Georgi Popivanov

What is the effectiveness of the negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) in patients treated with open abdomen technique? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND The open abdomen technique may be used in critically ill patients to manage abdominal injury, reduce the septic complications, and prevent the abdominal compartment syndrome. Many different techniques have been proposed and multiple studies have been conducted, but the best method of temporary abdominal closure has not been determined yet. Recently, new randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials have been published on this topic. We aimed to perform an up-to-date systematic review on the management of open abdomen, including the most recent published randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials, to compare negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) with no NPWT and define if one technique has better outcomes than the other with regard to primary fascial closure, postoperative 30-day mortality and morbidity, enteroatmospheric fistulae, abdominal abscess, bleeding, and length of stay. METHODS According to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement and the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, an online literature research (until July 1, 2015) was performed on MEDLINE, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cochrane Library databases. The MeSH terms and free words used “vacuum assisted closure” “vac;”, “open abdomen”, “damage control surgery”, and “temporary abdominal closure”. No language restriction was made. RESULTS The initial systematic literature search yielded 452 studies. After a careful assessment of the titles and of the full text was obtained, eight articles fulfilled inclusion criteria. We analyzed 1,225 patients, of whom 723 (59%) underwent NPWT and 502 (41%) did not undergo NPWT, and performed four subgroups: VAC versus Bogota bag technique (two studies, 106 participants), VAC versus mesh-foil laparostomy (two studies, 159 participants), VAC versus laparostomy (adhesive impermeable with midline zip) (one study, 106 participants), and NPWT versus no NPWT techniques (three studies, 854 participants) in which it is not possible to perform an analysis of the different types of treatment. Comparing the NPWT group and the group without NPWT, there was no statistically significant difference in fascial closure (63.5% vs 69.5%; odds ratio [OR], 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.27–2.06; p = 0.57), postoperative 30-day overall morbidity (p = 0.19), postoperative enteroatmospheric fistulae rate (2.1% vs 5.8%; OR, 0.63; 95% CIs, 0.12–3.15; p = 0.57), in the postoperative bleeding rate (5.7% vs 14.9%; OR, 0.58; 95% CIs, 0.05–6.84; p = 0.87), and postoperative abdominal abscess rate (2.4% vs 5.6%; OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.13–1.34; p = 0.14). On the other hand, statistical significance was found between the NPWT group and the group without NPWT in the postoperative mortality rate (28.5% vs 41.4%; OR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.23–0.91; p = 0.03) and in the length of stay in the intensive care unit (mean difference, −4.53; 95% CI, −5.46 to 3.60; p < 0.00001). CONCLUSION The limitations of the present analysis might be related to the lack of randomized controlled trials, so there is a risk of selection bias favoring NPWT. For several outcomes, there were few studies, confidence intervals were wide, and inconsistency was high, suggesting that although there were no statistically significant differences between the groups, there was insufficient evidence to show that the outcomes were similar. We can conclude from the current available data that NPWT seems to be associated with a trend toward better outcomes compared to the use of no NPWT. It does reflect the evidence presented in the current systematic review; however, the data should be interpreted with substantial caution given a number of weaknesses (in particular, the lack of statistical significance and heterogeneity between studies, i.e., small sample size of the included studies, high variability between studies). We highlight the need for randomized controlled trials having homogeneous inclusion criteria to assess the use of NPWT for the management of open abdomen. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Systemic review/meta-analysis, level III.

Open abdomen and VAC® in severe diffuse peritonitis

Background Currently, the open abdomen technique is the widely recognised method for treatment of life-threatening trauma, intra-abdominal sepsis, abdominal compartment syndrome and wound dehiscence. The techniques for temporary closure using negative pressure have gained increasing popularity. Although negative pressure wound therapy has been proved as an effective method in trauma, the results in diffuse peritonitis are contradictory. Methods Overall, 108 patients with diffuse peritonitis and open abdomen were prospectively enrolled from January 2006 to December 2013—69 treated with mesh-foil laparostomy without negative pressure and 49 with vacuum-assisted closure (VAC®) The primary endpoints were the rate of primary fascial closure and mortality. The secondary outcomes were the rate of complications—enteroatmospheric fistulas, intra-abdominal abscesses, wound infection and necrotising fasciitis, intensive care unit (ICU) and overall hospital stay. Results VAC was associated with higher overall (73% vs 53%) and late primary fascial closure rates (31% vs 7%), lower rates of necrotising fasciitis (2% vs 15%, p=0.012), intra-abdominal abscesses (10% vs 20%), enteroatmospheric fistulas (8% vs 19%), overall mortality (31% vs 53%, p<0.05), shorter ICU (6.1 vs 10.6 days, p=0.002) and hospital stay (15.1 vs 25.9 days, p=0.000). Conclusions The results clearly suggest the obvious advantage of VAC in comparison to the temporary abdominal closure without negative pressure in the cases with severe diffuse peritonitis. However, to a large extent, our results might be attributed to the combination of VAC with dynamic fascial closure.

A modern combat trauma

Introduction The world remains plagued by wars and terrorist attacks, and improvised explosive devices (IED) are the main weapons of our current enemies, causing almost two-thirds of all combat injuries. We wished to analyse the pattern of blast trauma on the modern battlefield and to compare it with combat gunshot injuries. Materials and methods Analysis of a consecutive series of combat trauma patients presenting to two Bulgarian combat surgical teams in Afghanistan over 11 months. Demographics, injury patterns and Injury Severity Scores (ISS) were compared between blast and gunshot-injured casualties using Fishers Exact Test. Results The blast victims had significantly higher median ISS (20.54 vs 9.23) and higher proportion of ISS>16 (60% vs 33.92%, p=0.008) than gunshot cases. They also had more frequent involvement of three or more body regions (47.22% vs 3.58%, p<0.0001). A significantly higher frequency of head (27.27% vs 3.57%), facial (20% vs 0%) and extremities injuries (85.45% vs 42.86%) and burns (12.72% vs 0%) was noted among the victims of explosion (p<0.0001). Based on clinical examination and diagnostic imaging, primary blast injury was identified in 24/55 (43.6%), secondary blast injury in 37 blast cases (67.3%), tertiary in 15 (27.3%) and quaternary blast injury (all burns) in seven (12.72%). Conclusions Our results corroborate the ‘multidimensional’ injury pattern of blast trauma. The complexity of the blast trauma demands a good knowledge and a special training of the military surgeons and hospital personnel before deployment.

A historical review of surgery for peritonitis secondary to acute colonic diverticulitis: from Lockhart-Mummery to evidence-based medicine

The management of patients with colonic diverticular perforation is still evolving. Initial lavage with or without simple suture and drainage was suggested in the late 19th century, replaced progressively by the three-stage Mayo Clinic or the two-stage Mickulicz procedures. Fears of inadequate source control prompted the implementation of the resection of the affected segment of colon with formation of a colostomy (Hartman procedure) in the 1970’s. Ensuing development of the treatment strategies was driven by the recognition of the high morbidity and mortality and low reversal rates associated with the Hartman procedure. This led to the wider use of resection and primary anastomosis during the 1990’s.The technique of lavage and drainage regained popularity during the 1990’s. This procedure can also be performed laparoscopically with the advantage of faster recovery and shorter hospital stay. This strategy allows resectional surgery to be postponed or avoided altogether in many patients; and higher rates of primary resection and anastomosis can be achieved avoiding the need for a stoma. The three recent randomized controlled trials comparing laparoscopic peritoneal lavage alone to resectional surgery reported inconsistent outcomes.The aim of this review is to review the historical evolution and future reflections of surgical treatment modalities for diffuse purulent and feculent peritonitis. In this review we classified the various surgical strategies according to Krukowski et al. and Vermeulen et al. and reviewed the literature related to surgical treatment separately for each period.

Medical aspects of terrorist bombings – a focus on DCS and DCR

Although terrorist bombings have tormented the world for a long time, currently they have reached unprecedented levels and become a continuous threat without borders, race or age. Almost all of them are caused by improvised explosive devices. The unpredictability of the terrorist bombings, leading to simultaneous generation of a large number of casualties and severe “multidimensional” blast trauma require a constant vigilance and preparedness of every hospital worldwide. Approximately 1-2.6% of all trauma patients and 7% of the combat casualties require a massive blood transfusion. Coagulopathy is presented in 65% of them with mortality exceeding 50%. Damage control resuscitation is a novel approach, developed in the military practice for treatment of this subgroup of trauma patients. The comparison with the conventional approach revealed mortality reduction with 40-74%, lower frequency of abdominal compartment syndrome (8% vs. 16%), sepsis (9% vs. 20%), multiorgan failure (16% vs. 37%) and a significant reduction of resuscitation volumes, both crystalloids and blood products. DCS and DCR are promising new approaches, contributing for the mortality reduction among the most severely wounded patients. Despite the lack of consensus about the optimal ratio of the blood products and the possible influence of the survival bias, we think that DCR carries survival benefit and recommend it in trauma patients with exsanguinating bleeding.

Surgical treatment of gastrointestinal stromal tumors of the duodenum: a literature review

Background Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) are the most frequent mesenchymal tumours in the digestive tract. The duodenal GIST (dGIST) is the rarest subtype, representing only 4-5% of all GIST, but up to 21% of the resected ones. The diagnostic and therapeutic management of dGIST may be difficult due to the rarity of this tumor, its anatomical location, and the clinical behavior that often mimic a variety of conditions; moreover, there is lack of consent for their treatment. This study has evaluated the scientific literature to provide consensus on the diagnosis of dGIST and to outline possible options for surgical treatment. Methods An extensive research has been carried out on the electronic databases MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE and Cochrane to identify all clinical trials that report an event or case series of dGIST. Results Eighty-six studies that met the inclusion criteria were identified with five hundred forty-nine patients with dGIST: twenty-seven patients were treated with pancreatoduodenectomy and ninety-six with only local resection (segmental/wedge resections); in four hundred twenty-six patients it is not possible identify the type of treatment performed (pancreatoduodenectomy or segmental/wedge resections). Conclusions dGISTs are a very rare subset of GISTs. They may be asymptomatic or may involve symptoms of upper GI bleeding and abdominal pain at presentation. Because of the misleading clinical presentation the differential diagnosis may be difficult. Tumours smaller than 2 cm have a low biological aggressiveness and can be followed annually by endoscopic ultrasound. The biggest ones should undergo radical surgical resection (R0). In dGIST there is no uniformly adopted surgical strategy because of the low incidence, lack of experience, and the complex anatomy of the duodenum. Therefore, individually tailored surgical approach is recommended. R0 resection with 1-2 cm clear margin is required. Lymph node dissection is not recommended due to the low incidence of lymphatic metastases. Tumor rupture should be avoided.

Modified Paul-Mikulicz jejunostomy in frail geriatric patients undergoing emergency small bowel resection

BACKGROUND Proximal or extended bowel resections are sometimes necessary during emergency surgery of the small bowel and call for creating a high small bowel stomy as a part of damage control surgery. Secondary restoration of intestinal continuity in the frail geriatric patient, further weakened by subsequent severe malabsorption may be prohibitive. METHODS Six patients underwent emergency small bowel resection for proximal jejunal disease (83.3% high-grade adhesive SBO and 16.7% jejunal diverticulitis complicated with perforation). With the intention to avoid end jejunostomy and the need for repeat laparotomy for bowel continuity restoration we modified the classic Paul-Mikulicz jejunostomy. RESULTS The postoperative course was uneventful in four patients whose general condition improved considerably. At six-month follow-up, neither patients required parenteral nutrition. CONCLUSIONS This modified stoma can have the advantage of allowing a partial passage of the enteric contents, reducing the degree of malabsorption, and rendering jejunostomy reversal easy to perform later.

Quality of life after laparoscopic surgery of uncomplicated diverticular disease

Diverticular disease (DD) affects mainly the people in the Western countries and has a great socioeconomic impact. In USA, DD accounts for approximately 267,000 hospitalizations per year with significant increase in the young adults (18–64 years) (1). The total cost exceeds 5% from the annual surgical budget (2).

Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy

Wound frequently complicates the quality of life of these patients. Despite the significant number of publications made on the subject are very few randomized trials published. It follows that the available evidence in the literature is of low level. The application of NPWT in treatment of the wound is very heterogeneous: negative-pressure wound therapy for treating surgical wound healing by secondary intention; negative-pressure wound therapy for treating leg ulcers; and negative-pressure wound therapy for treating pressure ulcers. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified through a systematic review of published literature (full article, thesis, or abstract). The types of interventions were NPWT in experimental group versus SWHSI in control group (surgical debridement, enzyme or chemical necrosectomy). We identified nine publications that fulfilled the inclusion criteria: six publications reported data about pressure ulcers, two publications reported data about the surgical wound healing by secondary intention (SWHSI), and one publication reported data about the leg ulcers. Despite the considerable amount of studies on the subject, the number of RCTs is modest. Patient characteristics, treatment, and outcome analyzed are very different. For these reasons it’s impossible to perform a meta-analysis. Our update systematic reviews of the literature did not lead to any new conclusions. Our result is still a result of the bias of publications.

A single gunshot wound of the face with simultaneous aspiration and ingestion of two bullets

### Key messages There is an increasing prevalence of civilian gunshot injuries over the last two decades around the world: approximately 29 000 deaths from gunshot wounds (GSWs) were recorded in USA in 2000,[1][1] 4558 firearms accidents were registered in 2007 in Germany, along with increasing