Peri-operative SARS-CoV-2 infection increases postoperative mortality. The aim of this study was to determine the optimal duration of planned delay before surgery in patients who have had SARS-CoV-2 infection. This international, multicentre, prospective cohort study included patients undergoing elective or emergency surgery during October 2020. Surgical patients with pre-operative SARS-CoV-2 infection were compared with those without previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. The primary outcome measure was 30-day postoperative mortality. Logistic regression models were used to calculate adjusted 30-day mortality rates stratified by time from diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection to surgery. Among 140,231 patients (116 countries), 3127 patients (2.2%) had a pre-operative SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. Adjusted 30-day mortality in patients without SARS-CoV-2 infection was 1.5% (95%CI 1.4-1.5). In patients with a pre-operative SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, mortality was increased in patients having surgery within 0-2 weeks, 3-4 weeks and 5-6 weeks of the diagnosis (odds ratio (95%CI) 4.1 (3.3-4.8), 3.9 (2.6-5.1) and 3.6 (2.0-5.2), respectively). Surgery performed ≥ 7 weeks after SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis was associated with a similar mortality risk to baseline (odds ratio (95%CI) 1.5 (0.9-2.1)). After a ≥ 7 week delay in undertaking surgery following SARS-CoV-2 infection, patients with ongoing symptoms had a higher mortality than patients whose symptoms had resolved or who had been asymptomatic (6.0% (95%CI 3.2-8.7) vs. 2.4% (95%CI 1.4-3.4) vs. 1.3% (95%CI 0.6-2.0), respectively). Where possible, surgery should be delayed for at least 7 weeks following SARS-CoV-2 infection. Patients with ongoing symptoms ≥ 7 weeks from diagnosis may benefit from further delay.
SARS-CoV-2 has been associated with an increased rate of venous thromboembolism in critically ill patients. Since surgical patients are already at higher risk of venous thromboembolism than general populations, this study aimed to determine if patients with peri-operative or prior SARS-CoV-2 were at further increased risk of venous thromboembolism. We conducted a planned sub-study and analysis from an international, multicentre, prospective cohort study of elective and emergency patients undergoing surgery during October 2020. Patients from all surgical specialties were included. The primary outcome measure was venous thromboembolism (pulmonary embolism or deep vein thrombosis) within 30 days of surgery. SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis was defined as peri-operative (7 days before to 30 days after surgery); recent (1-6 weeks before surgery); previous (≥7 weeks before surgery); or none. Information on prophylaxis regimens or pre-operative anti-coagulation for baseline comorbidities was not available. Postoperative venous thromboembolism rate was 0.5% (666/123,591) in patients without SARS-CoV-2; 2.2% (50/2317) in patients with peri-operative SARS-CoV-2; 1.6% (15/953) in patients with recent SARS-CoV-2; and 1.0% (11/1148) in patients with previous SARS-CoV-2. After adjustment for confounding factors, patients with peri-operative (adjusted odds ratio 1.5 (95%CI 1.1-2.0)) and recent SARS-CoV-2 (1.9 (95%CI 1.2-3.3)) remained at higher risk of venous thromboembolism, with a borderline finding in previous SARS-CoV-2 (1.7 (95%CI 0.9-3.0)). Overall, venous thromboembolism was independently associated with 30-day mortality ). In patients with SARS-CoV-2, mortality without venous thromboembolism was 7.4% (319/4342) and with venous thromboembolism was 40.8% (31/76). Patients undergoing surgery with peri-operative or recent SARS-CoV-2 appear to be at increased risk of postoperative venous thromboembolism compared with patients with no history of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Optimal venous thromboembolism prophylaxis and treatment are unknown in this cohort of patients, and these data should be interpreted accordingly.
Patient: Male, 58Final Diagnosis: Peritoneal loose bodySymptoms: Abdominal pain • hematuriaMedication: —Clinical Procedure: Diagnostic laparoscopySpecialty: SurgeryObjective:Unusual clinical courseBackground:Peritoneal loose bodies, also known as peritoneal mice, are rare findings and they present either with nonspecific symptoms or are found incidentally during exploration and autopsy. Usually, they have no clinical significance and require no specific treatment. We report a case of a giant peritoneal loose body found incidentally in the abdominal cavity of a patient who presented with abdominal pain and hematuria.Case Report:Our patient was a 58-year-old man who presented with abdominal pain and hematuria. Abdominal non-contrast computed tomography (CT) and subsequent CT abdomen and pelvis with intravenous and oral rectal contrast were performed preoperatively, showing a well-circumscribed and calcified lesion of undetermined etiology in the abdominal cavity. The lesion was removed laparoscopically with no complications. Histopathologically, the lesion was reported as calcified tissue with fat necrosis, most likely an infarcted appendix epiploicae.Conclusions:Loose peritoneal bodies can present a challenging diagnostic problem to the surgeon, with confusing findings that can point towards malignancy. It often requires a number of investigations; however even with these investigations, operative exploration, either open or laparoscopic, can be the ultimate diagnostic and therapeutic modality, and the mobility of these calcified lesions may give a preoperative clue to the etiology. It is important to distinguish peritoneal loose bodies from neoplastic or metastatic lesions and to consider it in the differential diagnosis of a calcified mobile pelvic mass. Laparoscopic surgery is safe and effective in the retrieval of symptomatic peritoneal loose bodies.
Background: We aimed to study the prevalence and outcomes of thrombophilia in acute pulmonary embolism. Methods: A retrospective observational study was conducted to include patients with a radiologically confirmed diagnosis of PE screened for thrombophilia from May 2011 to February 2015. Data included patients' demographics; clinical presentation, risk factors, laboratory investigations, management, and outcome were analyzed and compared in patients with and without thrombophilia. Results: A total of 227 cases of PE were included in the study, of which 108 (47.6%) had thrombophilia. The most frequent coagulopathic abnormality included deficiency of protein S, protein C, and antithrombin III and hyperhomocysteinemia. Only seven out of 79 patients were found to have factor V Leiden. PE patients diagnosed with thrombophilia were 10 years younger in age and peaked in the age range 30-39 years. Prior history of DVT (p=0.001) and PE (p=0.001) were the main significant risk factors in the thrombophilia group. The frequency of different risk categories of clinical probability scores did not differ significantly among those with and without thrombophilia. Pulmonary hypertension was a common complication in the thrombophilia group (P=0.009). Medications used included warfarin (74.7%), enoxaparin (73.9%), and heparin (55.4%). The overall mortality rate was 8.4%, and was non-significantly higher in the non-thrombophilia group. Conclusion: Deficiencies of protein S, protein C, and antithrombin III are the leading causes of thrombophilic defects. Patients with hereditary thrombophilia are at increased risk of acute PE, particularly among young individuals. Therefore, early detection of thrombophilic defects together with other unprovoked risk factors could reduce the risk of recurrent VTE.
A best evidence topic has been constructed using a described protocol. The three-part question addressed was: In [patients undergoing bariatric surgery], is [intraperitoneal local bupivacaine during the operation ] associated with [ lower pain score and decrease in post operative pain medications]? The search has been done and six randomized trial studies are considered to be appropriate to answer this question. The outcome assessed is the value of intraperitoneal bupivacaine in bariatric surgery in terms of effect on the pain score and post operative analgesia. We concluded that intraperitoneal bupivacaine causes improvement in both the pain score and post operative analgesia.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.