BackgroundAcute 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.MethodsThis 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.ResultsA 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%.ConclusionsThe 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.

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.

Background In patients undergoing resuscitative thoracotomy (RT) for traumatic cardiac arrest, focused assessment with sonography for trauma (FAST) is often used to look for intraperitoneal fluid. These findings can help determine whether abdominal exploration is warranted once return of spontaneous circulation is achieved; however, the diagnostic accuracy of FAST in this clinical scenario has yet to be evaluated. The purpose of this study was to assess the performance of FAST in identifying intra-abdominal hemorrhage following RT. Methods We performed a 3-year retrospective study at a high-volume level 1 trauma center from 2014 to 2016. We included patients who underwent RT in the Emergency Department. All FAST examinations were performed by nonradiologists. Operative findings, computed tomography reports, diagnostic peritoneal aspirate (DPA) results, and autopsy findings were used as reference standards to calculate the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy of the FAST. Results A total of 158 patients met our inclusion criteria. The median age was 35 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 23-53), 86.1% were male, and 60.1% sustained blunt trauma. Most patients suffered severe injuries with a median injury severity score of 27 (IQR: 18-38). The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and accuracy of FAST for identifying intra-abdominal hemorrhage were 66.0%, 84.8%, 68.6%, 83.2%, and 78.5%, respectively. Among the 107 patients with a negative FAST, 22 (20.6%) underwent DPA, which was positive in 5 patients. Conclusions FAST can be utilized in the diagnostic workup of trauma patients after RT. In patients with a positive FAST, exploratory laparotomy is warranted, whereas other diagnostic adjuncts such as DPA or mandatory abdominal exploration may be considered in patients with a negative FAST.

Background The use of Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma (FAST) in combination with computed tomography (CT) has become the mainstay of diagnostic workup in patients with suspected intraabdominal hemorrhage (IAH). However, diagnostic peritoneal aspirate (DPA) can be an important adjunct in hemodynamically unstable patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the utility and diagnostic accuracy of DPA in detecting IAH. Methods Retrospective analysis of all patients who presented to the LAC+USC Medical Center and underwent evaluation with DPA between January 2010 and December 2016. Intraoperative, CT, and autopsy findings were used as gold standards in determining the diagnostic accuracy of DPA for the detection of IAH. Results A total of 73 consecutive patients were included in the study. The median age was 42 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 25-56), median injury severity score was 29 (IQR: 21-41), and 82.2% sustained blunt trauma. The most common indications for DPA were hemodynamically unstable patients with suspected IAH and patients with return of spontaneous circulation following resuscitative thoracotomy. Overall, the positive and negative predictive values of DPA were 89.4% and 88.9%, respectively. In 14 cases (19.2%), DPA correctly identified false positive/negative FAST results. Conclusion Our data suggest that DPA has high diagnostic yield for IAH. The use of DPA should be considered in unstable patients with inconclusive FAST results who cannot safely be evaluated with CT.