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 (SpO 2 ) < 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.

No abstract

To evaluate the penetration of cefepime in the inflamed pancreas, three doses of 50 mg/kg were administered intramuscularly at 8-h intervals after induction of acute necrotizing pancreatitis using intraperitoneal injection of DL-ethionine in 35 rabbits and in 33 controls. Animals were sacrificed and concentrations of cefepime were determined by a microbiological assay. Cefepime reached its peak concentrations 60 min after the last drug dose when mean values of 46.05 microg/ml, 22.34 microg/g and 34.74 microg/ml were found in serum, pancreas and bile, respectively, in rabbits with acute necrotizing pancreatitis and 45.19 microg/ml, 12.68 microg/g and 20.77 microg/ml respectively in controls. Tissue/serum ratios of cefepime were 0.48, 0.23, 0.15 and 0.09 at 60, 90, 120 and 180 min, respectively, after the last dose of cefepime in rabbits with acute necrotizing pancreatitis and 0.28, 0.18, 0.16 and 0.16, respectively at 60, 90, 120 and 180 min in controls. It is concluded that the administration of cefepime in rabbits with acute necrotizing pancreatitis resulted in pancreatic tissue levels well above the MIC90s of the common pathogens involved in pancreatic superinfection, so that its administration might be proposed for the therapy of superinfection following acute necrotizing pancreatitis in humans.

No abstract

IntroductionSurgical studies evaluating a device or technology in comparison to an established surgical technique should accurately report all the important components of the surgical technique in order to reduce the risk of intervention bias. In the debate of visualization of the recurrent laryngeal nerve alone (VONA) versus intraoperative nerve monitoring (IONM) during thyroidectomy, surgical technique plays a key role in both strategies. Our aim was to investigate whether the surgical technique was considered as a risk of intervention bias by relevant meta-analyses and reviews and if steps of surgical intervention were described in their included studies.MethodsWe searched PUBMED, CENTRAL—Cochrane library, PROSPERO and GOOGLE for reviews and meta-analyses focusing on the comparison of IONM to VONA in primary open thyroidectomy. Τhen, primary studies were extracted from their reference lists. We developed a typology for surgical technique applied in primary studies and a framework approach for the evaluation of this typology by the meta-analyses and reviews.ResultsTwelve meta-analyses, one review (388,252 nerves at risk), and 84 primary studies (128,720 patients) were included. Five meta-analyses considered the absence of typology regarding the surgical technique as a source of intervention bias; 48 primary studies (57.14%) provided information about at least one item of the typology components and only 1 for all of them.DiscussionSurgical technique of thyroidectomy in terms of a typology is underreported in studies and undervalued by meta-analyses comparing VONA to IONM. This missing typology should be reconsidered in the comparative evaluation of these two strategies.