Peritonitis: laparoscopic approach

Small Bowel Diverticulosis and COVID-19: Awareness Is the Key: A Case Series and Review of the Literature

Small bowel non-Meckelian diverticulosis is a rare condition with only a few published cases despite being described over 200 years ago. In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, studies suggested that many patients may experience gastrointestinal manifestations. Intestinal symptoms could worsen the inflammation and infection associated with small bowel diverticulitis. Here we present three cases: one with inflammation and rupture in a COVID-19 patient and another as an asymptomatic detection. The third case involved recurrence after the first laparoscopic lavage approach. Furthermore, we provide a mini-review of the literature to emphasize the importance of considering this entity in the differential diagnosis of an acute abdomen. In the majority of cases involving small bowel diverticula, conservative management is the preferred approach. However, when complications arise, surgical intervention, including enteroctomy and primary anastomosis, may be necessary to achieve optimal outcomes.

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.

The Association of Polish Surgeons (APS) clinical guidelines for the use of laparoscopy in the management of abdominal emergencies. Part I

Introduction

Over the past three decades, almost every type of abdominal surgery has been performed and refined using the laparoscopic technique. Surgeons are applying it for more procedures, which not so long ago were performed only in the classical way. The position of laparoscopic surgery is therefore well established, and in many operations it is currently the recommended and dominant method.

Aim

The aim of the preparation of these guidelines was to concisely summarize the current knowledge on laparoscopy in acute abdominal diseases for the purposes of the continuous training of surgeons and to create a reference for opinions.

Material and methods

The development of these recommendations is based on a review of the available literature from the PubMed, Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases from 1985 to 2022, with particular emphasis on systematic reviews and clinical recommendations of recognized scientific societies. Recommendations were formulated in a directive form and evaluated by a group of experts using the Delphi method.

Results and conclusions

There are 63 recommendations divided into 12 sections: diagnostic laparoscopy, perforated ulcer, acute pancreatitis, incarcerated hernia, acute cholecystitis, acute appendicitis, acute mesenteric ischemia, abdominal trauma, bowel obstruction, diverticulitis, laparoscopy in pregnancy, and postoperative complications requiring emergency surgery. Each recommendation was supported by scientific evidence and supplemented with expert comments. The guidelines were created on the initiative of the Videosurgery Chapter of the Association of Polish Surgeons and are recommended by the national consultant in the field of general surgery. The first part of the guidelines covers 5 sections and the following challenges for surgical practice: diagnostic laparoscopy, perforated ulcer, acute pancreatitis, incarcerated hernia and acute cholecystitis. Contraindications for laparoscopy and the ERAS program are discussed.

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”.

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.

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.

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.

Abdominal Sepsis: An Update

Despite the significant development and advancement in antibiotic therapy, life-threatening complication of infective diseases cause hundreds of thousands of deaths world. This paper updates some of the issues regarding the etiology and treatment of abdominal sepsis and summaries the latest guidelines as recommended by the Intra-abdominal Infection (IAI) Consensus (2017). Prognostic scores are currently used to assess the course of peritonitis. Irrespective of the initial cause, there are several measures universally accepted as contributing to an improved survival rate, with the early recognition of IAI being the critical matter in this respect. Immediate correction of fluid balance should be undertaken with the use of vasoactive agents being prescribed, if necessary, to augment and assist fluid resuscitation. The WISS study showed that mortality was significantly affected by sepsis irrespective of any medical and surgical measures. A significant issue is the prevalence of extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Enterobacteriaceae in the clinical setting, and the reported prevalence of ESBLs intra-abdominal infections has steadily increased in Asia. Europe, Latin America, Middle East, North America, and South Pacific. Abdominal cavity pathology is second only to sepsis occurring in a pulmonary site. Following IAI (2017) guidelines, antibiotic therapy should be initiated as soon as possible after a diagnosis has been verified.

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.

The management of intra-abdominal infections from a global perspective: 2017 WSES guidelines for management of intra-abdominal infections

Intra-abdominal infections (IAIs) are common surgical emergencies and have been reported as major contributors to non-trauma deaths in the emergency departments worldwide. The cornerstones of effective treatment of IAIs are early recognition, adequate source control, and appropriate antimicrobial therapy. Prompt resuscitation of patients with ongoing sepsis is of utmost important. In hospitals worldwide, non-acceptance of, or lack of access to, accessible evidence-based practices and guidelines result in overall poorer outcome of patients suffering IAIs. The aim of this paper is to promote global standards of care in IAIs and update the 2013 WSES guidelines for management of intra-abdominal infections.

Management of Peritonitis After Minimally Invasive Colorectal Surgery: Can We Stick to Laparoscopy?

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopy is becoming the standard of care for the treatment of colorectal disease, its application in case of postoperative peritonitis is still not widespread. The objective of this article is to evaluate the role of laparoscopy in the management of postoperative peritonitis after elective minimally invasive colorectal resection for malignant and benign diseases.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between April 2010 and May 2016, 536 patients received primary minimally invasive colorectal surgery at our Department. Among this series, we carried out a retrospective study of those patients who, having developed signs of peritonitis, were treated with a laparoscopic reintervention. Patient demographics, type of complication and of the main relaparoscopic treatment, and main outcomes of reoperation were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 20 patients (3.7%) underwent relaparoscopy for the management of postoperative peritonitis, of which exact causes were detected by laparoscopy in 75% as follows: anastomotic leakage (n = 8, 40%), colonic ischemia (n = 2, 10%), iatrogenic bowel tear (n = 4, 20%), and other (n = 1, 5%). The median time between operations was 3.5 days (range, 2-8). The laparoscopic reintervention was tailored case by case and ranged from lavage and drainage to redo anastomosis with ostomy fashioning. Conversion rate was 10% and overall morbidity was 50%. No cases required additional surgery and 30-day mortality was nil. Three patients (15%) were admitted to intensive care unit for 24-hour surveillance.

CONCLUSION

Our experience suggests that in experienced hands and in hemodynamically stable patients, a prompt laparoscopic reoperation appears as an accurate diagnostic tool and an effective and safe option for the treatment of postoperative peritonitis after primary colorectal minimally invasive surgery.

Emergency laparoscopic ileo-colic resection and primary intracorporeal anastomosis for Crohn's acute ileitis with free perforation and faecal peritonitis: first ever reported laparoscopic treatment

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopy for abdominal surgical emergencies is gaining increasing acceptance given the spreading of advanced laparoscopic skills among modern surgeons, as it may allow at the same time an accurate diagnosis and appropriate treatment of acute abdomen. The use of the laparoscopic approach also in case of diffuse peritonitis is now becoming accepted provided hemodynamic stability, despite the common belief in the past decades that such severe condition represented an indication for conversion to open surgery or an immediate contraindication to continue laparoscopy. Crohn's Disease (CD) is a rare cause of acute abdomen and peritonitis, only a few cases of CD acute perforations are reported in the published literature; these cases have always been approached and treated by open laparotomy.

CASE DESCRIPTION

We report on a case of a faecal peritonitis due to an acute perforation caused by a terminal ileitis in an undiagnosed CD. The patient underwent diagnostic laparoscopy followed by a laparoscopic ileo-colic resection and primary intracorporeal anastomosis, with a successful postoperative outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Complicated CD has to be considered within the possible causes of small bowel non-traumatic perforation. Emergency laparoscopy with resection and primary intra-corporeal anastomosis can be feasible and may be a safe and effective minimally invasive alternative to open surgery even in case of faecal peritonitis, in selected stable patients and in presence of appropriate laparoscopic colorectal surgical skills and experience. To the best of our knowledge the present experience is the first ever reported case managed with a totally laparoscopic extended ileocecal resection with intracorporeal anastomosis in case of acutely perforated CD and diffuse peritonitis.

Predictive Factors of Ventilator Dependency after Colon and Rectal Surgery

There is limited data analyzing ventilator dependency by operative diagnoses and types of the procedures performed in colorectal surgery. We sought to identify predictive factors of ventilator dependency in colorectal surgery and investigate complication rates across various colorectal procedures. The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was used to examine the clinical data of patients with ventilator dependency for more than 48 hours after colorectal resection during 2005–2013. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to identify predictors of ventilator dependency. A total of 219,716 patients who underwent colorectal resection were identified. The rate of ventilator dependency was 3.9 per cent. The rate varied significantly based on patient diagnosis; with the highest rate seen in patients with acute mesenteric ischemia (25.9%). The highest risk of ventilator dependency according to the patients indication of surgery, type of the procedure, and preoperative factors exist in lower gastrointestinal bleeding [adjusted odds ratio (AOR): 77.44, P < 0.01], total colectomy (AOR: 1.58, P = 0.04), and American Society of Anesthesiologists classification of three or greater (AOR: 2.52, P < 0.01). Also, serum albumin level (AOR: 0.67, P < 0.01) seems to be associated with ventilator dependency. The overall rate of ventilator dependency is 3.9 per cent in colorectal surgery. However, depending on the indication for surgery, rates can be as high as 25.9 per cent. American Society of Anesthesiologist score can predict the risk of postoperative ventilator dependency in patients undergoing colorectal surgery. Serum albumin level is reversely associated with postoperative ventilator dependency.

Emergency laparoscopic cryptorchidectomy for acute abdomen due to testicular torsion in a dog

A 7-year-old male Siberian husky was presented with signs of acute abdomen. Based on the history and diagnostic imaging findings, torsion of an undescended abdominal testis was presumed. Emergency exploratory laparoscopy was performed and confirmed spermatic cord torsion in a non-neoplastic testis. The testis was enlarged and local peritonitis was evident. Laparoscopic cryptorchidectomy was performed and the dog recovered uneventfully. Histopathology confirmed thrombosis and necrosis. Laparoscopy is not only the method of choice for elective cryptorchidectomy, but can also be used in patients with acute abdomen from testicular torsion of an undescended testis.

Re-interventions following laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: data from 818 individuals from the Dutch surgical colorectal audit

BACKGROUND

The surgical procedure of choice for the resection of colorectal cancer has shifted in favor of laparoscopic surgery. Although increasing data prove advantages of elective laparoscopic surgery, less is known about the results in acute indications such as surgical re-interventions following colorectal resections. This study aims to assess the clinical benefits in recovery following laparoscopic re-interventions compared with open re-interventions following laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

We performed an analysis of data from the Dutch Surgical Colorectal Audit from January 2010 to December 2012. All patients requiring surgical re-intervention after initial laparoscopic colorectal surgery were analyzed.

RESULTS

Out of 27,448 patients, 11,856 underwent laparoscopic surgery. Following laparoscopic surgery, 159 patients (1.3%) had a laparoscopic re-intervention, and 659 patients (5.6%) had an open re-intervention. In a multivariable analysis adjusting for patients' demographics and risk factors, the length of hospital stay was 17 days (interquartile range, 11-16 days) for the laparoscopic group and 23 days (interquartile range, 14-37 days) for the open group (odds ratio [OR]=0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65-0.84). In the laparoscopic group the intensive care unit admission rate was 39% compared with 66% in the open group. The 30-day mortality rate was 7 (4%) in the laparoscopic group compared with 89 (14%) in the open group (OR=0.31; 95% CI, 0.13-0.73).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic re-intervention following laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer is feasible in selected patients. Because of the unknown extent of selection bias, prospective studies are needed to define the exact position and benefits of laparoscopic re-interventions.

Management of Complications Following Emergency and Elective Surgery for Diverticulitis

BACKGROUND

The clinical spectrum of sigmoid diverticulitis (SD) varies from asymptomatic diverticulosis to symptomatic disease with potentially fatal complications. Sigmoid colectomy with restoration of continuity has been the prevailing modality for treating acute and recurrent SD, and is often performed as a laparoscopy-assisted procedure. For elective sigmoid colectomy, the postoperative morbidity rate is 15-20% whereas morbidity rates reach up to 30% in patients who undergo emergency surgery for perforated SD. Some of the more common and serious surgical complications after sigmoid colectomy are anastomotic leaks and peritonitis, wound infections, small bowel obstruction, postoperative bleeding, and injuries to the urinary tract structures. Regarding the management of complications, it makes no difference whether the complication is a result of an emergency or an elective procedure.

METHODS

The present work gives an overview of the management of complications in the surgical treatment of SD based on the current literature.

RESULTS

To achieve successful management, early diagnosis is mandatory in cases of deviation from the normal postoperative course. If diagnostic procedures fail to deliver a correlate for the clinical situation of the patient, re-laparotomy or re-laparoscopy still remain among the most important diagnostic and/or therapeutic principles in visceral surgery when a patient's clinical status deteriorates.

CONCLUSION

The ability to recognize and successfully manage complications is a crucial part of the surgical treatment of diverticular disease and should be mastered by any surgeon qualified in this field.

Relaparoscopy for management of postoperative complications following colorectal surgery: ten years experience in a single center

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy has increasingly become the standard of care for patients who undergo colorectal surgery for both benign and malignant disease. On the basis of this growing experience, there is now an expanded role for laparoscopic approach to postoperative complications after primary colorectal resection. However, there is little literature specific to this topic. We report a ten-year experience with laparoscopic treatment of early complications following laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

METHODS

From January 2003 to December 2012, a total of 1,292 patients underwent elective laparoscopic colorectal surgery in our department. One hundred and two (7.9%) patients required reoperation for a postoperative complication. Laparoscopy has been also adopted as the preferred procedure for management of postoperative complications. A retrospective review of 84 patients who had relaparoscopy (RL) for postoperative complications, including peritonitis, ureteral injury, bowel obstruction, and bleeding, was performed.

RESULTS

Reoperation was carried out laparoscopically in 79 (94.0%) patients. Five (6.0%) conversions were necessary because of massive colonic ischemia, generalized fecal peritonitis, and lack of working space. The most common finding at RL was anastomotic leakage (57.1%) that was managed by peritoneal lavage and ileostomy in 91.7% of cases. Six percent of patients had negative RL. Overall morbidity rate was 25.0%. Five patients required additional surgery: four (5.1%) after RL and one after a converted procedure. There were five (6.0%) deaths from septic shock, myocardial infarction, and pulmonary embolism.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopy is a safe and effective tool for management of complications following laparoscopic colorectal surgery. In this setting, RL represents the first step of re-exploration and treatment, with no delay to conversion to open procedure even in skilled laparoscopic hands.

Current concept of abdominal sepsis: WSES position paper

Although sepsis is a systemic process, the pathophysiological cascade of events may vary from region to region.

Abdominal sepsis represents the host’s systemic inflammatory response to bacterial peritonitis.

It is associated with significant morbidity and mortality rates, and is the second most common cause of sepsis-related mortality in the intensive care unit.

The review focuses on sepsis in the specific setting of severe peritonitis.

Role of laparoscopy in peritonitis

OBJECTIVE

Laparoscopy has gained clinical acceptance in many subspecialties in the last decade. The conventional open surgery for peritonitis carries significant morbidity and mortality. The present study was done to extend and evaluate benefits of minimally invasive surgery in this subset of patients.

METHODS

This was a prospective study spanning over a period of four years. All those patients diagnosed as having peritonitis on clinical assessment and preoperative investigations and those who were stable enough haemodynamically were included in this study. After initial resuscitation for few hours, they underwent diagnostic and therapeutic laparoscopy to identify the cause of peritonitis and to confirm the pathology. All cases were done under general anesthesia, using three standard ports at appropriate sites according to pathology. Patients were treated by different procedures either laparoscopically or with laparoscopic assistance after diagnosis. Operative and post operative data was collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

Ninety two cases of peritonitis underwent diagnostic and therapeutic laparoscopy. Mean age of patient was 46.5 years. 24 patients were diagnosed as perforated duodenal, in 14 (58.3%) patients laparoscopic suture repair was done and in 8 (33.3%) small upper midline incision was given and perforation was repaired. Out of 32 patients having perforated appendix, 25 (78.1%) patients laparoscopic appendectomy was done while in 7 (21.8%) perforation was dealt by laparoscopic assistance. Out of 14 patients of ileal perforation 6 (42.8%) with minimal contamination laparoscopic suture was applied, while in 8 (57.1%), perforated loop was brought out by making small window and perforation was closed. All 22 patients with pelvic sepsis needed only aspiration of pus and peritoneal lavage. Only one patient died post operatively and 2 (2.1%) patients developed fistula. 6 (6.5%) patients developed port site infection.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic management is feasible, safe and effective surgical option for patients with peritonitis due to different abdominal emergencies in properly selected cases with higher diagnostic yield and a faster postoperative recovery.

Perforated gastrointestinal stromal tumor in Meckel's diverticulum treated laparoscopically

Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) can represent a source of substantial gastrointestinal hemorrhage. Bleeding is described as a frequent cause of clinical presentation and commonly patients received surgical treatment on an urgent basis to drain the hematoma. However, a literature review has shown that perforation with peritonitis is very uncommon and rarely reported. These tumors are usually located in the stomach, and primary ileal and Meckel's localization is rare, occurring in less than 10% of cases in many series. In the English literature, we have found seven well-reported cases of GIST in a Meckel's diverticulum that presented with perforation and peritonitis; these case were found through a MEDLINE search of the terms: "perforated" GISTs in "Meckel's" GISTs. Herein, we describe a rare case of a perforated GIST in Meckel's diverticulum that caused severe peritonitis and that was treated with minimally invasive surgery.

The role of laparoscopy in suspicious abdomen pain in children

OBJECTIVE

Abdominal pain is a frequently encountered problem in children. Suspicious right lower quadrant pains are sometimes a problem for pediatric surgeons. In this study, we wanted to evaluate the effectiveness of laparoscopy in diagnosis and treatment of children with suspicion of abdominal pain.

METHODS

The files of 84 patients treated with a diagnosis of suspicious right lower quadrant peritonitis between 2005 and 2011 were investigated. Laparoscopic exploration was performed for all cases with right lower quadrant pain where the appendix was not seen on USG/CT and the cause of acute abdomen could not be determined.

RESULTS

In this process, 84 patients consisting of 60 (71%) females and 24 (29%) males were included in the study. The mean age was 10.5 years (7-16 years). Appendicitis was determined during diagnostic laparoscopy in 35 (41.6%) patients. The appendix was normal in the remaining 49 (58.3%) patients. In 36 of these patients, gynecological diseases were encountered on pathology as the most frequent cause of the acute abdomen. The appendix was preserved in patients where the cause of the abdominal pain was explained.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopy can be used in the diagnosis and treatment of patients with suspected acute abdomen that imitates acute appendicitis and cannot be differentiated with physical examination and laboratory methods. Delays in diagnosis and unnecessary appendectomy will be prevented in this way.

Laparoscopic management of small-bowel intussusception in a 64-year-old female with ileoal lipomas

A 64-year-old female patient presented with upper abdominal pain and vomiting. Ultrasonography showed a hyperechoic mass in the right lower abdomen and computed tomography showed a low-density mass with intestinal invagination. An emergency laparoscopic right-hemicolectomy was performed, and the resected specimen was found to contain three tumors, which were identified histopathologically as intestinal lipomas. Adult intussusception is relatively rare and difficult to be diagnosed, since most symptoms of adult intussusception are nonspecific. We report our clinical experience of the diagnosis and emergent laparoscopic surgery for an adult patient with intussusception.

Emergency laparoscopic surgery for right colonic diseases with peritonitis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic bowel resection for right colonic diseases with peritonitis is technically difficult and time-consuming, particularly in the presence of hard adhesion and dense inflammation. Moreover, peritonitis frequently leads to an emergency operation. Therefore, we evaluated the feasibility and effectiveness of emergency laparoscopic bowel resection in patients with these diseases.

METHODS

During 3 years (November 2006 to October 2009), we enrolled 31 consecutive patients who underwent an emergency laparoscopic bowel resection for right colonic disease with peritonitis. In 2 patients, perforated malignancy was suspected preoperatively, but there was no patient with malignancy at pathologic finding. We analyzed the clinical outcomes, including complications.

RESULTS

The mean operating time was 140 minutes, and the mean hospital stay was 10 days. There was 1 conversion (3%), and the other intraoperative procedures were uneventful. Four complications (13%) occurred after treatment (1 intra-abdominal abscess, 2 wound abscesses, and 1 adhesive ileus). The intra-abdominal abscess was treated by subsequent percutaneous drainage; the wound abscesses were treated conservatively. One patient with an adhesive ileus 12 months after treatment was managed with a bowel resection. After a median follow-up of 16 months, the other patients had no complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Emergency laparoscopic bowel resection may be a feasible, effective method for the treatment of right colonic diseases with peritonitis.

A focus on intra-abdominal infections

Complicated intra-abdominal infections are an important cause of morbidity and are frequently associated with poor prognosis, particularly in higher risk patients.

Well defined evidence-based recommendations for intra-abdominal infections treatment are partially lacking because of the limited number of randomized-controlled trials.

Factors consistently associated with poor outcomes in patients with intra-abdominal infections include increased illness severity, failed source control, inadequate empiric antimicrobial therapy and healthcare-acquired infection.

Early prognostic evaluation of complicated intra-abdominal infections is important to select high-risk patients for more aggressive therapeutic procedures.

The cornerstones in the management of complicated intra-abdominal infections are both source control and antibiotic therapy.

The timing and the adequacy of source control are the most important issues in the management of intra-abdominal infections, because inadequate and late control of septic source may have a negative effect on the outcomes.

Recent advances in interventional and more aggressive techniques could significantly decrease the morbidity and mortality of physiologically severe complicated intra-abdominal infections, even if these are still being debated and are yet not validated by limited prospective trials.

Empiric antimicrobial therapy is nevertheless important in the overall management of intra-abdominal infections. Inappropriate antibiotic therapy may result in poor patient outcomes and in the appearance of bacterial resistance.

Antimicrobial management is generally standardised and many regimens, either with monotherapy or combination therapy, have proven their efficacy. Routine coverage especially against Enterococci and candida spp is not always recommended, but can be useful in particular clinical conditions. A de escalation approach may be recommended in patients with specific risk factors for multidrug resistant infections such as immunodeficiency and prolonged antibacterial exposure.

Therapy should focus on the obtainment of adequate source control and adequate use of antimicrobial therapy dictated by individual patient risk factors. Other critical issues remain debated and more controversies are still open mainly because of the limited number of randomized controlled trials.

Is a laparoscopic approach useful for treating complications after primary laparoscopic colorectal surgery?

PURPOSE

Although the use of laparoscopy for the management of postoperative complications has been previously well documented for different pathologies, there is scarce information regarding its use after laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

METHODS

Data were prospectively collected from all patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery between June 2000 to October 2007. Patients were divided into two groups according to the approach used for the reoperation: laparoscopy (Group I) or laparotomy (Group II). Data were statistically analyzed by using Student's t-test and chi-squared test.

RESULTS

In all, 510 patients were analyzed. Twenty-seven patients (5.2 percent), 14 men and 13 women (men/women Group I: 10/7 vs. Group II: 4/6; P = not significant (NS)), required a second surgery because of postoperative complications (Group I: 17 (63 percent); Group II: 10 (37 percent)). Mean age was 60 +/- 17 years (Group I: 61.7 +/- 17.7 vs. Group II: 57.1 +/- 16 years; P = NS). Fifteen patients (55.5 percent) had anastomotic leaks (Group I 13/17 (76.5 percent) vs. Group II 2/13 (15 percent); P = 0.004). The were no differences between the groups regarding the length of stay or postoperative complications (Group I: 11.9 +/- 9.6 vs. Group II: 18.1 +/- 19.7 days: P = NS; Group I: 1 vs. Group II: 3; P = NS).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic approach is a useful tool for treating complications after laparoscopic colorectal surgery, especially anastomotic leaks. Randomized, controlled trials are necessary to validate these findings.

The efficacy of laparoscopic surgery in patients with peritonitis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy is an essential part of our armamentarium in certain conditions and has been recently begun to be used on acute abdominal peritonitis effectively and frequently by surgeons. But, there is still a debate on laparoscopic management of surgical emergencies. The aim of the current study is to evaluate the safety and efficiency of laparoscopy and its role in patients with acute abdominal emergencies retrospectively.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From May 2002 to May 2006, 147 patients with provisional diagnosis of acute abdomen were operated laparoscopically (68 suspected lower quadrant peritonitis, 17 gastroduodenal perforated ulcers, and 62 cholecystitis).

RESULTS

A definitive diagnosis was accomplished in 93.1% (137 patients) of the cases and 85.7% (126) of the patients were successfully treated by emergent laparoscopy. An unnecessary laparotomy was avoided in 17.0% (24 women and 1 man) of the patients. The conversion rate was 14.2%. The morbidity rate was 4.0% with a postoperative mortality rate of 0.68%. After a mean period of 16.2 months, postoperative evolutions of patients were satisfactory.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic surgery, with high diagnostic accuracy and therapeutic capabilities, can be safely and effectively applied to the patients with acute abdominal emergencies in experienced hands. We believe that laparoscopy is a valuable way to prevent unnecessary laparotomies when routine investigations fail to identify the cause. This technique can be widely used in abdominal emergencies with increasing experience, but further studies are required to definitively establish its role in acute abdominal disorders.

Acute abdomen from chylous peritonitis: a surgical diagnosis. Case report and literature review

Acute accumulation of chyle in the peritoneal cavity is a rare event (less than 100 cases are described in the literature) and is to be distinguished from chylous ascites, which is characteristically chronic. It is frequently idiopathic, and diagnosis is usually made at laparotomy, whenever signs of acute peritonitis impose it. Peritoneal toilette and drainage are the only treatment required, and the prognosis is excellent. We describe the case of a 69-year-old man who underwent emergency surgery for acute peritonitis. Approximately 0.5 liters of chyle were found free in the peritoneal cavity at laparoscopic exploration, without any important underlying pathological condition apart from a blood vessel congestion in the bowel resembling angiomatosis. Laparotomic conversion, peritoneal toilette and drainage, with postoperative low-fat diet, were the pursued treatments. Two years after discharge, chemistry and clinics are normal, without evidence of associated disease or recurrence.

Microbubble-enriched lavage fluid for treatment of experimental peritonitis

Background

Relaparotomies and closed postoperative peritoneal lavage (CPPL) are performed to treat persistent peritonitis. This experimental animal study compared open abdominal lavage with CPPL, and evaluated the potential of microbubble-enriched lavage fluids to improve the efficiency of CPPL and reduce clinical morbidity, mortality and cost.

Methods

Fluorescent polystyrene spheres were injected intraperitoneally into 22 male Wistar rats to simulate localized peritonitis. After 18 h the rats received open abdominal lavage and CPPL, with and without microbubbles. Microbubbles were obtained by adding ultrasound contrast agents to continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis fluid.

Results

Open abdominal lavage was 3·5 times more effective in particle removal than CPPL, owing to better fluid dynamics. The introduction of air–liquid interfaces in the form of microbubbles made CPPL up to 2·4 times more effective than lavage without bubbles. Best detachment results were obtained when microbubbles with a flexible surfactant shell and longer blood elimination half-life were used.

Conclusion

Open abdominal and CPPL lavage techniques are not efficient beyond a certain duration and volume as they do not cause bacterial detachment from the peritoneal membrane. Using surface tension forces from microbubbles significantly enhanced polystyrene particle detachment. These findings may have great consequences for the treatment of patients with peritonitis.

Laparoscopic reintervention for anastomotic leakage after primary laparoscopic colorectal surgery

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leakage is associated with high morbidity and mortality rates. The aim of this study was to assess the potential benefits of a laparoscopic reintervention for anastomotic leakage after primary laparoscopic surgery.

METHODS

Between January 2003 and January 2006, ten patients who had laparoscopic colorectal resection and later developed anastomotic leakage had a laparoscopic reintervention. A second group included 15 patients who had relaparotomy after primary open surgery.

RESULTS

Patient characteristics were comparable in the two groups. The median time from first operation to reintervention was 6 days in both groups. There were no conversions. The intensive care stay was shorter in the laparoscopic group (1 versus 3 days; P = 0.002). Resumption of a normal diet (median 3 versus 6 days; P = 0.031) and first stoma output (2 versus 3 days; P = 0.041) occurred earlier in the laparoscopic group. The postoperative 30-day morbidity rate was lower (four of ten patients versus 12 of 15; P = 0.087) and hospital stay was shorter (median 9 versus 13 days; P = 0.058) in the laparoscopic group. No patient developed incisional hernia in the laparoscopic group compared with five of 15 in the open group (P = 0.061).

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that laparoscopic reintervention for anastomotic leakage after primary laparoscopic surgery is associated with less morbidity, faster recovery and fewer abdominal wall complications than relaparotomy.