Search

Introduction: Uncontrolled hemorrhage is a major cause of mortality in surgery and trauma. Damage control surgery (DCS) is essential in the management of these cases. The use of topical hemostatic agents has increased over the last two decades with the evolution of DCS and trauma-induced coagulopathy. The aim of this study was to compare the performance of standard perihepatic packing with the addition of either a MRDH (modified rapid deployment hemostat) or a non-MRDH hemostatic dressing. Methods: This was a retrospective, comparative analysis of prospectively collected data held in the registry of a level I trauma center in Bologna, Italy, between 2005 and 2019. 33 patients with grade IV/V liver injuries who underwent a standardized perihepatic packing with hemostatic dressings were enrolled in the study. The study group included 21 patients treated with standard packing plus MRDH. The control group included 12 patients treated with standard packing plus a combination of fibrillar absorbable hemostat and human fibrin sealant. Results: The two groups were homogeneous in terms of age and American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) grade although the MRDH one seemed to have more severe injury: hemodynamic instability was present in 95% of MRDH patients vs. 83% in the control group. Also, Injury Severity Score (ISS) and New Injury Severity Score (NISS) were 41 vs 35.5 and 47 vs 39.1, respectively. The incidence of re-bleeding requiring repacking at the second-look laparotomy was 4.7% in MRDH patients vs. 16.7% in non-MRDH patients (p =.5, OR = 4). The overall complication rate was of 23% after the introduction of MRDH vs. 81% in the control group. Conclusion: Despite the potential effectiveness of MRDH, this study does not seem to confirm a significant superiority of this hemostat over the standard. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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.

Introduction: Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are a heterogeneous group of tumors. NET of colon represent less than 1% of colonic tumors. Synchronous liver metastases, present in 75-80%, are considered significant adverse prognostic indicators. Liver is the second commonest site for metastasis in patients with colorectal neuroendocrine tumors. Available treatment options include surgical resection, chemotherapy, biotherapy. Surgery is the gold standard for curative therapy and it is strictly related to the localization, the grade of tumor, and the stage of disease., Case Report: We present a 64-year-old man with clinical carcinoid syndrome. Colonoscopy revealed ileocecal valve vegetating mass with negative biopsy. CT scans of thorax and abdomen showed a voluminous lesion (10 cm of diameter) of right liver. CEA, CA 19.9 and aFP were all normal. Only urinary 5HIAASerum 5-hydroxyindoleactic acid and blood Chromogranin A were positive. Surgical strategy was to treat the primary tumor and the liver synchronous metastasis in one stage surgery., Discussion: Management of NETs liver metastases is challenging and requires aggressive therapy. Currently, there are many therapeutic options for metastatic NETs. Although complete surgical resection remains the optimal therapy and aggressive surgical resection increases the 5-year survival of NETs with solitary liver metastasis to 100%. In this case, clinical status with doubt of carcinoid syndrome was essential for diagnosis and for subsequent surgical strategy with one stage surgery., Conclusion: Resection of the primary tumor, liver metastases, and local mesenteric lymph node metastases is thought to strictly promote long-term survival and quality of life. Typically, a multidisciplinary approach is a cornerstone for decision making while dealing with this aggressive disease., Key Words: Carcinoid syndrome, Liver surgery, NETs, Neuroendocrine tumor, One stage surgery, Synchronous liver metastasis.