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.

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.

The issue of bacterial infections in COVID-19 patients has received increasing attention among scientists. Antibiotics were widely prescribed during the early phase of the pandemic. We performed a literature review to assess the reasons, evidence and practices on the use of antibiotics in COVID-19 in- and outpatients. Published articles providing data on antibiotics use in COVID-19 patients were identified through computerized literature searches on the MEDLINE and SCOPUS databases. Searching the MEDLINE database, the following search terms were adopted: ((antibiotic) AND (COVID-19)). Searching the SCOPUS database, the following search terms were used: ((antibiotic treatment) AND (COVID-19)). The risk of bias in the included studies was not assessed. Both quantitative and qualitative information were summarized by means of textual descriptions. Five-hundred-ninety-three studies were identified, published from January 2020 to 30 October 2022. Thirty-six studies were included in this systematic review. Of the 36 included studies, 32 studies were on the use of antibiotics in COVID-19 inpatients and 4 on antibiotic use in COVID-19 outpatients. Apart from the studies identified and included in the review, the main recommendations on antibiotic treatment from 5 guidelines for the clinical management of COVID-19 were also summarized in a separate paragraph. Antibiotics should not be prescribed during COVID-19 unless there is a strong clinical suspicion of bacterial coinfection or superinfection.

Background: One of the main challenges in the management of COVID-19 patients is to early assess and stratify them according to their risk of developing severe pneumonia. The alveolar–arterial oxygen gradient (D(A-a)O2) is defined as the difference between the alveolar and arteriolar concentration of oxygen, an accurate index of the ventilatory function. The aim of this study is to evaluate D(A-a)O2 as a marker for predicting severe pneumonia in COVID-19 patients, in comparison to the PaO2/FiO2. Methods: This retrospective, multicentric cohort study included COVID-19 patients admitted to two Italian hospitals between April and July 2020. Clinical and laboratory data were retrospectively collected at the time of hospital admission and during hospitalization. The presence of severe COVID-19 pneumonia was evaluated, as defined by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) criteria for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). Patients were divided in severe and non-severe groups. Results: Overall, 53 COVID-19 patients were included in the study: male were 30/53 (57%), and 10/53 (19%) had severe pneumonia. Patients with severe pneumonia reported dyspnea more often than non-severe patients (90% vs. 39.5%; p = 0.031). A history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) was recalled by 5/10 (50%) patients with severe pneumonia, and only in 6/43 (1.4%) of non-severe cases (p = 0.023). A ROC curve, for D(A-a)O2 >60 mmHg in detecting severe pneumonia, showed an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.877 (95% CI: 0.675–1), while the AUC of PaO2/FiO2 < 263 mmHg resulted 0.802 (95% CI: 0.544–1). D(A-a)O2 in comparison to PaO2/FiO2 had a higher sensibility (77.8% vs. 66.7%), positive predictive value (75% vs. 71.4%), negative predictive value (94% vs. 91%), and similar specificity (94.4% vs. 95.5%). Conclusions: Our study suggests that the D(A-a)O2 is more appropriate than PaO2/FiO2 to identify COVID-19 patients at risk of developing severe pneumonia early.