Displaying all 4 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Podda M, Pacella D, Pellino G, Coccolini F, Giordano A, Di Saverio S, et al.
    Pancreatology, 2022 Nov;22(7):902-916.
    PMID: 35963665 DOI: 10.1016/j.pan.2022.07.007
    BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Reports about the implementation of recommendations from acute pancreatitis guidelines are scant. This study aimed to evaluate, on a patient-data basis, the contemporary practice patterns of management of biliary acute pancreatitis and to compare these practices with the recommendations by the most updated guidelines.

    METHODS: All consecutive patients admitted to any of the 150 participating general surgery (GS), hepatopancreatobiliary surgery (HPB), internal medicine (IM) and gastroenterology (GA) departments with a diagnosis of biliary acute pancreatitis between 01/01/2019 and 31/12/2020 were included in the study. Categorical data were reported as percentages representing the proportion of all study patients or different and well-defined cohorts for each variable. Continuous data were expressed as mean and standard deviation. Differences between the compliance obtained in the four different subgroups were compared using the Mann-Whitney U, Student's t, ANOVA or Kruskal-Wallis tests for continuous data, and the Chi-square test or the Fisher's exact test for categorical data.

    RESULTS: Complete data were available for 5275 patients. The most commonly discordant gaps between daily clinical practice and recommendations included the optimal timing for the index CT scan (6.1%, χ2 6.71, P = 0.081), use of prophylactic antibiotics (44.2%, χ2 221.05, P 

  2. Sartelli M, Abu-Zidan FM, Catena F, Griffiths EA, Di Saverio S, Coimbra R, et al.
    World J Emerg Surg, 2015;10:61.
    PMID: 26677396 DOI: 10.1186/s13017-015-0055-0
    BACKGROUND: To validate a new practical Sepsis Severity Score for patients with complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAIs) including the clinical conditions at the admission (severe sepsis/septic shock), the origin of the cIAIs, the delay in source control, the setting of acquisition and any risk factors such as age and immunosuppression.
    METHODS: The WISS study (WSES cIAIs Score Study) is a multicenter observational study underwent in 132 medical institutions worldwide during a four-month study period (October 2014-February 2015). Four thousand five hundred thirty-three patients with a mean age of 51.2 years (range 18-99) were enrolled in the WISS study.
    RESULTS: Univariate analysis has shown that all factors that were previously included in the WSES Sepsis Severity Score were highly statistically significant between those who died and those who survived (p 
  3. 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.

  4. 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.

Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links