Search

Objective: To compare the clinical outcome and bacteriological response in diabetic patients with a foot infection treated with imipenem/cilastatin or a combination of piperacillin/clindamycin., Methods: Patients hospitalised for diabetic foot lesions Wagner Stages II, III or IV were randomly assigned to receive either imipenem/cilastatin 500 mg QID or piperacillin 3000 mg QID in combination with clindamycin 600 mg TID. Cultures were obtained and clinical observations were made., Results: Forty-six patients (mean age 71.4 +/- 9.8 years) entered the study, 22 received imipenem/cilastatin (IC) and 24 received piperacillin/clindamycin (PCL) combination therapy. In the IC group 22.2% was considered to be clinically cured, 76.2% improved. In the PCL group this was 25.0% and 50.0%, respectively. In the IC treatment group 45.0% of baseline pathogens was eradicated compared to 70.0% in the PCL group. Adverse events were more often reported in PCL treated patients (50.0% vs. 19.0% P < 0.05)., Conclusions: Impipenem/cilastatin and piperacillin/clindamycin combination therapy were equally effective in the treatment of patients with diabetic foot lesions. The imipenem/cilastatin regimen caused less side effects.

Emergency one-stage surgery for acute, complicated, left-sided colonic cancer can be performed because of intraoperative antegrade irrigation of the large intestine. This procedure was performed in 17 patients: 15 patients with an obstructive, left-sided cancer and two patients with a perforated carcinoma. The age distribution ranged between 57 and 92 years. There were two postoperative septic complications: a small wound abscess and a partial abdominal wall dehiscence. One patient died because of massive upper gastrointestinal bleeding. This method permits the creation of a primary anastomosis in the left colon, obviating the necessity of a coeco- or colostomy, preternatural anus, or an extensive right-sided hemicolectomy. Several surgical interventions are avoided, resulting in a decrease of mortality, morbidity, duration of hospital stay, and costs. Moreover, intraoperative irrigation could be an attractive alternative for the usual preoperative mechanical bowel preparation, which is especially burdensome in elderly patients.

The histories of 67 patients with a diaphragmatic rupture due to blunt trauma were reviewed in four hospitals. In 45 patients the diagnosis was made within 24 hours after the accident, in the other 22 patients the rupture was diagnosed in a later stage. In the first group there were much abdominal injuries and during emergency laparotomy for some other reasons in 29% of these cases the diaphragmatic rupture was found accidentally. Not recognizing a rupture in the acute phase and therefore delaying operation was caused by the fact that the initial chest X-ray was not thoroughly checked for signs of a diaphragmatic rupture. The reasons for operation in the "delayed" group were mainly typical abnormalities for diaphragmatic rupture of the chest X-rays and other investigations proving the diagnosis. Only in one patient the delay in diagnosis has led to a very serious complication: because of incarceration with gangrene of a part of the small bowel it was necessary to remove this part. The other 21 patients in the group where the diagnosis was initially missed did not suffer from any serious complication.

Fifty-eight cases of traumatic intrapericardial diaphragmatic hernia were found in the literature and another delayed case added. The majority of patients presented after traffic accidents, with cardiopulmonary or abdominal symptoms. Most of the associated lesions to the bony skeleton were on the left side of the body. Chest X-rays and contrast studies, CAT scans, and echocardiography were helpful in establishing the diagnosis. We do not consider pneumoperitoneum to be a reliable procedure, nor to be used as a diagnostic aid. In the acute phase an abdominal approach is preferred to the transthoracic approach because the complete diaphragm can be inspected and concomitant abdominal lesions dealt with. Left thoracotomy should not be performed in the acute phase to prevent errors as reported in our patient.