Search

Background: Rib fractures are one of the most common traumatic injuries and may result in significant morbidity and mortality. Despite growing evidence, technological advances and increasing acceptance, surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) remains not uniformly considered in trauma centers. Indications, contraindications, appropriate timing, surgical approaches and utilized implants are part of an ongoing debate. The present position paper, which is endorsed by the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), and supported by the Chest Wall Injury Society, aims to provide a review of the literature investigating the use of SSRF in rib fracture management to develop graded position statements, providing an updated guide and reference for SSRF., Methods: This position paper was developed according to the WSES methodology. A steering committee performed the literature review and drafted the position paper. An international panel of experts then critically revised the manuscript and discussed it in detail, to develop a consensus on the position statements., Results: A total of 287 studies (systematic reviews, randomized clinical trial, prospective and retrospective comparative studies, case series, original articles) have been selected from an initial pool of 9928 studies. Thirty-nine graded position statements were put forward to address eight crucial aspects of SSRF: surgical indications, contraindications, optimal timing of surgery, preoperative imaging evaluation, rib fracture sites for surgical fixation, management of concurrent thoracic injuries, surgical approach, stabilization methods and material selection., Conclusion: This consensus document addresses the key focus questions on surgical treatment of rib fractures. The expert recommendations clarify current evidences on SSRF indications, timing, operative planning, approaches and techniques, with the aim to guide clinicians in optimizing the management of rib fractures, to improve patient outcomes and direct future research., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Laparoscopy is widely adopted across nearly all surgical subspecialties in the elective setting. Initially finding indication in minor abdominal emergencies, it has gradually become the standard approach in the majority of elective general surgery procedures. Despite many technological advances and increasing acceptance, the laparoscopic approach remains underutilized in emergency general surgery and in abdominal trauma. Emergency laparotomy continues to carry a high morbidity and mortality. In recent years, there has been a growing interest from emergency and trauma surgeons in adopting minimally invasive surgery approaches in the acute surgical setting. The present position paper, supported by the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), aims to provide a review of the literature to reach a consensus on the indications and benefits of a laparoscopic-first approach in patients requiring emergency abdominal surgery for general surgery emergencies or abdominal trauma., Methods: This position paper was developed according to the WSES methodology. A steering committee performed the literature review and drafted the position paper. An international panel of 54 experts then critically revised the manuscript and discussed it in detail, to develop a consensus on a position statement., Results: A total of 323 studies (systematic review and meta-analysis, randomized clinical trial, retrospective comparative cohort studies, case series) have been selected from an initial pool of 7409 studies. Evidence demonstrates several benefits of the laparoscopic approach in stable patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery for general surgical emergencies or abdominal trauma. The selection of a stable patient seems to be of paramount importance for a safe adoption of a laparoscopic approach. In hemodynamically stable patients, the laparoscopic approach was found to be safe, feasible and effective as a therapeutic tool or helpful to identify further management steps and needs, resulting in improved outcomes, regardless of conversion. Appropriate patient selection, surgeon experience and rigorous minimally invasive surgical training, remain crucial factors to increase the adoption of laparoscopy in emergency general surgery and abdominal trauma., Conclusions: The WSES expert panel suggests laparoscopy as the first approach for stable patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery for general surgery emergencies and abdominal trauma., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Objectives: The primary end point was the compliance rate with guidelines. The secondaries were mortality, hospital stay, and costs., Methods: This study included 1904 patients with acute pancreatitis (AP): group A, diagnosed before 2013, and group B, after 2013., Results: The compliance rate was 0.6%. The compliance rates increased for fluid resuscitation (3.3% vs 13.7%, P < 0.001), for antibiotics use (21.9% vs 28.1%, P = 0.002), for oral feeding (55.0% vs 49.7%, P = 0.007), and for correct use of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) (83% vs 91.9%, P < 0.001). Compliance to severity assessment with computed tomography (odds ratio [OR], 0.4; P = 0.029), parenteral nutrition recommendations (OR, 0.3; P = 0.009), and early surgery (OR, 0.3; P = 0.010) reduced the mortality. Compliance to antibiotic therapy (OR, 0.6; P < 0.001), correct use of parenteral nutrition (OR, 0.3; P < 0.001), correct use of ERCP (OR, 0.5; P < 0.001), and early surgery (OR, 0.3; P = 0.010) reduced hospital stay. The compliance reduced the costs for parenteral nutrition (P < 0.001), correct use of ERCP (P = 0.011), and surgery (P = 0.010)., Conclusions: The adherence to guidelines for AP was low. Compliance could reduce mortality, prolonged hospital stay, and costs., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)