MyMedR

Displaying all 8 publications

Abstract:

Sort:

Fulltext Highlighting the gaps in quantifying the economic burden of surgical site infections associated with antimicrobial-resistant bacteria

Iskandar K, Sartelli M, Tabbal M, Ansaloni L, Baiocchi GL, Catena F, et al.

World J Emerg Surg, 2019;14:50.
PMID: 31832084 DOI: 10.1186/s13017-019-0266-x

Antibiotics are the pillar of surgery from prophylaxis to treatment; any failure is potentially a leading cause for increased morbidity and mortality. Robust data on the burden of SSI especially those due to antimicrobial resistance (AMR) show variable rates between countries and geographical regions but accurate estimates of the incidence of surgical site infections (SSI) due to AMR and its related global economic impact are yet to be determined. Quantifying the burden of SSI treatment is an incentive to sensitize governments, healthcare systems, and the society to invest in quality improvement and sustainable development. However in the absence of a unified epidemiologically sound infection definition of SSI and a well-designed global surveillance system, the end result is a lack of accurate and reliable data that limits the comparability of estimates between countries and the possibility of tracking changes to inform healthcare professionals about the appropriateness of implemented infection prevention and control strategies. This review aims to highlight the reported gaps in surveillance methods, epidemiologic data, and evidence-based SSI prevention practices and in the methodologies undertaken for the evaluation of the economic burden of SSI associated with AMR bacteria. If efforts to tackle this problem are taken in isolation without a global alliance and data is still lacking generalizability and comparability, we may see the future as a race between the global research efforts for the advancement in surgery and the global alarming reports of the increased incidence of antimicrobial-resistant pathogens threatening to undermine any achievement.
Fulltext 2019 update of the WSES guidelines for management of Clostridioides (Clostridium) difficile infection in surgical patients

Sartelli M, Di Bella S, McFarland LV, Khanna S, Furuya-Kanamori L, Abuzeid N, et al.

World J Emerg Surg, 2019 02 28;14:8.
PMID: 30858872 DOI: 10.1186/s13017-019-0228-3

In the last three decades, Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) has increased in incidence and severity in many countries worldwide. The increase in CDI incidence has been particularly apparent among surgical patients. Therefore, prevention of CDI and optimization of management in the surgical patient are paramount. An international multidisciplinary panel of experts from the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) updated its guidelines for management of CDI in surgical patients according to the most recent available literature. The update includes recent changes introduced in the management of this infection.
Fulltext WSES/GAIS/WSIS/SIS-E/AAST global clinical pathways for patients with skin and soft tissue infections

Sartelli M, Coccolini F, Kluger Y, Agastra E, Abu-Zidan FM, Abbas AES, et al.

World J Emerg Surg, 2022 01 15;17(1):3.
PMID: 35033131 DOI: 10.1186/s13017-022-00406-2

Skin and soft-tissue infections (SSTIs) encompass a variety of pathological conditions that involve the skin and underlying subcutaneous tissue, fascia, or muscle, ranging from simple superficial infections to severe necrotizing infections.Together, the World Society of Emergency Surgery, the Global Alliance for Infections in Surgery, the Surgical Infection Society-Europe, The World Surgical Infection Society, and the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma have jointly completed an international multi-society document to promote global standards of care in SSTIs guiding clinicians by describing reasonable approaches to the management of SSTIs.An extensive non-systematic review was conducted using the PubMed and MEDLINE databases, limited to the English language. The resulting evidence was shared by an international task force with different clinical backgrounds.
Fulltext Raising concerns about the Sepsis-3 definitions

Sartelli M, Kluger Y, Ansaloni L, Hardcastle TC, Rello J, Watkins RR, et al.

World J Emerg Surg, 2018;13:6.
PMID: 29416555 DOI: 10.1186/s13017-018-0165-6

The Global Alliance for Infections in Surgery appreciates the great effort of the task force who derived and validated the Sepsis-3 definitions and considers the new definitions an important step forward in the evolution of our understanding of sepsis. Nevertheless, more than a year after their publication, we have a few concerns regarding the use of the Sepsis-3 definitions.
Prospective Observational Study on acute Appendicitis Worldwide (POSAW)

Sartelli M, Baiocchi GL, Di Saverio S, Ferrara F, Labricciosa FM, Ansaloni L, et al.

World J Emerg Surg, 2018;13:19.
PMID: 29686725 DOI: 10.1186/s13017-018-0179-0

Background: Acute appendicitis (AA) is the most common surgical disease, and appendectomy is the treatment of choice in the majority of cases. A correct diagnosis is key for decreasing the negative appendectomy rate. The management can become difficult in case of complicated appendicitis. The aim of this study is to describe the worldwide clinical and diagnostic work-up and management of AA in surgical departments.
Methods: This prospective multicenter observational study was performed in 116 worldwide surgical departments from 44 countries over a 6-month period (April 1, 2016-September 30, 2016). All consecutive patients admitted to surgical departments with a clinical diagnosis of AA were included in the study.
Results: A total of 4282 patients were enrolled in the POSAW study, 1928 (45%) women and 2354 (55%) men, with a median age of 29 years. Nine hundred and seven (21.2%) patients underwent an abdominal CT scan, 1856 (43.3%) patients an US, and 285 (6.7%) patients both CT scan and US. A total of 4097 (95.7%) patients underwent surgery; 1809 (42.2%) underwent open appendectomy and 2215 (51.7%) had laparoscopic appendectomy. One hundred eighty-five (4.3%) patients were managed conservatively. Major complications occurred in 199 patients (4.6%). The overall mortality rate was 0.28%.
Conclusions: The results of the present study confirm the clinical value of imaging techniques and prognostic scores. Appendectomy remains the most effective treatment of acute appendicitis. Mortality rate is low.
Fulltext WSES/GAIS/SIS-E/WSIS/AAST global clinical pathways for patients with intra-abdominal infections

Sartelli M, Coccolini F, Kluger Y, Agastra E, Abu-Zidan FM, Abbas AES, et al.

World J Emerg Surg, 2021 09 25;16(1):49.
PMID: 34563232 DOI: 10.1186/s13017-021-00387-8

Intra-abdominal infections (IAIs) are common surgical emergencies and have been reported as major contributors to non-trauma deaths in hospitals worldwide. The cornerstones of effective treatment of IAIs include early recognition, adequate source control, appropriate antimicrobial therapy, and prompt physiologic stabilization using a critical care environment, combined with an optimal surgical approach. Together, the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), the Global Alliance for Infections in Surgery (GAIS), the Surgical Infection Society-Europe (SIS-E), the World Surgical Infection Society (WSIS), and the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) have jointly completed an international multi-society document in order to facilitate clinical management of patients with IAIs worldwide building evidence-based clinical pathways for the most common IAIs. An extensive non-systematic review was conducted using the PubMed and MEDLINE databases, limited to the English language. The resulting information was shared by an international task force from 46 countries with different clinical backgrounds. The aim of the document is to promote global standards of care in IAIs providing guidance to clinicians by describing reasonable approaches to the management of IAIs.
Fulltext Physiological parameters for Prognosis in Abdominal Sepsis (PIPAS) Study: a WSES observational study

Sartelli M, Abu-Zidan FM, Labricciosa FM, Kluger Y, Coccolini F, Ansaloni L, et al.

World J Emerg Surg, 2019;14:34.
PMID: 31341511 DOI: 10.1186/s13017-019-0253-2

Background: Timing and adequacy of peritoneal source control are the most important pillars in the management of patients with acute peritonitis. Therefore, early prognostic evaluation of acute peritonitis is paramount to assess the severity and establish a prompt and appropriate treatment. The objectives of this study were to identify clinical and laboratory predictors for in-hospital mortality in patients with acute peritonitis and to develop a warning score system, based on easily recognizable and assessable variables, globally accepted.
Methods: This worldwide multicentre observational study included 153 surgical departments across 56 countries over a 4-month study period between February 1, 2018, and May 31, 2018.
Results: A total of 3137 patients were included, with 1815 (57.9%) men and 1322 (42.1%) women, with a median age of 47 years (interquartile range [IQR] 28-66). The overall in-hospital mortality rate was 8.9%, with a median length of stay of 6 days (IQR 4-10). Using multivariable logistic regression, independent variables associated with in-hospital mortality were identified: age > 80 years, malignancy, severe cardiovascular disease, severe chronic kidney disease, respiratory rate ≥ 22 breaths/min, systolic blood pressure < 100 mmHg, AVPU responsiveness scale (voice and unresponsive), blood oxygen saturation level (SpO2) < 90% in air, platelet count < 50,000 cells/mm3, and lactate > 4 mmol/l. These variables were used to create the PIPAS Severity Score, a bedside early warning score for patients with acute peritonitis. The overall mortality was 2.9% for patients who had scores of 0-1, 22.7% for those who had scores of 2-3, 46.8% for those who had scores of 4-5, and 86.7% for those who have scores of 7-8.
Conclusions: The simple PIPAS Severity Score can be used on a global level and can help clinicians to identify patients at high risk for treatment failure and mortality.
Goodbye Hartmann trial: a prospective, international, multicenter, observational study on the current use of a surgical procedure developed a century ago

Perrone G, Giuffrida M, Abu-Zidan F, Kruger VF, Livrini M, Petracca GL, et al.

World J Emerg Surg, 2024 Apr 16;19(1):14.
PMID: 38627831 DOI: 10.1186/s13017-024-00543-w

BACKGROUND: Literature suggests colonic resection and primary anastomosis (RPA) instead of Hartmann's procedure (HP) for the treatment of left-sided colonic emergencies. We aim to evaluate the surgical options globally used to treat patients with acute left-sided colonic emergencies and the factors that leading to the choice of treatment, comparing HP and RPA.
METHODS: This is a prospective, international, multicenter, observational study registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. A total 1215 patients with left-sided colonic emergencies who required surgery were included from 204 centers during the period of March 1, 2020, to May 31, 2020. with a 1-year follow-up.
RESULTS: 564 patients (43.1%) were females. The mean age was 65.9 ± 15.6 years. HP was performed in 697 (57.3%) patients and RPA in 384 (31.6%) cases. Complicated acute diverticulitis was the most common cause of left-sided colonic emergencies (40.2%), followed by colorectal malignancy (36.6%). Severe complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3b) were higher in the HP group (P