Pathogenetic and prognostic factors for neonatal gastric perforation: Personal experience and systematic review of the literature

Introduction: Neonatal gastric perforation (NGP) is a rare entity. Our aim was to report our experience and review the recent literature to characterize NGP, describe associated factors, and define prognostic factors.Materials and methods: Retrospective review of all consecutive patients with NGP treated between June 2009 and December 2017 in a third level pediatric hospital. In addition, a systematic review of Medline and Scopus database was performed using a defined strategy. All articles referring to NGP published between 2005 and 2017 were retrieved. Variables considered: prematurity (< 37 weeks gestation), birth weight (BW), Apgar score, prenatal complications, age at diagnosis, bag ventilation, pathogenetic events, site of perforation, treatment of perforation, sepsis, and outcome. Mann-Whitney or Fisher's test were used as appropriate. Results are median (range) or prevalence.Results: Between 2009 and 2016 we treated 8 consecutive patients for NGP and 199 further cases were retrieved from the systematic review (total of 207 patients). Overall survival was 73%. Most frequently reported pathogenesis: iatrogenic (20 patients), hypoxic/ ischemic or infection stress (13 patients), duodenal/jejunal obstruction (11 patients), drugs (11 patients), esophageal atresia (10 patients). 60% patients had only primary repair of the perforation as gastric surgery. Sepsis developed in 56 patients (34%).Conclusion: Although the pathogenesis of NGP is pleomorphic, prematurity and low BWs are frequent in these patients. Reviewing our experience and the available literature, none of the variables considered, but sepsis was associated with mortality

Cervical repair of congenital tracheoesophageal fistula: Complications lurking!

Aim: Esophageal atresia (EA) and tracheoesophageal fistula (TEF) consist of a spectrum of rare congenital abnormalities. Although EA surgical treatment is well established, the outcome of EA with proximal fistula (type B and D EA) or isolated H-type fistula (type E EA) is poorly explored. These forms of EA shared a common surgical step: the need of a cervical approach to close the fistula. Therefore, the aim of present study is to evaluate postoperative outcomes of patients treated for Gross type B-D and E EA, on regards of their cervical surgery.Materials and methods: A retrospective case series analysis of all patients affected by type B-D and E EA, and admitted to our tertiary care center between January 2003 and December 2014 was performed. All patients underwent preoperative flexible laryngo-tracheobronchoscopy (LTBS) as part of our standardized preoperative diagnostic assessment to define the diagnosis, evaluate preoperative vocal cord motility and to cannulate the fistula when required. Fistula closure was always performed through a right cervical access. Analysis of all cases and comparison between type B-D and E EA were performed. Mann-Whitney test, Chi-squared test and unpaired t test were used as appropriate; p < 0.05 was considered significant.Results: During the study period, 180 EA newborns were treated. Proximal or isolated TEF was found in 18 patients (10%): 7 type B, 11 type E EA. Patients affected by type B and E EA/TEF frequently present associated major malformations (27%), and major cardiac abnormalities (44%). Major postoperative complications were: vocal cord paralysis (5 patients), bilateral in 2 infants requiring tracheostomy, cerebral ischemia (1 patient), and cardiac failure (1 patient).Conclusion: Patients affected by type B and E EA have a high rate of associated abnormalities, and risk of possible sequelae. Postoperative complications are common, with possible transient vocal cord dismotility, but in some cases persistent paralysis may require tracheostomy. Therefore, both preoperative and postoperative LTBS is highly recommended to evaluate the presence of a proximal fistula, and vocal cord motility, even in asymptomatic patients, to rule out any possible intraoperative "surprise" and any vocal cord abnormality and to possibly define its pathogenesis (congenital vs. iatrogenic). (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved

Impact of the associated anorectal malformation on the outcome of spinal dysraphism after untethering surgery

Purpose: To analyze the outcome after untethering surgery in patients with spinal dysraphism (SD), with or without associated anorectal malformation (ARM). Methods: Patients operated on for SD, with (Group A) or without (Group B) associated ARM (1999–2015), were included. The post-operative outcome was analyzed in the two groups in terms of improving of clinical symptoms (neuro-motor deficits, bladder dysfunction, bowel dysfunction) and of instrumental examinations (urodynamics, bladder ultrasound, neurophysiology). Fisher’s exact test and χ 2 test were used as appropriate; p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Main results: Ten patients in Group A and 24 in Group B were consecutively treated. One patient was lost at follow up. Six patients (25%) in Group B underwent prophylactic surgery. The analysis of the pre-operative symptoms in the two groups showed that a significantly higher number of patients in group A needed bowel management and presented with neuro-motor deficits, compared to group B (p = 0.0035 and p = 0.04, respectively). Group A showed a significant post-operative neuro-motor improvement as compared to group B (p = 0.002). Conclusions: Based on our results, untethering seems to be effective in neuro-motor symptoms in selected patients with ARM. In ARM patients, untethering surgery does not seem to benefit intestinal and urinary symptoms. The presence of the associated ARM does not seem to impact the medium-term outcome of patients operated for SD

Screening policies, preventive measures and in-hospital infection of COVID-19 in global surgical practices

Background: In a surgical setting, COVID-19 patients may trigger in-hospital outbreaks and have worse postoperative outcomes. Despite these risks, there have been no consistent statements on surgical guidelines regarding the perioperative screening or management of COVID-19 patients, and we do not have objective global data that describe the current conditions surrounding this issue. This study aimed to clarify the current global surgical practice including COVID-19 screening, preventive measures and in-hospital infection under the COVID-19 pandemic, and to clarify the international gaps on infection control policies among countries worldwide. Methods: During April 2-8, 2020, a cross-sectional online survey on surgical practice was distributed to surgeons worldwide through international surgical societies, social media and personal contacts. Main outcome and measures included preventive measures and screening policies of COVID-19 in surgical practice and centers' experiences of in-hospital COVID-19 infection. Data were analyzed by country's cumulative deaths number by April 8, 2020 (high risk, >5000; intermediate risk, 100-5000; low risk, <100). Results: A total of 936 centers in 71 countries responded to the survey (high risk, 330 centers; intermediate risk, 242 centers; low risk, 364 centers). In the majority (71.9%) of the centers, local guidelines recommended preoperative testing based on symptoms or suspicious radiologic findings. Universal testing for every surgical patient was recommended in only 18.4% of the centers. In-hospital COVID-19 infection was reported from 31.5% of the centers, with higher rates in higher risk countries (high risk, 53.6%; intermediate risk, 26.4%; low risk, 14.8%; P < 0.001). Of the 295 centers that experienced in-hospital COVID-19 infection, 122 (41.4%) failed to trace it and 58 (19.7%) reported the infection originating from asymptomatic patients/staff members. Higher risk countries adopted more preventive measures including universal testing, routine testing of hospital staff and use of dedicated personal protective equipment in operation theatres, but there were remarkable discrepancies across the countries. Conclusions: This large international survey captured the global surgical practice under the COVID-19 pandemic and highlighted the insufficient preoperative screening of COVID-19 in the current surgical practice. More intensive screening programs will be necessary particularly in severely affected countries/institutions