Search

Background: Less invasive alternatives than Early Cholecystectomy (EC) for Acute Calculous Cholecystitis (ACC) treatment have been spreading in recent years. We still lack a reliable tool to select high-risk patients who could benefit from these alternatives. Our study aimed to prospectively validate the Chole-Risk score in predicting postoperative complications in patients undergoing EC for ACC compared with other pre-operative risk prediction models. Method: The S.P.Ri.M.A.C.C. study is a World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) prospective multicenter observational study. From 1st September 2021 to 1st September 2022, 1253 consecutive patients admitted in 79 centers were included. The inclusion criteria were a diagnosis of ACC and to be a candidate for EC. A Cochran-Armitage test of the trend was run to determine whether a linear correlation existed between the Chole-risk score and a complicated postoperative course. To assess the accuracy of the analyzed prediction models - POSSUM Physiological Score (PS), modified Frailty Index, Charlson Comorbidity Index, American Society of Anesthesiologist score (ASA), APACHE II score, ACC severity grade - receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) was used to compare the diagnostic abilities. Results: A 30-day major morbidity of 6.6% and 30-day-mortality of 1.1% were found. Chole-risk was validated, but POSSUM PS was the best risk prediction model for a complicated course after EC for ACC (in-hospital mortality: AUC 0.94, p Trial Registration: ClinicalTrial.gov NCT04995380

BACKGROUND: Trauma field triage matches injured patients to the appropriate level of care. Prior work suggests the Glasgow Coma Scale motor (GCSm) is as accurate as the total GCS (GCSt), and easier to use. However, older patients present with higher GCS for a given injury and as such it is unclear if this substitution is advisable. Our objective was to compare the GCS deficit patterns between geriatric and adult patients presenting with severe TBI, as well as the diagnostic performance of the GCSm versus GCSt within the field triage criteria in these populations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, observational cohort study of patients ≥16 years in the National Trauma Data Bank 2007-15. GCS deficit patterns were compared between adults (16-65) and geriatric patients (>65). Measures of diagnostic performance of GCSt≤13 versus GCSm≤5 criteria to predict trauma center need (TCN) were compared. RESULTS: 4,480,185 patients were analyzed (28% geriatric). Geriatric patients more frequently presented with non-motor only deficits than adults (16.4% vs. 12.4%, p

BACKGROUND The National Field Triage Guidelines were created to inform triage decisions by emergency medical services (EMS) providers and include eight anatomic injuries that prompt transportation to a Level I/II trauma center. It is unclear how accurately EMS providers recognize these injuries. Our objective was to compare EMS-identified anatomic triage criteria with International Classification of Diseases-10th revision (ICD-10) coding of these criteria, as well as their association with trauma center need (TCN). METHODS Scene patients 16 years and older in the NTDB during 2017 were included. National Field Triage Guidelines anatomic criteria were classified based on EMS documentation and ICD-10 diagnosis codes. The primary outcome was TCN, a composite of Injury Severity Score greater than 15, intensive care unit admission, urgent surgery, or emergency department death. Prevalence of anatomic criteria and their association with TCN was compared in EMS-identified versus ICD-10-coded criteria. Diagnostic performance to predict TCN was compared. RESULTS There were 669,795 patients analyzed. The ICD-10 coding demonstrated a greater prevalence of injury detection. Emergency medical service-identified versus ICD-10-coded anatomic criteria were less sensitive (31% vs. 59%), but more specific (91% vs. 73%) and accurate (71% vs. 68%) for predicting TCN. Emergency medical service providers demonstrated a marked reduction in false positives (9% vs. 27%) but higher rates of false negatives (69% vs. 42%) in predicting TCN from anatomic criteria. Odds of TCN were significantly greater for EMS-identified criteria (adjusted odds ratio, 4.5; 95% confidence interval, 4.46-4.58) versus ICD-10 coding (adjusted odds ratio 3.7; 95% confidence interval, 3.71-3.79). Of EMS-identified injuries, penetrating injury, flail chest, and two or more proximal long bone fractures were associated with greater TCN than ICD-10 coding. CONCLUSION When evaluating the anatomic criteria, EMS demonstrate greater specificity and accuracy in predicting TCN, as well as reduced false positives compared with ICD-10 coding. Emergency medical services identification is less sensitive for anatomic criteria; however, EMS identify the most clinically significant injuries. Further study is warranted to identify the most clinically important anatomic triage criteria to improve our triage protocols. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Care management, Level IV; Prognostic, Level III.

Abdominal vascular trauma accounts for a small percentage of military and a moderate percentage of civilian trauma, affecting all age ranges and impacting young adult men most frequently. Penetrating causes are more frequent than blunt in adults, while blunt mechanisms are more common among pediatric populations. High rates of associated injuries, bleeding, and hemorrhagic shock ensure that, despite advances in both diagnostic and therapeutic technologies, immediate open surgical repair remains the mainstay of treatment for traumatic abdominal vascular injuries. Because of their devastating nature, abdominal vascular injuries remain a significant source of morbidity and mortality among trauma patients. The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma in conjunction with the World Society of Emergency Surgery seek to summarize the literature to date and provide guidelines on the presentation, diagnosis, and treatment of abdominal vascular injuries. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Review study, level IV.

BACKGROUND: There are well-known disparities for patients injured in rural setting versus urban setting. Many cite access to care; however, the mechanisms are not defined. One potential factor is differences in field triage. Our objective was to evaluate differences in prehospital undertriage (UT) in rural setting versus urban settings. METHODS: Adult patients in the Pennsylvania Trauma Outcomes Study (PTOS) registry 2000 to 2017 were included. Rural/urban setting was defined by county according to the Pennsylvania Trauma Systems Foundation. Rural/urban classification was performed for patients and centers. Undertriage was defined as patients meeting physiologic or anatomic triage criteria from the National Field Triage Guidelines who were not initially transported to a Level I or Level II trauma center. Logistic regression determined the association between UT and rural/urban setting, adjusting for transport distance and prehospital time. Models were expanded to evaluate the effect of individual triage criteria, trauma center setting, and transport mode on UT. RESULTS: There were 453,112 patients included (26% rural). Undertriage was higher in rural patients (8.6% vs. 3.4%, p < 0.01). Rural setting was associated with UT after adjusting for distance and prehospital time (odds ratio [OR], 3.52; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.82–6.78; p < 0.01). Different triage criteria were associated with UT in rural/urban settings. Rural setting was associated with UT for patients transferred to an urban center (OR, 3.32; 95% CI, 1.75–6.25; p < 0.01), but not a rural center (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.08–5.53; p = 0.72). Rural setting was associated with UT for ground (OR, 5.01; 95% CI, 2.65–9.46; p < 0.01) but not air transport (OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.54–2.55; p = 0.68). CONCLUSION: Undertriage is more common in rural settings. Specific triage criteria are associated with UT in rural settings. Lack of a rural trauma center requiring transfer to an urban center is a risk factor for UT of rural patients. Air medical transport mitigated the risk of UT in rural patients. Provider and system interventions may help reduce UT in rural settings. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Care Management, Level IV

The aim of this paper was to review the recent literature to create recommendations for the day-to-day diagnosis and surgical management of small bowel and colon injuries. Where knowledge gaps were identified, expert consensus was pursued during the 8th International Congress of the World Society of Emergency Surgery Annual (September 2021, Edinburgh). This process also aimed to guide future research.

BackgroundSmall bowel obstruction (SBO) is a common surgical emergency, causing high morbidity and healthcare costs. The majority of SBOs are caused by adhesions that result from previous surgeries. Bowel obstruction, however, also occurs in patients without previous operation or known pathology, a so called virgin abdomen. It is unknown if small bowel obstruction in the virgin abdomen (SBO-VA) can be managed according to the same principles as other cases of small bowel obstruction. The aim of this position paper is to evaluate the available evidence on etiology and management of small bowel obstruction in the virgin abdomen.MethodsThis is a narrative review with scoping aspects. Clinical topics covered in this review include epidemiology and etiology of SBO-VA, diagnosis and imaging, initial assessment, the role of surgical management in SBO-VA, and the role of non-operative management in SBO-VA.ResultsOur scoping search revealed seven original studies reporting original patient data related to SBO-VA. All the included studies are retrospective cohorts, with populations ranging between 44 and 103 patients with SBO-VA. Adhesions were found to be the cause of the obstruction in approximately half of the reported cases of SBO-VA. A relatively high number of cases of SBO-VA were managed surgically with studies reporting 39–83%. However, in cases where a trial of non-operative management was started, this was generally successful.ConclusionThe data available suggest that etiology and treatment results for patients with SBO-VA are largely comparable to the results in patients with SBO after previous abdominal surgery. We therefore propose that patients with a virgin abdomen could be treated according to existing guidelines for SBO and adhesive small bowel obstruction.

BACKGROUND Despite evidence of benefit after injury, helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) overtriage remains high. Scene and transfer overtriage are distinct processes. Our objectives were to identify geographic variation in overtriage and patient-level predictors, and determine if overtriage impacts population-level outcomes. METHODS Patients 16 years or older undergoing scene or interfacility HEMS in the Pennsylvania Trauma Outcomes Study were included. Overtriage was defined as discharge within 24 hours of arrival. Patients were mapped to zip code, and rates of overtriage were calculated. Hot spot analysis identified regions of high and low overtriage. Mixed-effects logistic regression determined patient predictors of overtriage. High and low overtriage regions were compared for population-level injury fatality rates. Analyses were performed for scene and transfer patients separately. RESULTS A total of 85,572 patients were included (37.4% transfers). Overtriage was 5.5% among scene and 11.8% among transfer HEMS (p < 0.01). Hot spot analysis demonstrated geographic variation in high and low overtriage for scene and transfer patients. For scene patients, overtriage was associated with distance (odds ratio [OR], 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-1.06 per 10 miles; p = 0.04), neck injury (OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.01-1.60; p = 0.04), and single-system injury (OR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.15-1.64; p < 0.01). For transfer patients, overtriage was associated with rurality (OR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.22-2.21; p < 0.01), facial injury (OR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.03-1.44; p = 0.02), and single-system injury (OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.18-2.19; p < 0.01). For scene patients, high overtriage was associated with higher injury fatality rate (coefficient, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.68-1.76; p < 0.01); low overtriage was associated with lower injury fatality rate (coefficient, -0.73; 95% CI, -0.78 to -0.68; p < 0.01). For transfer patients, high overtriage was not associated with injury fatality rate (p = 0.53); low overtriage was associated with lower injury fatality rate (coefficient, -2.87; 95% CI, -4.59 to -1.16; p < 0.01). CONCLUSION Geographic overtriage rates vary significantly for scene and transfer HEMS, and are associated with population-level outcomes. These findings can help guide targeted performance improvement initiatives to reduce HEMS overtriage. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapeutic, level IV.

Bile duct injury (BDI) is a dangerous complication of cholecystectomy, with significant postoperative sequelae for the patient in terms of morbidity, mortality, and long-term quality of life. BDIs have an estimated incidence of 0.4–1.5%, but considering the number of cholecystectomies performed worldwide, mostly by laparoscopy, surgeons must be prepared to manage this surgical challenge. Most BDIs are recognized either during the procedure or in the immediate postoperative period. However, some BDIs may be discovered later during the postoperative period, and this may translate to delayed or inappropriate treatments. Providing a specific diagnosis and a precise description of the BDI will expedite the decision-making process and increase the chance of treatment success. Subsequently, the choice and timing of the appropriate reconstructive strategy have a critical role in long-term prognosis. Currently, a wide spectrum of multidisciplinary interventions with different degrees of invasiveness is indicated for BDI management. These World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) guidelines have been produced following an exhaustive review of the current literature and an international expert panel discussion with the aim of providing evidence-based recommendations to facilitate and standardize the detection and management of BDIs during cholecystectomy. In particular, the 2020 WSES guidelines cover the following key aspects: (1) strategies to minimize the risk of BDI during cholecystectomy; (2) BDI rates in general surgery units and review of surgical practice; (3) how to classify, stage, and report BDI once detected; (4) how to manage an intraoperatively detected BDI; (5) indications for antibiotic treatment; (6) indications for clinical, biochemical, and imaging investigations for suspected BDI; and (7) how to manage a postoperatively detected BDI. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13017-021-00369-w.

Medical intensive care unit (MICU) patients develop acute surgical processes that require operative intervention. There are limited data addressing outcomes of emergency general surgery (EGS) in this population. The aim of our study was to characterize the breadth of surgical consults from the MICU and assess mortality after abdominal EGS cases.All MICU patients with an EGS consult in an academic medical center between January 2010 and 2016 were identified from an electronic medical record-based registry. Charts were reviewed to determine reason for consult, procedures performed, and to obtain additional clinical data. A multivariate logistic regression was used to determine patient factors associated with patient mortality.Of 911 MICU patients seen by our service, 411(45%) required operative intervention, with 186 patients undergoing an abdominal operation. The postoperative mortality rate after abdominal operations was 37% (69/186), significantly higher than the mortality of 16% (1833/11192) for all patients admitted to the MICU over the same period (p0.05). Damage-control procedures were performed in 64 (34%) patients, with 46% mortality in this group. The most common procedures were bowel resections, with mortality of 42% (28/66) and procedures for severe clostridium difficile, mortality of 38% (9/24). Twenty-seven patients met our definition of surgical rescue, requiring intervention for complications of prior procedures, with mortality of 48%. Need for surgical rescue was associated with increased admission mortality (odds ratio, 13.07; 95% confidence interval, 2.86-59.77). Twenty-six patients had pathology amenable to surgical intervention but did not undergo operation, with 100% mortality. In patients with abdominal pathology at the time of operation, in-hospital delay was associated with increased mortality (odds ratio, 5.13; 95% confidence interval, 1.11-23.77).Twenty percent of EGS consults from the MICU had an abdominal process requiring an operative intervention. While the MICU population as a whole has a high baseline mortality, patients requiring abdominal surgical intervention are an even higher risk.Prognostic and epidemiological, level III.

OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to determine whether prehospital blood products reduce 30-day mortality in patients at risk for hemorrhagic shock compared with crystalloid only resuscitation. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA Hemorrhage is the primary cause of preventable death after injury. Large volume crystalloid resuscitation can be deleterious. The benefits of prehospital packed red blood cells (PRBCs), plasma, or transfusion of both products among trauma patients is unknown compared with crystalloid. METHODS Secondary analysis of the multicenter PAMPer trial was performed on hypotensive injured patients from the scene. The trial randomized 27 helicopter bases to prehospital plasma or standard resuscitation. Standard resuscitation at the sites was equally divided between crystalloid and crystalloid + PRBC. This led to 4 prehospital resuscitation groups: crystalloid only; PRBC; plasma; and PRBC+plasma. Cox regression determined the association between resuscitation groups and risk-adjusted 30-day mortality. The dose effect of resuscitation fluids was also explored. RESULTS Four hundred seven patients were included. PRBC+plasma had the greatest benefit [hazard ratio (HR) 0.38; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.26-0.55, P < 0.001], followed by plasma (HR 0.57; 95% CI 0.36-0.91, P = 0.017) and PRBC (HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.49-0.95, P = 0.025) versus crystalloid only. Mortality was lower per-unit of PRBC (HR 0.69; 95% CI 0.52-0.92, p = 0.009) and plasma (HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.54-0.88, P = 0.003). Crystalloid volume was associated with increased mortality among patients receiving blood products (HR 1.65; 95% CI 1.17-2.32, P = 0.004). CONCLUSION Patients receiving prehospital PRBC+plasma had the greatest mortality benefit. Crystalloid only had the worst survival. Patients with hemorrhagic shock should receive prehospital blood products when available, preferably PRBC+plasma. Prehospital whole blood may be ideal in this population.

Tranexamic acid (TXA) is used as a hemostatic adjunct for hemorrhage control in the injured patient and reduces early preventable death. However, the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) has been incompletely explored. Previous studies investigating the effect of TXA on VTE vary in their findings. We performed a propensity matched analysis to investigate the association between TXA and VTE following trauma, hypothesizing that TXA is an independent risk factor for VTE.This retrospective study queried trauma patients presenting to a single Level I trauma center from 2012 to 2016. Our primary outcome was composite pulmonary embolism or deep vein thrombosis. Mortality, transfusion, intensive care unit and hospital lengths of stay were secondary outcomes. Propensity matched mixed effects multivariate logistic regression was used to determine adjusted odds ratio (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) of TXA on outcomes of interest, adjusting for prespecified confounders. Competing risks regression assessed subdistribution hazard ratio of VTE after accounting for mortality.Of 21,931 patients, 189 pairs were well matched across propensity score variables (standardized differences0.2). Median Injury Severity Score was 19 (interquartile range, 12-27) and 14 (interquartile range, 8-22) in TXA and non-TXA groups, respectively (p = 0.19). Tranexamic acid was associated with more than threefold increase in the odds of VTE (aOR, 3.3; 95% CI, 1.3-9.1; p = 0.02). Tranexamic acid was not significantly associated with survival (aOR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.23-3.25; p = 0.83). Risk of VTE remained elevated in the TXA cohort despite accounting for mortality (subdistribution hazard ratio, 2.42; 95% CI, 1.11-5.29; p = 0.03).Tranexamic acid may be an independent risk factor for VTE. Future investigation is needed to identify which patients benefit most from TXA, especially given the risks of this intervention to allow a more individualized treatment approach that maximizes benefits and mitigates potential harms.Therapeutic, level III.

Anorectal emergencies comprise a wide variety of diseases that share common symptoms, i.e., anorectal pain or bleeding and might require immediate management. While most of the underlying conditions do not need inpatient management, some of them could be life-threatening and need prompt recognition and treatment. It is well known that an incorrect diagnosis is frequent for anorectal diseases and that a delayed diagnosis is related to an impaired outcome. This paper aims to improve the knowledge and the awareness on this specific topic and to provide a useful tool for every physician dealing with anorectal emergencies.The present guidelines have been developed according to the GRADE methodology. To create these guidelines, a panel of experts was designed and charged by the boards of the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) and American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) to perform a systematic review of the available literature and to provide evidence-based statements with immediate practical application. All the statements were presented and discussed during the WSES-AAST-WJES Consensus Conference on Anorectal Emergencies, and for each statement, a consensus among the WSES-AAST panel of experts was reached. We structured our work into seven main topics to cover the entire management of patients with anorectal emergencies and to provide an up-to-date, easy-to-use tool that can help physicians and surgeons during the decision-making process.

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.

Contains fulltext : 245653.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) Immunocompromised patients are a heterogeneous and diffuse category frequently presenting to the emergency department with acute surgical diseases. Diagnosis and treatment in immunocompromised patients are often complex and must be multidisciplinary. Misdiagnosis of an acute surgical disease may be followed by increased morbidity and mortality. Delayed diagnosis and treatment of surgical disease occur; these patients may seek medical assistance late because their symptoms are often ambiguous. Also, they develop unique surgical problems that do not affect the general population. Management of this population must be multidisciplinary.This paper presents the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), Surgical Infection Society Europe (SIS-E), World Surgical Infection Society (WSIS), American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST), and Global Alliance for Infection in Surgery (GAIS) joined guidelines about the management of acute abdomen in immunocompromised patients.

Contains fulltext : 215819.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) Renal and urogenital injuries occur in approximately 10-20% of abdominal trauma in adults and children. Optimal management should take into consideration the anatomic injury, the hemodynamic status, and the associated injuries. The management of urogenital trauma aims to restore homeostasis and normal physiology especially in pediatric patients where non-operative management is considered the gold standard. As with all traumatic conditions, the management of urogenital trauma should be multidisciplinary including urologists, interventional radiologists, and trauma surgeons, as well as emergency and ICU physicians. The aim of this paper is to present the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) and the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) kidney and urogenital trauma management guidelines.

The peripheral arteries and veins of the extremities are among the most commonly injured vessels in both civilian and military vascular trauma. Blunt causes are more frequent than penetrating except during military conflicts and in certain geographic areas. Physical examination and simple bedside investigations of pulse pressures are key in early identification of these injuries. In stable patients with equivocal physical examinations, computed tomography angiograms have become the mainstay of screening and diagnosis. Immediate open surgical repair remains the first-line therapy in most patients. However, advances in endovascular therapies and more widespread availability of this technology have resulted in an increase in the range of injuries and frequency of utilization of minimally invasive treatments for vascular injuries in stable patients. Prevention of and early detection and treatment of compartment syndrome remain essential in the recovery of patients with significant peripheral vascular injuries. The decision to perform amputation in patients with mangled extremities remains difficult with few clear indicators. The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma in conjunction with the World Society of Emergency Surgery seeks to summarize the literature to date and provide guidelines on the presentation, diagnosis, and treatment of peripheral vascular injuries. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Review study, level IV.

IMPORTANCE: In-hospital administration of tranexamic acid after injury improves outcomes in patients at risk for hemorrhage. Data demonstrating the benefit and safety of the pragmatic use of tranexamic acid in the prehospital phase of care are lacking for these patients. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness and safety of tranexamic acid administered before hospitalization compared with placebo in injured patients at risk for hemorrhage. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This pragmatic, phase 3, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, superiority randomized clinical trial included injured patients with prehospital hypotension (systolic blood pressure ≤90 mm Hg) or tachycardia (heart rate ≥110/min) before arrival at 1 of 4 US level 1 trauma centers, within an estimated 2 hours of injury, from May 1, 2015, through October 31, 2019. INTERVENTIONS: Patients received 1 g of tranexamic acid before hospitalization (447 patients) or placebo (456 patients) infused for 10 minutes in 100 mL of saline. The randomization scheme used prehospital and in-hospital phase assignments, and patients administered tranexamic acid were allocated to abbreviated, standard, and repeat bolus dosing regimens on trauma center arrival. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality. RESULTS: In all, 927 patients (mean [SD] age, 42 [18] years; 686 [74.0%] male) were eligible for prehospital enrollment (460 randomized to tranexamic acid intervention; 467 to placebo intervention). After exclusions, the intention-to-treat study cohort comprised 903 patients: 447 in the tranexamic acid arm and 456 in the placebo arm. Mortality at 30 days was 8.1% in patients receiving tranexamic acid compared with 9.9% in patients receiving placebo (difference, –1.8%; 95% CI, –5.6% to 1.9%; P = .17). Results of Cox proportional hazards regression analysis, accounting for site, verified that randomization to tranexamic acid was not associated with a significant reduction in 30-day mortality (hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.59-1.11, P = .18). Prespecified dosing regimens and post-hoc subgroup analyses found that prehospital tranexamic acid were associated with significantly lower 30-day mortality. When comparing tranexamic acid effect stratified by time to treatment and qualifying shock severity in a post hoc comparison, 30-day mortality was lower when tranexamic acid was administered within 1 hour of injury (4.6% vs 7.6%; difference, −3.0%; 95% CI, −5.7% to −0.3%; P

BackgroundSince the COVID-19 pandemic has occurred, nations showed their unpreparedness to deal with a mass casualty incident of this proportion and severity. The World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) conceived this position paper with the purpose of providing recommendations for the management of surgical, infected and non-infected, patients in emergency setting under COVID-19 pandemic in the safety of the patient and health care workers based on available evidences and experienced surgeons’opinion.MethodA systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P)through the MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase and SCOPUS databases. Synthesis of evidence, statements and recommendations were developed in accordance with the GRADE methodology.ResultsGiven the limitation of the evidence, the current document represents an effort to provide a guide for emergency surgeons to perform safely surgery during this pandemic on the basis of evidence medicine and principles of mass casualty incident management to limit the diffusion of the infection among patients and health care workers. ConclusionsWe recommend screening for COVID-19 infection at emergency department, all surgical patients with clinical and epidemiologic features suspect for COVID-19 disease who are waiting for hospital admission and urgent surgery. The screening provides performing a RT-PCR naso-pharyngeal swab test and a baseline (non-contrast) chest CT or chest X-ray or lungs US, depending on skills and availability.The management of COVID-19 surgical patient is multidiplinary.If an immediate surgical procedure is mandatory, whether laparoscopic or via open approach, we recommend doing every efforts to protect the operating room staff, in the safety of the patient . We recommend not being present during the intubation and extubation maneuvers (1A).To perform a safe surgical procedure, we recommend:-having a trained staff, wearing the necessary personal protective equipments, and an established protocol for the preoperative, peri-operative and postoperative management of the COVID-19 surgical patient;-being careful in the establishment and management of the artificial pneumoperitoneum, in the control of the hemostasis and of incisions to prevent any loss of biological fluids and contamination of the surgical staff;-using of all available devices to remove smoke and aerosol during the operation and a closed suction system for artificial pneumoperitoneum, especially if there is a risk of conversion to laparotomy.If it is not possible to perform surgery in a safe and protected environment, we recommend do not underestimating the highest risk of contamination and infection for health care workers and dissemination of the virus in the hospital and to consider transferring the patient in a COVID HUB hospital for the appropriate management.The administration of prophylactic anticoagulation with LMWH is recommended as soon as possible in COVID-19 patients to reduce thromboembolic risk related to the virus and sepsis, decreasing the mortality rate. We recommend to carefully administrating antibiotics in COVID-19 surgical patients for the high risk of selecting resistant bacteria, especially in patients admitted in ICU for mechanical ventilation. Early empirical antibiotic treatment should be targeted to results from cultures, with de-escalation of treatment as soon as possible. We recommend against empirical antifungal treatment in all surgical COVID-19 patients but to consider it in critically ill patients.

Purpose of ReviewWe aim to determine the various models of training and identify educational strategies that would be efficacious in teaching bleeding control to the public.Recent FindingsRecent studies have examined various educational strategies of bleeding control education including lectures, web-based classes, and hands-on training. The effectiveness of these trainings can not only be measured in increases in knowledge, but also in feelings of confidence, preparedness, and willingness to assist in a bleeding emergency. When looking at retention or skills and knowledge, we found that multiple studies showed decreases in ability to stop life-threatening bleeding when retested weeks or months after training. These issues of retention and a lack of education in general lead to a discussion about the possible benefits of having just-in-time (JiT) information during a bleeding emergency.SummaryBased on the recent findings, bleeding control trainings have proven to be a very effective method of providing the general public with necessary skills. Therefore, moving forward, it is crucial to look at retention and the use of JiT information in longitudinal studies.

Background and aims Acute appendicitis (AA) is among the most common causes of acute abdominal pain. Diagnosis of AA is still challenging and some controversies on its management are still present among different settings and practice patterns worldwide. In July 2015, the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) organized in Jerusalem the first consensus conference on the diagnosis and treatment of AA in adult patients with the intention of producing evidence-based guidelines. An updated consensus conference took place in Nijemegen in June 2019 and the guidelines have now been updated in order to provide evidence-based statements and recommendations in keeping with varying clinical practice: use of clinical scores and imaging in diagnosing AA, indications and timing for surgery, use of non-operative management and antibiotics, laparoscopy and surgical techniques, intra-operative scoring, and peri-operative antibiotic therapy. Methods This executive manuscript summarizes the WSES guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of AA. Literature search has been updated up to 2019 and statements and recommendations have been developed according to the GRADE methodology. The statements were voted, eventually modified, and finally approved by the participants to the consensus conference and by the board of co-authors, using a Delphi methodology for voting whenever there was controversy on a statement or a recommendation. Several tables highlighting the research topics and questions, search syntaxes, and the statements and the WSES evidence-based recommendations are provided. Finally, two different practical clinical algorithms are provided in the form of a flow chart for both adults and pediatric (< 16 years old) patients. Conclusions The 2020 WSES guidelines on AA aim to provide updated evidence-based statements and recommendations on each of the following topics: (1) diagnosis, (2) non-operative management for uncomplicated AA, (3) timing of appendectomy and in-hospital delay, (4) surgical treatment, (5) intra-operative grading of AA, (6) ,management of perforated AA with phlegmon or abscess, and (7) peri-operative antibiotic therapy.

Since December 2019, the world is potentially facing one of the most difficult infectious situations of the last decades. COVID-19 epidemic warrants consideration as a mass casualty incident (MCI) of the highest nature. An optimal MCI/disaster management should consider all four phases of the so-called disaster cycle: mitigation, planning, response, and recovery. COVID-19 outbreak has demonstrated the worldwide unpreparedness to face a global MCI.This present paper thus represents a call for action to solicitate governments and the Global Community to actively start effective plans to promote and improve MCI management preparedness in general, and with an obvious current focus on COVID-19.

Background Peptic ulcer disease is common with a lifetime prevalence in the general population of 5–10% and an incidence of 0.1–0.3% per year. Despite a sharp reduction in incidence and rates of hospital admission and mortality over the past 30 years, complications are still encountered in 10–20% of these patients. Peptic ulcer disease remains a significant healthcare problem, which can consume considerable financial resources. Management may involve various subspecialties including surgeons, gastroenterologists, and radiologists. Successful management of patients with complicated peptic ulcer (CPU) involves prompt recognition, resuscitation when required, appropriate antibiotic therapy, and timely surgical/radiological treatment. Methods The present guidelines have been developed according to the GRADE methodology. To create these guidelines, a panel of experts was designed and charged by the board of the WSES to perform a systematic review of the available literature and to provide evidence-based statements with immediate practical application. All the statements were presented and discussed during the 5th WSES Congress, and for each statement, a consensus among the WSES panel of experts was reached. Conclusions The population considered in these guidelines is adult patients with suspected complicated peptic ulcer disease. These guidelines present evidence-based international consensus statements on the management of complicated peptic ulcer from a collaboration of a panel of experts and are intended to improve the knowledge and the awareness of physicians around the world on this specific topic. We divided our work into the two main topics, bleeding and perforated peptic ulcer, and structured it into six main topics that cover the entire management process of patients with complicated peptic ulcer, from diagnosis at ED arrival to post-discharge antimicrobial therapy, to provide an up-to-date, easy-to-use tool that can help physicians and surgeons during the decision-making process.

BACKGROUND Children suffering nonaccidental trauma (NAT) are at high risk of death. It is unclear whether markers of injury severity for trauma center/system benchmarking such as Injury Severity Score (ISS) adequately characterize this. Our objective was to evaluate mortality prediction of ISS in children with NAT compared with accidental trauma (AT). METHODS Pediatric patients younger than 16 years from the Pennsylvania state trauma registry 2000 to 2013 were included. Logistic regression predicted mortality from ISS for NAT and AT patients. Multilevel logistic regression determined the association between mortality and ISS while adjusting for age, vital signs, and injury pattern in NAT and AT patients. Similar models were performed for head Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS). Sensitivity analysis examined impaired functional independence at discharge as an alternate outcome. RESULTS Fifty thousand five hundred seventy-nine patients were included with 1,866 (3.7%) NAT patients. Nonaccidental trauma patients had a similar rate of mortality at an ISS of 13 as an ISS of 25 for AT patients. Nonaccidental trauma patients also have higher mortality for a given head AIS level (range, 1.2-fold to 5.9-fold higher). Injury Severity Score was a significantly greater predictor of mortality in AT patients (adjusted odds rations [AOR], 1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.13-1.15; p < 0.01) than NAT patients (AOR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.07-1.12; p < 0.01) per 1-point ISS increase, while head injury was a significantly greater predictor of mortality in NAT patients (AOR, 3.48; 95% CI, 1.54-8.32; p < 0.01) than AT patients (AOR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.95-1.45; p = 0.12). Nonaccidental trauma patients had a higher rate of impaired functional independence at any given ISS or head AIS level than AT patients. CONCLUSION Nonaccidental trauma patients have higher mortality and impaired function at a given ISS/head AIS than AT patients. Conventional ISS thresholds may underestimate risk and head injury is a more important predictor of mortality in the NAT population. These findings should be considered in system performance improvement and benchmarking efforts that rely on ISS for injury characterization. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Epidemiologic study, level III.