Is lung ultrasound imaging a worthwhile procedure for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pneumonia detection?

Objectives: We compared 2 imaging modalities in patients suspected of having coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia. Blinded to the results of real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) testing, lung ultrasound (LUS) examinations and chest computed tomography (CT) were performed, and the specific characteristics of these imaging studies were assessed. Methods: From March 15, 2020, to April 15, 2020, 63 consecutive patients were enrolled in this prospective pilot study. All patients underwent hematochemical tests, LUS examinations, chest CT, and confirmatory rRT-PCR. The diagnostic performance of LUS and chest CT was calculated with rRT-PCR as a reference. The interobserver agreement of radiologists and ultrasound examiners was calculated. Ultrasound and CT features were compared to assess the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value. Positive and negative likelihood ratios measured the diagnostic accuracy. Results: Nineteen (30%) patients were COVID-19 negative, and 44 (70%) were positive. No differences in demographics and clinical data at presentation were observed among positive and negative patients. Interobserver agreement for CT had a κ value of 0.877, whereas for LUS, it was 0.714. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of chest CT for COVID-19 pneumonia were 93%, 90%, 85%, and 95%, respectively; whereas for LUS, they were 68%, 79%, 88%, and 52%. On receiver operating characteristic curves, area under the curve values were 0.834 (95% confidence interval, 0.711–0.958) and 0.745 (95% confidence interval, 0.606–0.884) for chest CT and LUS. Conclusions: Lung ultrasound had good reliability compared to chest CT. Therefore, our results indicate that LUS may be used to assess patients suspected of having COVID-19 pneumonia

Emergency hernia repair in the elderly. multivariate analysis of morbidity and mortality from an Italian registry

Purpose The incidence of inguinal hernia is higher in elderly because of aging-related diseases like prostatism, bronchitis, collagen laxity. A conservative management is common in elderly to reduce surgery-related risks, however watchful waiting can expose to obstruction and strangulation. The aim of the present study was to assess the impact of emergency surgery in a large series of elderly with complicated groin hernia and to identify the independent risk factors for postoperative morbidity and mortality. The predictive performance of prognostic risk scores has been also assessed. Methods This is a prospective observational study carried out between January 2017 and June 2018 in elderly patients who underwent emergency surgery for complicated hernia in 38 Italian hospitals. Pre-operative, surgical and postoperative data were recorded for each patient. ASA score, Charlson's comorbidity index, P-POSSUM and CR-POSSUM were assessed. Results 259 patients were recruited, mean age was 80 years. A direct repair without mesh was performed in 62 (23.9%) patients. Explorative laparotomy was performed in 56 (21.6%) patients and bowel resection was necessary in 44 (17%). Mortality occurred in seven (2.8%) patients. Fifty-five (21.2%) patients developed complications, 12 of whom had a major one. At univariate and multivariate analyses, Charlson's comorbidity index >= 6, altered mental status, and need for laparotomy were associated with major complications and mortality Conclusion Emergency surgery for complicated hernia is burdened by high morbidity and mortality in elderly patients. Preoperative comorbidity played a pivotal role in predicting complications and mortality and therefore Charlson's comorbidity index could be adopted to select patients for elective operation

Estimation of Pap-test coverage in an area with an organised screening program: challenges for survey methods

BACKGROUND: The cytological screening programme of Viterbo has completed the second round of invitations to the entire target population (age 25–64). From a public health perspective, it is important to know the Pap-test coverage rate and the use of opportunistic screening. The most commonly used study design is the survey, but the validity of self-reports and the assumptions made about non respondents are often questioned. METHODS: From the target population, 940 women were sampled, and responded to a telephone interview about Pap-test utilisation. The answers were compared with the screening program registry; comparing the dates of Pap-tests reported by both sources. Sensitivity analyses were performed for coverage over a 36-month period, according to various assumptions regarding non respondents. RESULTS: The response rate was 68%. The coverage over 36 months was 86.4% if we assume that non respondents had the same coverage as respondents, 66% if we assume they were not covered at all, and 74.6% if we adjust for screening compliance in the non respondents. The sensitivity and specificity of the question, "have you ever had a Pap test with the screening programme" were 84.5% and 82.2% respectively. The test dates reported in the interview tended to be more recent than those reported in the registry, but 68% were within 12 months of each other. CONCLUSION: Surveys are useful tools to understand the effectiveness of a screening programme and women's self-report was sufficiently reliable in our setting, but the coverage estimates were strongly influenced by the assumptions we made regarding non respondents

Metabolic Syndrome (MetS), Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS), and Frailty: Is There any Room for Good Outcome in the Elderly Undergoing Emergency Surgery?

Background: Patients with MetS or SIRS experience higher rates of mortality and morbidity, across both cardiac and noncardiac surgery. Frailty assessment has acquired increasing importance in recent years as it predisposes elderly patients to a worse outcome. The aim of our study was to investigate the influence of MetS, SIRS, and with or without frailty on elderly patients undergoing emergency surgical procedures. Methods: We analyzed data of all patients with nonmalignant diseases requiring an emergency surgical procedure from January 2017 to December 2020. The occurrence of MetS was identified using modified definition criteria used by the NCEP-ATP III Expert Panel: obesity, hypertension, diabetes, or if medication for high triglycerides or for low HDL cholesterol was taken. Systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) was evaluated according to the original consensus study (Sepsis-1). The frailty profile was investigated by the 5-modified Frailty Index (5-mFI) and the Emergency Surgery Frailty Index (EmSFI). Postoperative complications have been reported and categorized according to the Clavien–Dindo (C–D) classification system. Morbidity and mortality have been mainly considered as the 30-day standard period definition. Results: Of the 2,318 patients included in this study, 1,010 (43.6%) fulfilled the criteria for MetS (MetsG group). Both 5-Items score and EmsFI showed greater fragility in patients with MetS. All patients with MetS showed more frequently a CACI index greater than 6. The occurrence of SIRS was higher in MetSG. LOS was longer in patients with MetS (MetSG 11.4 ± 12 days vs. n-MetSG 10.5 ± 10.2 days, p = 0.046). MetSG has a significantly higher rate of morbidity (353 (35.%) vs. 385 (29.4%), p = 0.005). The mortality rate in patients with MetS (98/1010, 10%) was similar to that in patients without it (129/1308, 10%). Considering patients with MetS who developed SIRS and those who had frailty or both, the occurrence of these conditions was associated with a higher rate of morbidity and mortality. Conclusion: Impact of MetS and SIRS on elderly surgical patient outcomes has yet to be fully elucidated. The present study showed a 43.6% incidence of MetS in the elderly population. In conclusion, age per se should be not considered anymore as the main variable to estimate patient outcomes, while MetS and Frailty should have always a pivotal role

Perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) treatment: an Italian nationwide propensity score-matched cohort study investigating laparoscopic vs open approach

BackgroundPerforated peptic ulcer (PPU) remain a surgical emergency accounting for 37% of all peptic ulcer-related deaths. Surgery remains the standard of care. The benefits of laparoscopic approach have been well-established even in the elderly. However, because of inconsistent results with specific regard to some technical aspects of such technique surgeons questioned the adoption of laparoscopic approach. This leads to choose the type of approach based on personal experience. The aim of our study was to critically appraise the use of the laparoscopic approach in PPU treatment comparing it with open procedure.MethodsA retrospective study with propensity score matching analysis of patients underwent surgical procedure for PPU was performed. Patients undergoing PPU repair were divided into: Laparoscopic approach (LapA) and Open approach (OpenA) groups and clinical-pathological features of patients in the both groups were compared.ResultsA total of 453 patients underwent PPU simple repair. Among these, a LapA was adopted in 49% (222/453 patients). After propensity score matching, 172 patients were included in each group (the LapA and the OpenA). Analysis demonstrated increased operative times in the OpenA [OpenA: 96.4 +/- 37.2 vs LapA 88.47 +/- 33 min, p = 0.035], with shorter overall length of stay in the LapA group [OpenA 13 +/- 12 vs LapA 10.3 +/- 11.4 days p = 0.038]. There was no statistically significant difference in mortality [OpenA 26 (15.1%) vs LapA 18 (10.5%), p = 0.258]. Focusing on morbidity, the overall rate of 30-day postoperative morbidity was significantly lower in the LapA group [OpenA 67 patients (39.0%) vs LapA 37 patients (21.5%) p = 0.002]. When stratified using the Clavien-Dindo classification, the severity of postoperative complications was statistically different only for C-D 1-2.ConclusionsBased on the present study, we can support that laparoscopic suturing of perforated peptic ulcers, apart from being a safe technique, could provide significant advantages in terms of postoperative complications and hospital stay

Gastro-intestinal emergency surgery: Evaluation of morbidity and mortality. Protocol of a prospective, multicenter study in Italy for evaluating the burden of abdominal emergency surgery in different age groups. (The GESEMM study)

Gastrointestinal emergencies (GE) are frequently encountered in emergency department (ED), and patients can present with wide-ranging symptoms. more than 3 million patients admitted to US hospitals each year for EGS diagnoses, more than the sum of all new cancer diagnoses. In addition to the complexity of the urgent surgical patient (often suffering from multiple co-morbidities), there is the unpredictability and the severity of the event. In the light of this, these patients need a rapid decision-making process that allows a correct diagnosis and an adequate and timely treatment. The primary endpoint of this Italian nationwide study is to analyze the clinicopathological findings, management strategies and short-term outcomes of gastrointestinal emergency procedures performed in patients over 18. Secondary endpoints will be to evaluate to analyze the prognostic role of existing risk-scores to define the most suitable scoring system for gastro-intestinal surgical emergency. The primary outcomes are 30-day overall postoperative morbidity and mortality rates. Secondary outcomes are 30-day postoperative morbidity and mortality rates, stratified for each procedure or cause of intervention, length of hospital stay, admission and length of stay in ICU, and place of discharge (home or rehabilitation or care facility). In conclusion, to improve the level of care that should be reserved for these patients, we aim to analyze the clinicopathological findings, management strategies and short-term outcomes of gastrointestinal emergency procedures performed in patients over 18, to analyze the prognostic role of existing risk-scores and to define new tools suitable for EGS. This process could ameliorate outcomes and avoid futile treatments. These results may potentially influence the survival of many high-risk EGS procedure

The weekend effect on the provision of Emergency Surgery before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: case–control analysis of a retrospective multicentre database

Introduction: The concept of “weekend effect”, that is, substandard healthcare during weekends, has never been fully demonstrated, and the different outcomes of emergency surgical patients admitted during weekends may be due to different conditions at admission and/or different therapeutic approaches. Aim of this international audit was to identify any change of pattern of emergency surgical admissions and treatments during weekends. Furthermore, we aimed at investigating the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the alleged “weekend effect”. Methods: The database of the CovidICE-International Study was interrogated, and 6263 patients were selected for analysis. Non-trauma, 18+ yo patients admitted to 45 emergency surgery units in Europe in the months of March–April 2019 and March–April 2020 were included. Demographic and clinical data were anonymised by the referring centre and centrally collected and analysed with a statistical package. This study was endorsed by the Association of Italian Hospital Surgeons (ACOI) and the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES). Results: Three-quarters of patients have been admitted during workdays and only 25.7% during weekends. There was no difference in the distribution of gender, age, ASA class and diagnosis during weekends with respect to workdays. The first wave of the COVID pandemic caused a one-third reduction of emergency surgical admission both during workdays and weekends but did not change the relation between workdays and weekends. The treatment was more often surgical for patients admitted during weekends, with no difference between 2019 and 2020, and procedures were more often performed by open surgery. However, patients admitted during weekends had a threefold increased risk of laparoscopy-to-laparotomy conversion (1% vs. 3.4%). Hospital stay was longer in patients admitted during weekends, but those patients had a lower risk of readmission. There was no difference of the rate of rescue surgery between weekends and workdays. Subgroup analysis revealed that interventional procedures for hot gallbladder were less frequently performed on patients admitted during weekends. Conclusions: Our analysis revealed that demographic and clinical profiles of patients admitted during weekends do not differ significantly from workdays, but the therapeutic strategy may be different probably due to lack of availability of services and skillsets during weekends. The first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic did not impact on this difference

SARS-CoV-2 infection in acute pancreatitis increases disease severity and 30-day mortality: COVID PAN collaborative study

Objective: There is emerging evidence that the pancreas may be a target organ of SARS-CoV-2 infection. This aim of this study was to investigate the outcome of patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) and coexistent SARS-CoV-2 infection. Design: A prospective international multicentre cohort study including consecutive patients admitted with AP during the current pandemic was undertaken. Primary outcome measure was severity of AP. Secondary outcome measures were aetiology of AP, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, length of hospital stay, local complications, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), persistent organ failure and 30-day mortality. Multilevel logistic regression was used to compare the two groups. Results: 1777 patients with AP were included during the study period from 1 March to 23 July 2020. 149 patients (8.3%) had concomitant SARS-CoV-2 infection. Overall, SARS-CoV-2-positive patients were older male patients and more likely to develop severe AP and ARDS (p<0.001). Unadjusted analysis showed that SARS-CoV-2-positive patients with AP were more likely to require ICU admission (OR 5.21, p<0.001), local complications (OR 2.91, p<0.001), persistent organ failure (OR 7.32, p<0.001), prolonged hospital stay (OR 1.89, p<0.001) and a higher 30-day mortality (OR 6.56, p<0.001). Adjusted analysis showed length of stay (OR 1.32, p<0.001), persistent organ failure (OR 2.77, p<0.003) and 30-day mortality (OR 2.41, p<0.04) were significantly higher in SARS-CoV-2 co-infection. Conclusion: Patients with AP and coexistent SARS-CoV-2 infection are at increased risk of severe AP, worse clinical outcomes, prolonged length of hospital stay and high 30-day mortality