Rectus sheath hematoma: three case reports

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Introduction</p> <p>Rectus sheath hematoma is an uncommon cause of acute abdominal pain. It is an accumulation of blood in the sheath of the rectus abdominis, secondary to rupture of an epigastric vessel or muscle tear. It could occur spontaneously or after trauma. They are usually located infraumblically and often misdiagnosed as acute abdomen, inflammatory diseases or tumours of the abdomen.</p> <p>Case presentation</p> <p>We reported three cases of rectus sheath hematoma presenting with a mass in the abdomen and diagnosed by computerized tomography. The patients recovered uneventfully after bed rest, intravenous fluid replacement, blood transfusion and analgesic treatment.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Rectus sheath hematoma is a rarely seen pathology often misdiagnosed as acute abdomen that may lead to unnecessary laparotomies. Computerized tomography must be chosen for definitive diagnosis since ultrasonography is subject to error due to misinterpretation of the images. Main therapy is conservative management.</p

Surgical site infection after gastrointestinal surgery in high-income, middle-income, and low-income countries: a prospective, international, multicentre cohort study

Background: Surgical site infection (SSI) is one of the most common infections associated with health care, but its importance as a global health priority is not fully understood. We quantified the burden of SSI after gastrointestinal surgery in countries in all parts of the world. Methods: This international, prospective, multicentre cohort study included consecutive patients undergoing elective or emergency gastrointestinal resection within 2-week time periods at any health-care facility in any country. Countries with participating centres were stratified into high-income, middle-income, and low-income groups according to the UN's Human Development Index (HDI). Data variables from the GlobalSurg 1 study and other studies that have been found to affect the likelihood of SSI were entered into risk adjustment models. The primary outcome measure was the 30-day SSI incidence (defined by US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention criteria for superficial and deep incisional SSI). Relationships with explanatory variables were examined using Bayesian multilevel logistic regression models. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02662231. Findings: Between Jan 4, 2016, and July 31, 2016, 13 265 records were submitted for analysis. 12 539 patients from 343 hospitals in 66 countries were included. 7339 (58·5%) patient were from high-HDI countries (193 hospitals in 30 countries), 3918 (31·2%) patients were from middle-HDI countries (82 hospitals in 18 countries), and 1282 (10·2%) patients were from low-HDI countries (68 hospitals in 18 countries). In total, 1538 (12·3%) patients had SSI within 30 days of surgery. The incidence of SSI varied between countries with high (691 [9·4%] of 7339 patients), middle (549 [14·0%] of 3918 patients), and low (298 [23·2%] of 1282) HDI (p < 0·001). The highest SSI incidence in each HDI group was after dirty surgery (102 [17·8%] of 574 patients in high-HDI countries; 74 [31·4%] of 236 patients in middle-HDI countries; 72 [39·8%] of 181 patients in low-HDI countries). Following risk factor adjustment, patients in low-HDI countries were at greatest risk of SSI (adjusted odds ratio 1·60, 95% credible interval 1·05–2·37; p=0·030). 132 (21·6%) of 610 patients with an SSI and a microbiology culture result had an infection that was resistant to the prophylactic antibiotic used. Resistant infections were detected in 49 (16·6%) of 295 patients in high-HDI countries, in 37 (19·8%) of 187 patients in middle-HDI countries, and in 46 (35·9%) of 128 patients in low-HDI countries (p < 0·001). Interpretation: Countries with a low HDI carry a disproportionately greater burden of SSI than countries with a middle or high HDI and might have higher rates of antibiotic resistance. In view of WHO recommendations on SSI prevention that highlight the absence of high-quality interventional research, urgent, pragmatic, randomised trials based in LMICs are needed to assess measures aiming to reduce this preventable complication

Complicated intra-abdominal infections in Europe: preliminary data from the first three months of the CIAO Study

Peer reviewe

Complicated intra-abdominal infections in Europe: a comprehensive review of the CIAO study

Peer reviewe

Five-year outcomes for laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy from a single center in Turkey

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: There are no long-term results for laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) from Turkey. OBJECTIVES: Assess the outcomes of LSG at 5 years. DESIGN: Retrospective. SETTING: Training and research hospital. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study included patients with LSG performed from August 2012 to December 2013. The data was prospectively collected with the aim of providing 5-year outcomes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Changes in percentage excessive weight loss (%EWI) and BMI. Changes in the pharmacological treatment status of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and hypertension. SAMPLE SIZE AND CHARACTERISTICS: 120 patients (89 female) completed follow up; mean age 37 years (range, 19-63 years), mean preoperative BMI 48.3 kg/m 2 (range 40-80.4 kg/m 2 ). RESULTS: After a mean 5.6-year follow-up, the mean (SD) postoperative weight loss was 43.5 (11.8) kg and the mean (SD) BMI loss was 16.1 (4.4). The mean %EWL value was 62.9% (range, 30-101%). Most patients (87.5%, n=105) achieved satisfactory %EWL values. The major complication rate was 6.6%. After surgery, 74.2% of patients taking medication for hypertension were able to stop treatment, while 12.9% reduced the dose, of patients that took medication for diabetes, all had a dosage reduction. CONCLUSIONS: We showed that LSG is an acceptable bariatric procedure, but in the long-term there may be weight gain and frequent reflux symptoms. We think renewed weight gain can be partially prevented by close clinical follow-up. There is a need for long-term randomized controlled studies with long-term follow-up to clearly define the indications for LSG. LIMITATIONS: Retrospective, incomplete clinical visits, GERD symptoms not objectively assessed. CONFLICT OF INTEREST: None. </jats:sec