Transfusion related acute lung injury-TRALI: a review

Acute pulmonary damage caused by transfusion is characterized by the sudden onset of respiratory distress in newly transfused patients within 6 hours after the transfusion, bilateral infiltrative changes in chest X-ray, PaO2/FIO2 <300 mmHg, absence of other risk factors for acute lung injury and absence of signs suggesting cardiogenic origin of pulmonary edema. Being one of the most serious complications of blood transfusion, plasma is the most involved factor, although all blood components can cause it, and is caused by antigen reactions/leukocyte antibody and lipid activity with ability to modify the biological response on primitive leukocytes. The diagnosis is based on the integration of clinical, radiological and gasometric elements, ruling out the rest of the possible causes of acute lung injury. Its differential diagnosis should include hemodynamic overload, anaphylactic reaction, bacterial contamination of transfused blood products and transfusion hemolytic reaction. The treatment is supportive measures based on the needs and does not differ from the treatment of acute lung injury secondary to other etiologies, severe cases require endotracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation while the non-severe can be managed with oxygen therapy

Global attitudes in the management of acute appendicitis during COVID-19 pandemic: ACIE Appy Study

Background: Surgical strategies are being adapted to face the COVID-19 pandemic. Recommendations on the management of acute appendicitis have been based on expert opinion, but very little evidence is available. This study addressed that dearth with a snapshot of worldwide approaches to appendicitis. Methods: The Association of Italian Surgeons in Europe designed an online survey to assess the current attitude of surgeons globally regarding the management of patients with acute appendicitis during the pandemic. Questions were divided into baseline information, hospital organization and screening, personal protective equipment, management and surgical approach, and patient presentation before versus during the pandemic. Results: Of 744 answers, 709 (from 66 countries) were complete and were included in the analysis. Most hospitals were treating both patients with and those without COVID. There was variation in screening indications and modality used, with chest X-ray plus molecular testing (PCR) being the commonest (19\ub78 per cent). Conservative management of complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis was used by 6\ub76 and 2\ub74 per cent respectively before, but 23\ub77 and 5\ub73 per cent, during the pandemic (both P < 0\ub7001). One-third changed their approach from laparoscopic to open surgery owing to the popular (but evidence-lacking) advice from expert groups during the initial phase of the pandemic. No agreement on how to filter surgical smoke plume during laparoscopy was identified. There was an overall reduction in the number of patients admitted with appendicitis and one-third felt that patients who did present had more severe appendicitis than they usually observe. Conclusion: Conservative management of mild appendicitis has been possible during the pandemic. The fact that some surgeons switched to open appendicectomy may reflect the poor guidelines that emanated in the early phase of SARS-CoV-2