meta-analysis and practice management guideline from the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma

BACKGROUND

Multiple techniques describe the management of the open abdomen (OA) and restoration of abdominal wall integrity after damage-control laparotomy (DCL). It is unclear which operative technique provides the best method of achieving primary myofascial closure at the index hospitalization.

METHODS

A writing group from the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the current literature regarding OA management strategies in the adult population after DCL. The group sought to understand if fascial traction techniques or techniques to reduce visceral edema improved the outcomes in these patients. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology was utilized, meta-analyses were performed, and an evidence profile was generated.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies met inclusion criteria. Overall, the use of fascial traction techniques was associated with improved primary myofascial closure during the index admission (relative risk, 0.32) and fewer hernias (relative risk, 0.11.) The use of fascial traction techniques did not increase the risk of enterocutaneous fistula formation nor mortality. Techniques to reduce visceral edema may improve the rate of closure; however, these studies were very limited and suffered significant heterogeneity.

CONCLUSION

We conditionally recommend the use of a fascial traction system over routine care when treating a patient with an OA after DCL. This recommendation is based on the benefit of improved primary myofascial closure without worsening mortality or enterocutaneous fistula formation. We are unable to make any recommendations regarding techniques to reduce visceral edema.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis; Level IV.

Negative pressure wound therapy for managing the open abdomen in non-trauma patients

BACKGROUND

Management of the open abdomen is a considerable burden for patients and healthcare professionals. Various temporary abdominal closure techniques have been suggested for managing the open abdomen. In recent years, negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) has been used in some centres for the treatment of non-trauma patients with an open abdomen; however, its effectiveness is uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) on primary fascial closure for managing the open abdomen in non-trauma patients in any care setting.

SEARCH METHODS

In October 2021 we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL EBSCO Plus. To identify additional studies, we also searched clinical trials registries for ongoing and unpublished studies, and scanned reference lists of relevant included studies as well as reviews, meta-analyses, and health technology reports. There were no restrictions with respect to language, date of publication, or study setting.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared NPWT with any other type of temporary abdominal closure (e.g. Bogota bag, Wittmann patch) in non-trauma patients with open abdomen in any care setting. We also included RCTs that compared different types of NPWT systems for managing the open abdomen in non-trauma patients.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed the study selection process, risk of bias assessment, data extraction, and GRADE assessment of the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included two studies, involving 74 adults with open abdomen associated with various conditions, predominantly severe peritonitis (N = 55). The mean age of the participants was 52.8 years; the mean proportion of women was 39.2%. Both RCTs were carried out in single centres and were at high risk of bias. Negative pressure wound therapy versus Bogota bag We included one study (40 participants) comparing NPWT with Bogota bag. We are uncertain whether NPWT reduces time to primary fascial closure of the abdomen (NPWT: 16.9 days versus Bogota bag: 20.5 days (mean difference (MD) -3.60 days, 95% confidence interval (CI) -8.16 to 0.96); very low-certainty evidence) or adverse events (fistulae formation, NPWT: 10% versus Bogota: 5% (risk ratio (RR) 2.00, 95% CI 0.20 to 20.33); very low-certainty evidence) compared with the Bogota bag. We are also uncertain whether NPWT reduces all-cause mortality (NPWT: 25% versus Bogota bag: 35% (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.88); very low-certainty evidence) or length of hospital stay compared with the Bogota bag (NPWT mean: 28.5 days versus Bogota bag mean: 27.4 days (MD 1.10 days, 95% CI -13.39 to 15.59); very low-certainty evidence). The study did not report the proportion of participants with successful primary fascial closure of the abdomen, participant health-related quality of life, reoperation rate, wound infection, or pain. Negative pressure wound therapy versus any other type of temporary abdominal closure There were no randomised controlled trials comparing NPWT with any other type of temporary abdominal closure. Comparison of different negative pressure wound therapy devices We included one study (34 participants) comparing different types of NPWT systems (Suprasorb CNP system versus ABThera system). We are uncertain whether the Suprasorb CNP system increases the proportion of participants with successful primary fascial closure of the abdomen compared with the ABThera system (Suprasorb CNP system: 88.2% versus ABThera system: 70.6% (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.14); very low-certainty evidence). We are also uncertain whether the Suprasorb CNP system reduces adverse events (fistulae formation, Suprasorb CNP system: 0% versus ABThera system: 23.5% (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.92); very low-certainty evidence), all-cause mortality (Suprasorb CNP system: 5.9% versus ABThera system: 17.6% (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.89); very low-certainty evidence), or reoperation rate compared with the ABThera system (Suprasorb CNP system: 100% versus ABThera system: 100% (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.12); very low-certainty evidence). The study did not report the time to primary fascial closure of the abdomen, participant health-related quality of life, length of hospital stay, wound infection, or pain.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on the available trial data, we are uncertain whether NPWT has any benefit in primary fascial closure of the abdomen, adverse events (fistulae formation), all-cause mortality, or length of hospital stay compared with the Bogota bag. We are also uncertain whether the Suprasorb CNP system has any benefit in primary fascial closure of the abdomen, adverse events, all-cause mortality, or reoperation rate compared with the ABThera system. Further research evaluating these outcomes as well as participant health-related quality of life, wound infection, and pain outcomes is required. We will update this review when data from the large studies that are currently ongoing are available.

Abdominal Negative Pressure Wound Therapy Devices for Management of the Open Abdomen: A Technologic Analysis

PURPOSE

The purpose of this technologic analysis was to analyze technologic features of abdominal negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT).

APPROACH

Published literature regarding abdominal negative pressure wound therapy (aNPWT) devices was reviewed. A summary of management approaches for the open abdomen provides a foundation for understanding the benefits of aNPWT. Safety information regarding aNPWT was derived from the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) Database.

CONCLUSIONS

The open abdomen approach with temporary abdominal closure may be employed for patients with a variety of conditions. Specialized abdominal NPWT devices, either singly or in combination with other approaches, may contribute to improved outcomes in this high-risk patient population. Manufacturer recommendations and clinical guidelines should be followed to minimize patient risk.

Vertical traction device prevents abdominal wall retraction and facilitates early primary fascial closure of septic and non-septic open abdomen

Purpose

One of the major challenges in the management of patients with septic and non-septic open abdomen (OA) is to control abdominal wall retraction. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of a novel vertical traction device (VTD) on primary fascial closure (PFC) and prevention of fascial retraction.

Methods

Twenty patients treated with OA were included in this retrospective multicenter study. All patients were initially stabilized with laparostomy and the abdomen temporarily sealed either with a Bogotá bag or a negative pressure wound therapy system (NPWT).

Results

The mean duration of OA and fascia-to-fascia distance (FTF) prior to the VTD application were 3 days and 15 cm, respectively. At relook laparotomy 48 h after VTD implementation, the mean FTF distance significantly decreased to 10 cm (p = 0.0081). In all cases, PFC was achieved after a mean period of 7 days. Twelve patients received the VTD in combination with a NPWT, whereas in eight patients, the device was combined with an alternative temporary abdominal closure system (TAC). Although not statistically significant, the FTF distance remarkably decreased in both groups at relook laparotomy 48 h following the device implementation. The mean periods of PFC for patients with septic and non-septic OA were comparable (7.5 vs. 7 days). During follow-up, two patients developed an incisional hernia.

Conclusion

Vertical traction device prevents fascial retraction and facilitates early PFC in OA. In combination with NPWT, rapid fascial closure of large abdominal defects can be achieved.

Evolution of damage control surgery in non-traumatic abdominal pathology: a light in the darkness

Damage control surgery is based on temporal control of the injury, physiologic recovery and posterior deferred definitive management. This strategy began in the 1980s and became a formal concept in 1993. It has proven to be a strategy that reduces mortality in severely injured trauma patients. Nevertheless, the concept of damage control in non-traumatic abdominal pathology remains controversial. This article aims to gather historical experiences in damage control surgery performed in non-traumatic abdominal emergency pathology patients and present a novel management algorithm. This strategy could be a surgical option to treat hemodynamically unstable patients in catastrophic scenarios such as hemorrhagic and septic shock caused by peritonitis, pancreatitis, acute mesenteric ischemia, among others. Therefore, damage control surgery is light amid better short- and long-term results.

Multilayer Mattress Stitches for Complicated Wounds in Spine Surgery

Introduction

Local infection and prolonged fluid discharge account for most complications in lumbar spine surgery. This report is a brief description of a useful technique for revision of complicated, draining wounds with surprisingly positive results that otherwise frequently require multiple surgical interventions.

Technical Note

We describe the postoperative course of three patients, with prolonged and continuous serosanguineous discharge from the skin incision, who underwent wound revision with multilayered mattress stitches after open decompressive or instrumented spinal surgery. For this purpose, a thick monofilament suture is passed through the skin, subcutaneous fatty tissue, and paravertebral muscle in the fashion of a vertical mattress stitch while the loop above the skin level is augmented using a soft silicone capillary drainage to distribute tension along the wound margin.

Conclusions

None of the patients treated with the multilayered mattress stitches required further surgical intervention. In this small case series, the multilayered mattress stitches augmented with soft silicone tubing were a useful technique for treating complicated lumbar surgical wounds with prolonged serosanguineous discharge.

Tertiary peritonitis: considerations for complex team-based care

Peritonitis, as a major consequence of hollow visceral perforation, anastomotic disruption, ischemic necrosis, or other injuries of the gastrointestinal tract, often drives acute care in the emergency department, operating room, and the ICU. Chronic critical illness (CCI) represents a devastating challenge in modern surgical critical care where successful interventions have fostered a growing cohort of patients with prolonged dependence on mechanical ventilation and other organ supportive therapies who would previously have succumbed much earlier in the acute phase of critical illness. An important subset of CCI patients are those who have survived an emergency abdominal operation, but who subsequently require prolonged open abdomen management complicated by persistent peritoneal space infection or colonization, fistula formation, and gastrointestinal (GI) tract dysfunction; these patients are described as having tertiary peritonitis (TP).The organ dysfunction cascade in TP terminates in death in between 30 and 64% of patients. This narrative review describes key—but not all—elements in a framework for the coordinate multiprofessional team-based management of a patient with tertiary peritonitis to mitigate this risk of death and promote recovery. Given the prolonged critical illness course of this unique patient population, early and recurrent Palliative Care Medicine consultation helps establish goals of care, support adjustment to changes in life circumstance, and enable patient and family centered care.

[Koblenz algorithm for open abdomen management]

The issue of laparostomy treatment is still controversial, since there are insufficient evidence-based data. German military surgeons have developed and implemented the «Koblenz algorithm» of laparostomy treatment into everyday practice. The algorithm was developed at the Bundeswehr Central Hospital in Koblenz (Germany). Today, approximately 50% of German civilian hospitals use the «Koblenz algorithm». The database for laparostomy treatment was created on the basis of international platform European Registry of Abdominal wall Hernias (EuraHS) in May 2015. These data will be valuable for further multipla-center studies. This manuscript is devoted to analysis of clinical effectiveness of the «Koblenz algorithm» in the treatment of patients with laparostomy. Searching of Russian, English and German studies devoted to «Koblenz algorithm» in the treatment of patients with laparostomy was carried out in the eLIBRARY, Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek, the Cochrane Library and the PubMed databases. The authors comprehensively described «Koblenz algorithm». Mortality in the group of VAC - therapy was 57% (31/54), in case of «Koblenz algorithm» - 33% (33/100). Between-group differences were significant (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.18-0.72, p=0.003). However, an efficacy of «Koblenz algorithm» should be confirmed in further multiple-center studies including national evidence-based trials.

Should Negative Pressure Therapy Replace Any Other Temporary Abdominal Closure Device in Open-Abdomen Management of Secondary Peritonitis?

AIM

To clarify the advantages of negative pressure therapy (NPT) compared to other methods of temporary abdominal closure (TAC) in the management of secondary peritonitis.

METHODS

We retraced the history of known methods of TAC, and analyzed their advantages and disadvantages. We evaluated as the NPT mechanisms, both from the macroscopic that bio-molecular point of view, well suits to manage this difficult condition.

RESULTS

The ideal TAC technique should be quick to apply, easy to change, protect and contain the abdominal viscera, decrease bowel edema, prevent loss of domain and abdominal compartment syndrome, limit contamination, allow egress of peritoneal fluid (and its estimation) and not result in adhesions. It should also be cost-effective, minimize the number of dressing changes and the number of surgical revisions, and ensure a high rate of early closure with a low rate of complications (especially entero-atmospheric fistula). For NPT, the reported fistula rate is 7%, primary fascial closure ranges from 33 to 100% (average 60%) and the mortality rate is about 20%. With the use of NPT as TAC, it may be possible to extend the window of time to achieve primary fascial closure (for up to 20-40 days).

CONCLUSION

NPT has several potential advantages in open-abdomen (OA) management of secondary peritonitis and may make it possible to achieve all the goals suggested above for an ideal TAC system. Only trained staff should use NPT, following the manufacturer's instructions when commercial products are used. Even if there was a significant evolution in OA management, we believe that further research into the role of NPT for secondary peritonitis is necessary.

Predictive factors of mortality in open abdomen for abdominal sepsis: a retrospective cohort study on 113 patients

Over the past few years, the open abdomen (OA) as a part of Damage Control Surgery (DCS) has been introduced as a surgical strategy with the intent to reduce the mortality of patients with severe abdominal sepsis. Aims of our study were to analyze the OA effects on patients with abdominal sepsis and identify predictive factors of mortality. Patients admitted to our institution with abdominal sepsis requiring OA from 2010 to 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Primary outcomes were mortality, morbidity and definitive fascial closure (DFC). Comparison between groups was made via univariate and multivariate analyses. On 1474 patients operated for abdominal sepsis, 113 (7.6%) underwent OA. Male gender accounted for 52.2% of cases. Mean age was 68.1 ± 14.3 years. ASA score was > 2 in 87.9%. Mean BMI, APACHE II score and Mannheim Peritonitis Index were 26.4 ± 4.9, 15.3 ± 6.3, and 22.6 ± 7.3, respectively. A negative pressure wound system technique was used in 47% of the cases. Overall, mortality was 43.4%, morbidity 76.6%, and DFC rate was 97.8%. Entero-atmospheric fistula rate was 2.2%. At multivariate analysis, APACHE II score (OR 1.18; 95% CI 1.05–1.32; p = 0.005), Frailty Clinical Scale (OR 4.66; 95% CI 3.19–6.12; p < 0.0001) and ASA grade IV (OR 7.86; 95% CI 2.18–28.27; p = 0.002) were significantly associated with mortality. OA seems to be a safe and reliable treatment for critically ill patients with severe abdominal sepsis. Nonetheless, in these patients, co-morbidity and organ failure remain the major obstacles to a better prognosis.

The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland consensus guidelines in emergency colorectal surgery

AIM

There is a requirement for an expansive and up to date review of the management of emergency colorectal conditions seen in adults. The primary objective is to provide detailed evidence-based guidelines for the target audience of general and colorectal surgeons who are responsible for an adult population and who practise in Great Britain and Ireland.

METHODS

Surgeons who are elected members of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland Emergency Surgery Subcommittee were invited to contribute various sections to the guidelines. They were directed to produce a pathology-based document using literature searches that were systematic, comprehensible, transparent and reproducible. Levels of evidence were graded. Each author was asked to provide a set of recommendations which were evidence-based and unambiguous. These recommendations were submitted to the whole guideline group and scored. They were then refined and submitted to a second vote. Only those that achieved >80% consensus at level 5 (strongly agree) or level 4 (agree) after two votes were included in the guidelines.

RESULTS

All aspects of care (excluding abdominal trauma) for emergency colorectal conditions have been included along with 122 recommendations for management.

CONCLUSION

These guidelines provide an up to date and evidence-based summary of the current surgical knowledge in the management of emergency colorectal conditions and should serve as practical text for clinicians managing colorectal conditions in the emergency setting.

Abdominal Decompression after Cardiac Surgery: Outcome of 42 Patients with Abdominal Compartment Syndrome

BACKGROUND

Up to 50% of patients in intensive care units develop intraabdominal hypertension (IAH) in the course of medical treatment. If not detected on time and treated adequately, IAH may develop into an abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS) which is associated with a high mortality rate. Patients undergoing cardiac surgery are especially prone to develop ACS due to several risk factors including intraoperative hypothermia, fluid resuscitation and acidosis. We investigated patients who developed ACS after cardiac surgery and analyzed potential risk factors, treatment and outcome.

METHODS

From 2011 to 2016, patients with ACS after cardiac surgery requiring decompressive laparotomy were prospectively recorded. Patient characteristics, details on the cardiac surgery, mortality rate and type of treatment of the open abdomen were analyzed.

RESULTS

Incidence of ACS in cardiac surgery patients was 1.0% (n = 42/4128), with a mortality rate of 57%. Ejection fraction, Euroscore2 as well as the perfusion time are independent risk factors for the development of ACS. The outcome of patients with ACS was independent of elective versus emergency surgery, gender, age, BMI or ASA score. In the 18 surviving patients, fascial closure was achieved in 72% after a median of 9 days.

CONCLUSION

Abdominal compartment syndrome is a rare but serious complication after cardiac surgery with a high mortality rate. Independent risk factors for ACS were identified. Negative pressure wound therapy seems to promote and allow early fascia closure of the abdomen and represents therefore a likely benefit for the patient.

Is open abdominal management useful in nontrauma emergency surgery for older adults? A single-center retrospective study

PURPOSE

Open abdominal management (OAM) is being adopted increasingly frequently in nontrauma patients. This study assessed the effectiveness of OAM in nontrauma older adults.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all adults who underwent nontrauma emergency laparotomy requiring postoperative intensive care unit (ICU) management between September 2012 and August 2017 at our hospital. Patients ≥ 80 years old, who underwent OAM, were compared with those < 80 years old. The primary outcome was the 90-day mortality. Secondary outcomes were the 30-day mortality, unplanned relaparotomy, and the ICU length of stay (LOS).

RESULTS

The OAM group comprised 58 patients, including 27 who were ≥ 80 years old. The patients ≥ 80 years old in the OAM group had a significantly higher 90-day mortality rate (33% vs. 10%; p = 0.027) than those < 80 years old. There were no significant differences in the 30-day mortality rate, patients' unplanned relaparotomy rate, or ICU LOS between the patients ≥ 80 years old and those < 80 in the OAM group.

CONCLUSIONS

Older adults who underwent OAM had a significantly higher mortality rate than younger patients. However, the OAM strategy for older nontrauma patients may still be useful and reasonable considering the severe condition of these patients.

Intra-abdominal Hypertension and the Open Abdomen: Nursing Guidelines From the Abdominal Compartment Society

Intra-abdominal hypertension has been identified as an independent risk factor for death in critically ill patients. Known risk factors for intra-abdominal hypertension indicate that intra-abdominal pressures should be measured and monitored. The Abdominal Compartment Society has identified medical and surgical interventions to relieve intra-abdominal hypertension or to manage the open abdomen if abdominal compartment syndrome occurs. The purpose of this article is to describe assessments and interventions for managing intra-abdominal hypertension and open abdomen that are within the scope of practice for direct-care nurses. These guidelines provide direction to critical care nurses caring for these patients.

Chinese expert consensus on adult ventral abdominal wall defect repair and reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Surgical management of patients with ventral abdominal wall defects, especially complex abdominal wall defects, remains a challenging problem for abdominal wall reconstructive surgeons. Effective surgical treatment requires appropriate preoperative assessment, surgical planning, and correct operative procedure in order to improve postoperative clinical outcomes and minimize complications. Although substantial advances have been made in surgical techniques and prosthetic technologies, there is still insufficient high-level evidence favoring a specific technique. Broad variability in existing practice patterns, including clinical pre-operative evaluation, surgical techniques and surgical procedure selection, are still common.

DATA SOURCES

With the purpose of providing a best practice algorithm, a comprehensive search was conducted in Medline and PubMed. Sixty-four surgeons considered as experts on abdominal wall defect repair and reconstruction in China were solicited to develop a Chinese consensus and give recommendations to help surgeons standardize their techniques and improve clinical results.

CONCLUSIONS

This consensus serves as a starting point to provide recommendations for adult ventral abdominal wall repair and reconstruction in China and may help build opportunities for international cooperation to refine AWR practice.

Prevention of Fascial Retraction in the Open Abdomen with a Novel Device

The open abdomen requires intensive and specific treatment efforts. Long hospital admissions, treatment duration, high mortality rates, deferred and delayed wound closures with alloplastic materials or elaborate closure techniques, and the need for subsequent surgical procedures justify and call for implementation of new therapy options. The case presented here demonstrates the use of a new product (Fasciotens Abdomen) to prevent fascial retraction in the open abdomen of an extubated, conscious patient with four-quadrant peritonitis after perforated appendicitis. Controlled, anteriorly directed fascial traction of 50-60 Newtons prevented fascial retraction during open treatment of the abdomen. Once edema was reduced, abdominal closure was completed without difficulty. This new form of therapy was well tolerated by the patient and led to a markedly more rapid abdominal closure without mesh or abdominal wall reconstruction.

Abdominal compartment syndrome: Current concepts and management

Abdominal compartment syndrome occurs when 2 or more anatomic compartments have a sustained intra-abdominal pressure >20mmHg, associated with organ failure. Incidence is 2% and prevalence varies from 0% to 36.4%. A literature search was conducted utilizing different databases. Articles published from 1970 to 2018 were included, in English or Spanish, to provide the concepts, classifications, and comprehensive management in the approach to abdominal compartment syndrome, for its treatment and the prevention of severe complications associated with the entity. Intravesical pressure measurement is the standard diagnostic method. Treatment is based on evacuation of the intraluminal content, identification and treatment of intra-abdominal lesions, improvement of abdominal wall compliance, and optimum administration of fluids and tissue perfusion. Laparotomy is generally followed by temporary abdominal wall closure 5 to 7 days after surgery. Reconstruction is performed 6 to 12 months after the last operation. Abdominal compartment syndrome should be diagnosed and operated on before organic damage from the illness occurs. Kidney injury can frequently progress and is a parameter for considering abdominal decompression. Having a biomarker for early damage would be ideal. Surgical treatment is successful in the majority of cases. A multidisciplinary focus is necessary for the intensive care and reconstructive needs of the patient. Thus, efforts must be made to define and implement strategies for patient quality of life optimization.

Open Abdomen and Fluid Instillation in the Septic Abdomen: Results from the IROA Study

Background

Open abdomen (OA) is a surgical option that can be used in patients with severe peritonitis. Few evidences exist to recommend the use of intraperitoneal fluid instillation associated with OA in managing septic abdomen.

Materials and methods

A prospective analysis of adult patients enrolled in the International Register of Open Abdomen (trial registration: NCT02382770) was performed.

Results

A total of 387 patients were enrolled in two groups: 84 with peritoneal fluid instillation (FI) and 303 without (NFI). The groups were homogeneous for baseline characteristics. Overall complications were 92.9% in FI and 86.3% in NFI (p = 0.106). Complications during OA were 72.6% in FI and 59.9% in NFI (p = 0.034). Complications after definitive closure were 70.8% in FI and 61.1% in NFI (p = 0.133). Entero-atmospheric fistula was 13.1% in FI and 12% in NFI (p = 0.828). Fascial closure was 78.6% in FI and 63.7% in NFI (p = 0.02). Analysis of FI in negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) showed: Overall morbidity in NPWT was 94% and in non-NPWT 91.2% (p = 0.622) and morbidity during OA was 68% and 79.4% (p = 0.25), respectively. Definitive fascial closure in NPWT was 87.8% and 96.8% in non-NPWT (p = 0.173). Overall mortality was 40% in NPWT and 29.4% in non-NPWT (p = 0.32) and morality during OA period was 18% and 8.8% (p = 0.238), respectively.

Conclusion

We found intraperitoneal fluid instillation during open abdomen in peritonitic patients to increase the complication rate during the open abdomen period, with no impact on mortality, entero-atmospheric fistula rate and opening time. Fascial closure rate is increased by instillation. Fluid instillation is feasible even when associated with nonnegative pressure temporary abdominal closure techniques.

Wittmann Patch : Superior Closure for the Open Abdomen

INTRODUCTION

Damage control laparotomy (DCL) is a life-saving surgical technique, but the resultant open abdomen (OA) carries serious morbidity/mortality. Many methods are utilized to manage OAs, but discrepancy exists in distinguishing closure from coverage techniques. We observed a difference in our DCL patient outcomes managed with the Wittmann Patch (WP) closure device versus the more popular ABThera (AB) coverage device. We hypothesized that the WP contributed to an improved fascial closure rate of the OAs after DCL.

METHODS

A retrospective review of OAs managed with the AB or WP at our Level 1 trauma center was performed using billing codes to capture DCL patients from 2011 to 2019. Patients were divided into AB alone or WP groups. Major endpoints included primary fascial closure (PFC) and delayed fascial closure (DFC, fascial closure after greater than 7 days).

RESULTS

189 patients were identified as AB and 38 as WP. Rates of death before closure, age, gender, and Injury Severity Score were similar in both groups. PFC = 81%-90% for AB versus WP, respectively. Excluding patients with preexisting hernias PFC = 87%-100% for AB versus WP (P < .05) and DFC = 44%-100% for AB versus WP (P ≤ 0.001). WP had a statistically higher rate of PFC and DFC. There was a decreased incidence of complications in the WP versus AB group.

CONCLUSIONS

While not well reported in the peer-reviewed literature, the application of the WP for management of the OA is an active form of pursuing PFC when compared with the AB, a coverage device. Our interinstitutional results have demonstrated superior PFC and DFC rates and fewer complications, in patients managed with the WP compared with the AB.

Cost evaluation of temporary abdominal closure methods in abdominal sepsis patients successfully treated with an open abdomen. Should we take temporary abdominal closure methods at face value? Health economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Many commercial and artisanal devices are utilized for temporary abdominal closure in patients being managed with an open abdomen for abdominal sepsis. The costs of materials required to treat patients with an open abdomen varies drastically. In Costa Rica, due to the lack of accurate information relating to the actual cost to manage a patient entails that the method with the least expensive materials is usually selected.

STUDY DESIGN

A single-center retrospective review of 46 patients diagnosed with abdominal sepsis and successfully treated with an open abdomen and one of the three temporary abdominal closure methods during the year 2018 in a tertiary hospital was evaluated using a gross-cost pricing model developed by the authors. The three temporary abdominal closure methods were a locally manufactured Bogota Bag, and commercial abdominal negative pressure therapy dressing and negative pressure therapy with 0.9% saline solution instillation. The per-unit-costs were hospital day and intensive care day, number of surgical procedures per patient, cost negative pressure therapy kits.

RESULTS

Statistically significant cost reduction was observed in the cohort treated with negative pressure therapy with instillation as compared to the other temporary abdominal closure methods. The reduction of hospital length of stay, as well as fewer number of surgeries were the main contributing factors in diminishing costs. On average, the costs to treat a patient utilizing negative pressure therapy with instillation was nearly 50% lower than using the other two temporary abdominal closure methods.

CONCLUSIONS

The costs relating to managing abdominal sepsis in the septic open abdomen vary greatly according to the temporary abdominal closure utilized. If the hospital length of stay, intensive care unit length of stay and number of surgeries required are the main parameters used in determining costs, the use of negative pressure therapy with 0.9% saline solution instillation reduces costs by nearly 50% in comparison to conventional negative pressure wound therapy and Bogota Bag. In this instance, the more expensive method at first glance, obtained a considerable cost reduction when compared to therapies that utilize less expensive materials.

The Bucharest ESTES consensus statement on peritonitis

INTRODUCTION

Peritonitis is still an important health problem associated with high morbidity and mortality. A multidisciplinary approach to the management of patients with peritonitis may be an important factor to reduce the risks for patients and improve efficiency, outcome, and the cost of care.

METHODS

Expert panel discussion on Peritonitis was held in Bucharest on May 2017, during the 17th ECTES Congress, involving surgeons, infectious disease specialists, radiologists and intensivists with the goal of defining recommendations for the optimal management of peritonitis.

CONCLUSION

This document is an updated presentation of management of peritonitis and represents the summary of the final recommendations approved by a panel of experts.

Single-Center Retrospective Analysis of the Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Staged Peritoneal Lavage for Secondary Peritonitis

Background

Secondary peritonitis is associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality. Data on the effect of staged re-laparotomy or re-laparoscopy as a surgical option in the management of abdominal sepsis due to secondary peritonitis are limited and conflicting. Herein, we report the outcomes of patients undergoing staged peritoneal lavage (SPL) for secondary peritonitis in our department.

Methods

This is a single-center retrospective analysis of the data of patients undergoing SPL for secondary peritonitis. SPL was performed via either re-laparotomy or re-laparoscopy. The simplified acute physiology score (SAPS II) was calculated at the time of the initial operation and for each SPL. The end points of interest included: the evolution of sepsis characterized by the SAPS II score, the mortality rate and the rate of definitive abdominal wall closure.

Results

The data of 74 patients with a median age of 73 years requiring at least one SPL between 2012 and 2019 were analyzed. The median number of SPL performed was three (range 1–12). A sequential drop of SAPS II score from 41 at the initial procedure to 32 at the third SPL was documented. The overall mortality rate was 16.2%, definitive abdominal closure was achieved in all surviving patients and the median length of stay was 17.5d

Conclusion

Staged re-laparotomy or re-laparoscopy with peritoneal lavage may reduce the severity of peritonitis and reduce the risk of mortality in patients with abdominal sepsis. Maintaining the abdominal wall under constant retraction using a rigid mesh while creating an open abdomen is a crucial step in achieving definite abdominal wall closure. Thus, staged peritoneal lavage may be a good surgical option for selected patients with peritonitis.

A new device to prevent fascial retraction in the open abdomen - proof of concept in vivo

Background

An open abdomen is often necessary for survival of patients after peritonitis, compartment syndrome, or in damage control surgery. However, abdominal wall retraction relieves delays and complicates abdominal wall closure. The principle of the newly fascia preserving device (FPD) is the application of anteriorly directed traction on both fascial edges over an external support through a longitudinal beam to relieve increased abdominal pressure and prevent fascial retraction.

Methods

Twelve pigs were randomly divided into two groups. Both groups underwent midline laparotomy under general anesthesia. Group one was treated with the new device, group two served as controls. The tension for closing the abdominal fascia was measured immediately after laparotomy as well as at 24 and 48 h. Vital parameters and ventilation pressure were recorded. Post mortem, all fascial tissues were histologically examined.

Results

All pigs demonstrated increases in abdominal circumference. In both groups, forces for closing the abdomen increased over the observation period. Concerning the central closing force after 24 h we saw a significant lower force in the FPD group (14.4 ± 3 N) vs. control group (21.6 ± 5.7 N, p < 0.001). By testing the main effects using an ANOVA analysis we found a significant group related effect concerning closing force and abdominal circumference of the FDP-group vs. control group (p < 0.001; p < 0.001). The placement of the device on chest and pelvis did not influence vital parameters and ventilation pressure. Histologic exam detected no tissue damage.

Conclusions

This trial shows the feasibility to prevent fascial retraction during the open abdomen by using the new device. Thus, it is expected that an earlier closure of the abdominal wall will be possible, and a higher rate of primary closure will be attained.

Novel method for delayed primary closure and incisional hernia prevention in open abdomen: COmbined and MOdified Definitive Abdominal wall closure (COMODA)

BACKGROUND

Intended open abdomen is an option in cases of trauma and non-trauma patients. Nevertheless, after primary closure, incisional hernia rate is high. We describe a novel method, called COmbined and MOdified Definitive Abdominal closure (COMODA), a delayed primary closure which prevents incisional hernia.

METHODS

A negative pressure wound therapy system is combined with a condensed polytetrafluoroethylene (cPTFE) mesh.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN72678033.

RESULTS

Ten male patients with a median age of 68.8 (43-87) years were included. Primary closure rate was 100% per protocol. The median number of procedures per patient was 5.7 (5-9). Primary closure was obtained in 20.8 (10-32) days and median hospital stay was 36.3 (18-52) days. Only one patient developed incisional hernia during a median follow-up of 27 (8-60) months.

CONCLUSION

COMODA method allows for a high rate of delayed primary closure. It is safe and decreases the risk for developing an incisional hernia. However, a large number of patients are needed to support this conclusion.

Hypertonic saline resuscitation after emergent laparotomy and temporary abdominal closure

BACKGROUND

Our objective was to establish the safety of 3% hypertonic saline (HTS) resuscitation for trauma and acute care surgery patients undergoing emergent laparotomy and temporary abdominal closure (TAC) with the hypothesis that HTS administration would be associated with hyperosmolar hypercholoremic acidosis, lower resuscitation volumes, and higher fascial closure rates, without adversely affecting renal function.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of 189 trauma and acute care surgery patients who underwent emergent laparotomy and TAC, comparing patients with normal baseline renal function who received 3% HTS at 30 mL/h (n = 36) to patients with standard resuscitation (n = 153) by baseline characteristics, resuscitation parameters, and outcomes including primary fascial closure and Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes stages of acute kidney injury.

RESULTS

The HTS and standard resuscitation groups had similar baseline illness severity and organ dysfunction, though HTS patients had lower serum creatinine at initial laparotomy (1.2 mg/dL vs. 1.4 mg/dL; p = 0.078). Forty-eight hours after TAC, HTS patients had significantly higher serum sodium (145.8 mEq/L vs. 142.2 mEq/L, p < 0.001), chloride (111.8 mEq/L vs. 106.6 mEq/L, p < 0.001), and osmolarity (305.8 mOsm/kg vs. 299.4 mOsm/kg; p = 0.006), and significantly lower arterial pH (7.34 vs. 7.38; p = 0.011). The HTS patients had lower intravenous fluid (IVF) volumes within 48 hours of TAC (8.5 L vs. 11.8 L; p = 0.004). Serum creatinine, urine output, and kidney injury were similar between groups. Fascial closure was achieved for 92% of all HTS patients and 77% of all standard resuscitation patients (p = 0.063). Considering all 189 patients, higher IVF resuscitation volumes within 48 hours of TAC were associated with decreased odds of fascial closure (odds ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval, 0.83-0.97; p = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

Hypertonic saline resuscitation was associated with the development of a hypernatremic, hyperchloremic, hyperosmolar acidosis, and lower total IVF resuscitation volumes, without adversely affecting renal function. These findings may not be generalizable to patients with baseline renal dysfunction and susceptibility to hyperchloremic acidosis-induced kidney injury.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic study, level II.

Blurring the boundary between open abdomen treatment and ventral hernia repair

PURPOSE

Therapeutic approaches for septic open abdomen treatment remain a major challenge with many uncertainties. The most convincing method is vacuum-assisted wound closure with mesh-mediated fascia traction with a protective plastic sheet placed on the viscera. As this plastic sheet and the mesh must be removed before final fascial closure, such a technique only allows temporary abdominal closure. This retrospective study analyzes the results of a modification of this technique allowing final abdominal closure using an anti-adhesive permeable polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) mesh.

METHODS

The outcome of all consecutive patients with septic open abdomen treatment at one academic surgical department from January 2013 to June 2015 was retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

Retrospectively, 57 severely ill consecutive patients with septic open abdomen treatment with a 30-day mortality of 26% and a 2-year mortality of 51% were included in the study. In 26 patients, no mesh was implanted; in 31 patients, mesh implantation was done at median third-look laparotomy, median 5 days postoperative. Re-laparotomies after mesh implantation (median n = 2) revealed anastomotic leakage in 16% but no new bowel fistula. In 40% of those patients who had mesh implantation, fascia closure was not achieved and the mesh was left in place in a bridging position avoiding planned ventral hernia.

CONCLUSION

The application of an anti-adhesive PVDF mesh for fascia traction in vacuum-assisted wound closure of septic open abdomen is novel, versatile, and seems to be safe. It offers the highly relevant possibility for provisional and final abdominal closure.

The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland consensus guidelines in surgery for inflammatory bowel disease

AIM

There is a requirement of an expansive and up to date review of surgical management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) that can dovetail with the medical guidelines produced by the British Society of Gastroenterology.

METHODS

Surgeons who are members of the ACPGBI with a recognised interest in IBD were invited to contribute various sections of the guidelines. They were directed to produce a procedure based document using literature searches that were systematic, comprehensible, transparent and reproducible. Levels of evidence were graded. An editorial board was convened to ensure consistency of style, presentation and quality. Each author was asked to provide a set of recommendations which were evidence based and unambiguous. These recommendations were submitted to the whole guideline group and scored. They were then refined and submitted to a second vote. Only those that achieved >80% consensus at level 5 (strongly agree) or level 4 (agree) after 2 votes were included in the guidelines.

RESULTS

All aspects of surgical care for IBD have been included along with 157 recommendations for management.

CONCLUSION

These guidelines provide an up to date and evidence based summary of the current surgical knowledge in the management of IBD and will serve as a useful practical text for clinicians performing this type of surgery.

A Novel Method of Damage Control for Multiple Discontinuous Intestinal Injuries with Hemorrhagic Shock: A Controlled Experiment

Aim: In this study, we examined the effects of branched silicon tube (BST) and temporary closed circle (TCC) in a Beagle dog model of multiple transection of small intestine and discontinuities suspected intestinal necrosis with hemorrhagic shock. Materials and Methods: Ten male Beagle dogs were randomly divided into two groups. Hemorrhagic shock was induced by bleeding. Intestine was severed. Suspected intestinal necrotic model by ligating the mesenteric vessels was established, with a small tertiary mesenteric vessel reserved. Fracted intestines were ligated (IL group, n = 5) or reconnected with BST (IR group, n = 5). The abdominal cavity was temporarily closed with TCC. Definitive surgery was conducted after 24 h. Results: There was no statistical difference between two groups in the weight of dogs, their blood loss, fluid resuscitation, operation time of early emergency treatment (EET). After definitive surgery, all dogs in IR group and 3 dogs in IL groups were alive. 18 (90%) suspicious necrotic intestinal segments in IL group became necrotic, but 20 (80%) segments in IR group didn't develop obvious changes (p < 0.01). From 2 h after EET, the endotoxin concentration in IL group was significantly higher than that in IR group (133.87 ± 43.73 vs. 56.31 ± 24.70 pg/ml, p < 0.01). Microscopic examination revealed that much more severe damage occurred in the suspicious necrotic intestinal segments in IL group. Conclusion: Both reconnecting intestine with BST and temporary abdominal closure with TCC are viable methods of damage control for multiple discontinuous intestinal injuries.

Does Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy for the Open Abdomen Benefit the Patient? A Retrospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

Negative-pressure wound therapy (NPWT) is the most modern and sophisticated method of temporary abdominal closure. The aim of the study was to determine the significant predictors for mortality in patients with NPWT.

SETTING

University Clinical Centre Maribor, Slovenia MATERIALS AND METHODS:: The authors performed a retrospective cohort study of all patients treated with NPWT between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2014.

RESULTS

In the univariate analysis, the type of wound closure, more than 7 NPWT changes, the total days with NPWT, and time to wound closure were significantly associated with death of the patient. In the multivariate analysis, only the number of more than 7 NPWT changes was found as a significant predictor for death (P = .038).

CONCLUSIONS

Negative-pressure wound therapy is a method of choice for the treatment of open abdomen if there is a clear indication. However, clinicians should try all measures to remove the NPWT system and close the abdomen as soon as possible because prolonged use is associated with significantly higher mortality.

"Complex abdominal wall" management: evidence-based guidelines of the Italian Consensus Conference

To date, there is no shared consensus on a definition of a complex abdominal wall in elective surgery and in the emergency, on indications, technical details, complications, and follow-up. The purpose of the conference was to lay the foundations for a homogeneous approach to the complex abdominal wall with the primary intent being to attain the following objectives: (1) to develop evidence-based recommendations to define “complex abdominal wall”; (2) indications in emergency and in elective cases; (3) management of “complex abdominal wall”; (4) techniques for temporary abdominal closure. The decompressive laparostomy should be considered in a case of abdominal compartment syndrome in patients with critical conditions or after the failure of a medical treatment or less invasive methods. In the second one, beyond different mechanism, patients with surgical emergency diseases might reach the same pathophysiological end point of trauma patients where a preventive “open abdomen” might be indicated (a temporary abdominal closure: in the case of a non-infected field, the Wittmann patch and the NPWT had the best outcome followed by meshes; in the case of an infected field, NPWT techniques seem to be the preferred). The second priority is to create optimal both general as local conditions for healing: the right antimicrobial management, feeding—preferably by the enteral route—and managing correctly the open abdomen wall. The use of a mesh appears to be—if and when possible—the gold standard. There is a lot of enthusiasm about biological meshes. But the actual evidence supports their use only in contaminated or potentially contaminated fields but above all, to reduce the higher rate of recurrences, the wall anatomy and function should be restored in the midline, with or without component separation technique. On the other site has not to be neglected that the use of monofilament and macroporous non-absorbable meshes, in extraperitoneal position, in the setting of the complex abdomen with contamination, seems to have a cost effective role too. The idea of this consensus conference was mainly to try to bring order in the so copious, but not always so “evident” literature utilizing and exchanging the expertise of different specialists.

Open Abdomen in Trauma and Critical Care

The open abdomen technique and temporary abdominal closure after damage control surgery is fast becoming the standard of care for managing intra-abdominal bleeding and infectious or ischemic processes in critically ill patients. Expansion of this technique has evolved from damage control surgery in severely injured trauma patients to use in patients with abdominal compartment syndrome due to acute pancreatitis and other disorders. Subsequent therapies after use of the open abdomen technique and temporary abdominal closure are resuscitation in the intensive care unit and planned reoperation to manage the underlying cause of bleeding, infection, or ischemia. Determining the need for this potentially lifesaving intervention and managing the wound after the open abdomen has been created are all within the realm of critical care nurses. Case studies illustrate the implementation of the open abdomen technique and patient management strategies.

The open abdomen: analysis of risk factors for mortality and delayed fascial closure in 101 patients

Introduction

The core concepts of damage control and open abdomen in trauma surgery have been expanding for emergent general surgery. Temporary closures allow ease of access to the abdominal cavity for source control.The aim of the current study was to assess the outcomes of patients who underwent open abdomen management for acute abdominal conditions and evaluate risk factors for worse outcomes and inability of fascial closure during the initial hospitalization.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective analysis of 101 patients submitted to laparostomy in a single institution from January 2009 to March 2017. The evaluated outcomes were mortality, local morbidity, and rate of primary fascial closure.

Results

The most common indications for open abdomen were bowel perforation, bowel ischemia, and necrotizing pancreatitis. Global in-hospital mortality rate was 62.4%. For the 37 patients discharged from the hospital, a definitive abdominal closure was attained in 28.Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that people older than 60 years of age and with Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II) scores over 18.5 had higher in-hospital mortality rates. Definitive fascial closure was statistically associated with a lower number of re-interventions and ICU stay.

Conclusions

Open abdomen management may be appropriate in these critically ill patients; however, it continues to be associated with significantly high mortality, especially in elder patients and with higher APACHE II scores. Recognition of risk factors for fascia closure failure should promote the investigation for a tailored surgical approach in these patients.

Closed Or Open after Source Control Laparotomy for Severe Complicated Intra-Abdominal Sepsis (the COOL trial): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Severe complicated intra-abdominal sepsis (SCIAS) has an increasing incidence with mortality rates over 80% in some settings. Mortality typically results from disruption of the gastrointestinal tract, progressive and self-perpetuating bio-mediator generation, systemic inflammation, and multiple organ failure. Principles of treatment include early antibiotic administration and operative source control. A further therapeutic option may be open abdomen (OA) management with active negative peritoneal pressure therapy (ANPPT) to remove inflammatory ascites and ameliorate the systemic damage from SCIAS. Although there is now a biologic rationale for such an intervention as well as non-standardized and erratic clinical utilization, this remains a novel therapy with potential side effects and clinical equipoise.

Methods

The Closed Or Open after Laparotomy (COOL) study will constitute a prospective randomized controlled trial that will randomly allocate eligible surgical patients intra-operatively to either formal closure of the fascia or use of the OA with application of an ANPTT dressing. Patients will be eligible if they have free uncontained intra-peritoneal contamination and physiologic derangements exemplified by septic shock OR a Predisposition-Infection-Response-Organ Dysfunction Score ≥ 3 or a World-Society-of-Emergency-Surgery-Sepsis-Severity-Score ≥ 8. The primary outcome will be 90-day survival. Secondary outcomes will be logistical, physiologic, safety, bio-mediators, microbiological, quality of life, and health-care costs. Secondary outcomes will include days free of ICU, ventilation, renal replacement therapy, and hospital at 30 days from the index laparotomy. Physiologic secondary outcomes will include changes in intensive care unit illness severity scores after laparotomy. Bio-mediator outcomes for participating centers will involve measurement of interleukin (IL)-6 and IL-10, procalcitonin, activated protein C (APC), high-mobility group box protein-1, complement factors, and mitochondrial DNA. Economic outcomes will comprise standard costing for utilization of health-care resources.

Discussion

Although facial closure after SCIAS is considered the current standard of care, many reports are suggesting that OA management may improve outcomes in these patients. This trial will be powered to demonstrate a mortality difference in this highly lethal and morbid condition to ensure critically ill patients are receiving the best care possible and not being harmed by inappropriate therapies based on opinion only.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03163095.

Successful abdominal wound closure for treatment of severe peritonitis using negative pressure wound therapy with continuous mesh fascial traction: a case report

Background

Surgery for severe peritonitis often entails difficult wound closure and may require open abdominal management due to gut edema and/or concern of abdominal compartment syndrome. Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) is known to have good outcomes for wound closure after surgery for severe peritonitis. NPWT with continuous mesh fascial traction may result in even better outcomes, especially for fascial closure.

Case presentation

An 81-year-old man was hospitalized for abdominal pain. At admission, computed tomography (CT) demonstrated multiple liver metastases and a tumor perforating the sigmoid colon. Acute peritonitis due to perforated sigmoid colon cancer was diagnosed, and emergency peritonitis surgery and Hartmann’s operation were performed. However, at the end of the operation, the surgical abdominal wound could not be closed due to gut edema and concern of abdominal compartment syndrome. Thus, the abdominal wound was left open and NPWT was performed in the primary operation. In the second and subsequent operations, NPWT with mesh fascial traction was performed. The wound was ultimately closed in the fifth operation, which took place 9 days after the primary operation.

Conclusions

Treatment of severe peritonitis requires that gastroenterological surgeons learn some form of open abdominal management. This case suggests that NPWT with fascial mesh traction is a suitable solution. Furthermore, it does not require any special materials, and surgeons will find it easy to perform. In sum, NPWT with fascial mesh traction may be the preferred method of open abdominal management over other techniques currently available.