Search

Intra-abdominal infections (IAIs) account for a major cause of morbidity and mortality, representing the second most common sepsis-related death with a hospital mortality of 23-38%. Prompt identification of sepsis source, appropriate resuscitation, and early treatment with the shortest delay possible are the cornerstones of management of IAIs and are associated with a more favorable clinical outcome. The aim of source control is to reduce microbial load by removing the infection source and it is achievable by using a wide range of procedures, such as definitive surgical removal of anatomic infectious foci, percutaneous drainage and toilette of infected collections, decompression, and debridement of infected and necrotic tissue or device removal, providing for the restoration of anatomy and function. Damage control surgery may be an option in selected septic patients. Intra-abdominal infections can be classified as uncomplicated or complicated causing localized or diffuse peritonitis. Early clinical evaluation is mandatory in order to optimize diagnostic testing and establish a therapeutic plan. Prognostic scores could serve as helpful tools in medical settings for evaluating both the seriousness and future outlook of a condition. The patient's conditions and the potential progression of the disease determine when to initiate source control. Patients can be classified into three groups based on disease severity, the origin of infection, and the patient's overall physical health, as well as any existing comorbidities. In recent decades, antibiotic resistance has become a global health threat caused by inappropriate antibiotic regimens, inadequate control measures, and infection prevention. The sepsis prevention and infection control protocols combined with optimizing antibiotic administration are crucial to improve outcome and should be encouraged in surgical departments. Antibiotic and antifungal regimens in patients with IAIs should be based on the resistance epidemiology, clinical conditions, and risk for multidrug resistance (MDR) and Candida spp. infections. Several challenges still exist regarding the effectiveness, timing, and patient stratification, as well as the procedures for source control. Antibiotic choice, optimal dosing, and duration of therapy are essential to achieve the best treatment. Promoting standard of care in the management of IAIs improves clinical outcomes worldwide. Further trials and stronger evidence are required to achieve optimal management with the least morbidity in the clinical care of critically ill patients with intra-abdominal sepsis.

Patients with intra-abdominal sepsis suffer from significant mortality and morbidity. The main pillars of treatment for intra-abdominal infections are (1) source control and (2) early delivery of antibiotics. Antibiotic therapy should be started as soon as possible. However, the duration of antibiotics remains a matter of debate. Prolonged antibiotic delivery can lead to increased microbial resistance and the development of nosocomial infections. There has been much research on biomarkers and their ability to aid the decision on when to stop antibiotics. Some of these biomarkers include interleukins, C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin (PCT). PCT's value as a biomarker has been a focus area of research in recent years. Most studies use either a cut-off value of 0.50 ng/mL or an >80% reduction in PCT levels to determine when to stop antibiotics. This paper performs a literature review and provides a synthesized up-to-date global overview on the value of PCT in managing intra-abdominal infections.

Introduction . Sepsis is an overwhelming reaction to infection with significant morbidity, requiring urgent interventions in order to improve outcomes. The 2016 Sepsis-3 guidelines modified the previous definitions of sepsis and septic shock, and proposed some specific diagnostic and therapeutic measures to define the use of fluid resuscitation and antibiotics. However, some open issues still exist. Methods . A literature research was performed on PubMed and Cochrane using the terms "sepsis" AND "intra-abdominal infections" AND ("antibiotic therapy" OR "antibiotic treatment"). The inclusion criteria were management of intra-abdominal infection (IAI) and effects of antibiotic stewardships programs (ASP) on the outcome of the patients. Discussion. Sepsis-3 definitions represent an added value in the understanding of sepsis mechanisms and in the management of the disease. However, some questions are still open, such as the need for an early identification of sepsis. Sepsis management in the context of IAI is particularly challenging and a prompt diagnosis is essential in order to perform a quick treatment (source control and antibiotic treatment). Antibiotic empirical therapy should be based on the kind of infection (community or hospital acquired), local resistances, and patient's characteristic and comorbidities , and should be adjusted or de-escalated as soon as microbiological information is available. Antibiotic Stewardship Programs (ASP) have demonstrated to improve antimicrobial utilization with reduction of infections, emergence of multi-drug resistant bacteria, and costs. Surgeons should not be alone in the management of IAI but ideally inserted in a sepsis team together with anaesthesiologists, medical physicians, pharmacists, and infectious diseases specialists, meeting periodically to reassess the response to the treatment. Conclusion. The cornerstones of sepsis management are accurate diagnosis, early resuscitation, effective source control, and timely initiation of appropriate antimicrobial therapy. Current evidence shows that optimizing antibiotic use across surgical specialities is imperative to improve outcomes. Ideally every hospital and every emergency surgery department should aim to provide a sepsis team in order to manage IAI.

Background. Antibiotic treatment in emergency general surgery (EGS) is a major challenge for surgeons, and a multidisciplinary approach is necessary in order to improve outcomes. Intra-abdominal infections are at high risk of increased morbidity and mortality, and prolonged hospitalization. An increase in multi-drug resistance bacterial infections and a tendency to an antibiotic overuse has been described in surgical settings. In this clinical scenario, antibiotic de-escalation (ADE) is emerging as a strategy to improve the management of antibiotic therapy. The objective of this article is to summarize the available evidence, current strategies and unsolved problems for the optimization of ADE in EGS. Methods. A literature search was performed on PubMed and Cochrane using "de-escalation", "antibiotic therapy" and "antibiotic treatment" as research terms. Results. There is no universally accepted definition for ADE. Current evidence shows that ADE is a feasible strategy in the EGS setting, with the ability to optimize antibiotic use, to reduce hospitalization and health care costs, without compromising clinical outcome. Many studies focus on Intensive Care Unit patients, and a call for further studies is required in the EGS community. Current guidelines already recommend ADE when surgery for uncomplicated appendicitis and cholecystitis reaches a complete source control. Conclusions. ADE in an effective and feasible strategy in EGS patients, in order to optimize antibiotic management without compromising clinical outcomes. A collaborative effort between surgeons, intensivists and infectious disease specialists is mandatory. There is a strong need for further studies selectively focusing in the EGS ward setting.

Background: The available evidence on the effects of daylight saving time (DST) transitions on major cardiovascular diseases is limited and conflicting. We carried out the first meta-analysis aimed at evaluating the risk of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) following DST transitions., Methods: We searched cohort or case-control studies evaluating the incidence of AMI, among adults (≥18 y), during the weeks following spring and/or autumn DST shifts, versus control periods. The search was made in MedLine and Scopus, up to 31 December 2018, with no language restriction. A summary odds ratio of AMI was computed after: (1) spring, (2) autumn or (3) both transitions considered together. Meta-analyses were also stratified by gender and age. Data were combined using a generic inverse-variance approach., Results: Seven studies (>115,000 subjects) were included in the analyses. A significantly higher risk of AMI (Odds Ratio: 1.03; 95% CI: 1.01⁻1.06) was observed during the two weeks following spring or autumn DST transitions. However, although AMI risk increased significantly after the spring shift (OR: 1.05; 1.02⁻1.07), the incidence of AMI during the week after winter DST transition was comparable with control periods (OR 1.01; 0.98⁻1.04). No substantial differences were observed when the analyses were stratified by age or gender., Conclusion: The risk of AMI increases modestly but significantly after DST transitions, supporting the proposal of DST shifts discontinuation. Additional studies that fully adjust for potential confounders are required to confirm the present findings.