The Straw Pressure Gradient and Gravity (SPGG) Technique: A Safe and Cost-Effective Technique for Laparoscopic Suction

Suction devices are frequently used during laparoscopic surgery. However, their cost and limitations can be significant, depending on the clinical case, theatre setting and national health system. Furthermore, the continuous need to reduce the costs of the consumables in minimally invasive surgical procedures and their environmental burden creates extra pressure on the healthcare systems globally. Therefore, we present a new technique for laparoscopic suctioning, the Straw Pressure Gradient and Gravity (SPGG) technique. It is a safe, cost-effective and environmentally friendly technique compared to traditional suction devices. The technique involves using a sterile, single-use Suction Catheter 12-16 French after positioning the patient according to the targeted collection. The catheter is inserted via the laparoscopic port nearest the collection and directed using laparoscopic graspers. The outer end needs to be clamped to avoid fluid spillage, and the catheter tip is placed in the collection. Then after the clamp is released, the fluid will be successfully drained due to the pressure gradient into a pot placed at a lower level than the intra-abdominal collection. Minimal wash can be performed via the gas vent by using a syringe. SPGG is a safe and easy-to-learn technique that requires similar skills as placing an intra-abdominal drain during laparoscopy. It is softer than rigid, traditional suction devices and atraumatic. It can be used for suction, irrigation, collection of fluid for sampling and as a drain in case of an intraoperative indication. SPGG is a cost-effective device as it is cheaper than the average disposable suction device system and has multiple uses, which can significantly decrease the annual cost of laparoscopies. It can also reduce the number of consumables and lighten the environmental burden of laparoscopic procedures.

Evaluation of Drain Insertion After Appendicectomy for Complicated Appendicitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the comparative outcomes of drain insertion versus no drain after appendicectomy for complicated appendicitis. A systematic search of PubMed, Cochrane Library and Scopus was conducted, and all studies comparing drain versus no drain after appendicectomy for complicated appendicitis were included. Abdominal collection, surgical site infection (SSI), bowel obstruction, faecal fistula, paralytic ileus, length of hospital stay (LOS) and mortality were the evaluated outcome parameters for the meta-analysis. Seventeen studies reporting a total number of 4,255 patients who underwent appendicectomy for complicated appendicitis with (n=1,580) or without (n=2,657) drain were included. There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding abdominal collection (odds ratio (OR)=1.41, P=0.13). No-drain group was superior to the drain group regarding SSI (OR=1.93, P=0.0001), faecal fistula (OR=4.76, P=0.03), intestinal obstruction (OR=2.40, P=0.04) and paralytic ileus (OR=2.07, P=0.01). There was a difference regarding mortality rate between the two groups (3.4% in the drain group vs 0.5% in the no-drain group, risk difference (RD)=0.01, 95% CI (-0.01, 0.04), P=0.36). In conclusion, this meta-analysis has shown that drains have no effect on the development of intra-abdominal collections in complicated appendicitis, but it can significantly increase the risk of postoperative complications such as fistula, surgical site infection (SSI), bowel obstruction, ileus and length of hospital stay.

Peritoneal lavage during laparoscopic appendectomy for complex appendicitis is associated with increased post-operative morbidity

AIM

Appendicitis is one of the most common paediatric surgical pathologies seen by paediatric surgeons worldwide. Laparoscopic appendectomy is undertaken for all cases of appendicitis in our institute. Intraperitoneal lavage following appendectomy is the conventional way of managing complicated appendicitis; however, some surgeons debate the efficacy of this practice. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of intraperitoneal lavage versus suction only in children with complicated appendicitis.

METHODS

Data were collected retrospectively between January 2018 and January 2019. All patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy for complex appendicitis were included and divided into two groups, patients who had suction only and those who had lavage and suction. Outcome parameters studied were the length of stay (LOS), number of temperature spikes > 37.7 (TS), operative times (OT) and readmission for intra-abdominal collections. Comparison between the two groups was performed using two sample t-test with unequal variance, significance was set at P < 0.05.

RESULTS

A total of 115 patients were included (lavage n = 52, Suction n = 63). The LOS (P = 0.0054), TS (0.0109), OT (P < 0.0001) were significantly higher in the lavage group compared to the suction-only group. Overall rates of readmission were similar between groups, however, readmission for the confirmed intra-abdominal collection was more common in the lavage group.

CONCLUSION

Based on our study, it appears that there is no advantage in performing an intraperitoneal lavage for complex appendicitis. It resulted in a prolonged stay, more post-operative TS and longer operative duration. The likelihood of being readmitted with an intra-abdominal collection following a lavage was higher compared to suction only.

COVID-19 With an Initial Presentation of Intraperitoneal Hemorrhage Secondary to Spontaneous Splenic Rupture

The WHO declared coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) a global pandemic in early 2020. As the pandemic has continued to evolve over a period of several months, many cases of unusual presentations are now emerging, which pose a greater challenge for physicians in terms of quickly identifying COVID-19 patients based on initial signs and symptoms. In this report, we present one such unusual presentation in a patient with sudden intraperitoneal hemorrhage and spontaneous splenic rupture with COVID-19 as the likely etiology and contributing factor. The patient was a 75-year-old Caucasian woman who presented to the emergency department (ED) with complaints of severe left-sided abdominal pain for several days without any preceding trauma. A CT of the abdomen/pelvis revealed a large amount of fluid in the abdomen, which raised suspicion of bleeding. An exploratory laparotomy revealed splenic rupture with hemoperitoneum, and the patient subsequently underwent an emergent splenectomy. The patient's COVID-19 antigen test returned positive during the surgery and was subsequently confirmed with a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test. COVID-19 has been found to result primarily in respiratory symptoms through its ability to invade endothelial cells via angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 affinity. It is speculated that this mechanism may cause a predisposition to micro-thromboses, which can eventually lead to manifestations such as large lymphoid organ thrombosis. Based on this case presentation and the evolving literature on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), spontaneous splenic rupture is an emergent differential diagnosis that should be considered in COVID-19 patients presenting with gastrointestinal complaints such as abdominal pain and nausea.

Gastrointestinal Tract Leak: Is It One Entity or Spectrum of Conditions?

Gastrointestinal (GI) leak is a well-known and catastrophic surgical complication. Its impact on patients, surgeons, and the healthcare system is tremendous. Efforts to constraint the occurrence and consequences of GI leak contributed to better assessment and management planning, especially with advanced technology. Detail information about the problem extent and new management options became available and effective for specific categories. Therefore, a full and accurate assessment and understanding of the disease presentation assists in choosing the appropriate management plan.

The pathophysiologic process encompasses a severe inflammatory process with a superimposed infection inside sterile body tissue and cavities initiated by contaminated GI leaked content. The extent of the morbidity resulting from GI perforation and leak is variable and may not be predictable. Leak might not be the same in every case. Patients with GI leak present at variable severity depending on several factors. Accordingly, management should be individualized to target the underlying pathophysiology and the extent of the complication. Operative intervention and repair of the perforation site surgically or endoscopically are the standard of care frequently used. However, it may not always be needed. In this article, a practical review of the diversity and underlying pathologies of GI leak will be presented to inform case-specific management plans.

A Step-Up Approach to Infected Abdominal Fluid Collections: Not Just for Pancreatitis

Background: More than 145,500 abdominal abscesses occur annually in the U.S. Percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) is the primary treatment for clinically significant intra-abdominal collections (IACs), but only approximately 90% of all IACs are treatable with PCD. This leaves a significant number of patients facing long courses of management, including multiple interventions. Minimally invasive debridement techniques are now employed regularly for the treatment of infected necrosis caused by acute pancreatitis. We describe the use of minimally invasive videoscopic debridement techniques employed as part of a "step-up" approach to resolve IACs of other etiologies that are unresponsive to PCD. Methods: Data of all patients undergoing this procedure at a tertiary referral academic center from 2015 to 2017 after failure of different PCD techniques were analyzed retrospectively. Results: Four men and two women, mean age 54.6 years (range 26-70 years), with refractory IACs (mean drainage time 91.3 days; mean number of drainage procedures 4.6) following a variety of surgical interventions and inflammatory conditions underwent either video-assisted retroperitoneal debridement or sinus tract endoscopic debridement with a rigid or flexible endoscope. Technical success was achieved in all cases, and clinical success was observed in five cases. No immediate procedural complications were detected. The mean hospital stay and post-procedure drainage times were 5.5 and 25.2 days, respectively. There were no recurrent IACs. Conclusion: Minimally invasive debridement techniques can safely resolve IACs refractory to standard PCD techniques. Employment of these techniques as part of a step-up approach may reduce the morbidity and duration of drainage for the thousands of patients treated annually who have refractory IACs, whatever their etiology.