The Global Alliance for Infections in Surgery : defining a model for antimicrobial stewardship-results from an international cross-sectional survey

Background: Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs (ASPs) have been promoted to optimize antimicrobial usage and patient outcomes, and to reduce the emergence of antimicrobial-resistant organisms. However, the best strategies for an ASP are not definitively established and are likely to vary based on local culture, policy, and routine clinical practice, and probably limited resources in middle-income countries. The aim of this study is to evaluate structures and resources of antimicrobial stewardship teams (ASTs) in surgical departments from different regions of the world. Methods: A cross-sectional web-based survey was conducted in 2016 on 173 physicians who participated in the AGORA (Antimicrobials: A Global Alliance for Optimizing their Rational Use in Intra-Abdominal Infections) project and on 658 international experts in the fields of ASPs, infection control, and infections in surgery. Results: The response rate was 19.4%. One hundred fifty-six (98.7%) participants stated their hospital had a multidisciplinary AST. The median number of physicians working inside the team was five [interquartile range 4-6]. An infectious disease specialist, a microbiologist and an infection control specialist were, respectively, present in 80.1, 76.3, and 67.9% of the ASTs. A surgeon was a component in 59.0% of cases and was significantly more likely to be present in university hospitals (89.5%, p <0.05) compared to community teaching (83.3%) and community hospitals (66.7%). Protocols for pre-operative prophylaxis and for antimicrobial treatment of surgical infections were respectively implemented in 96.2 and 82.3% of the hospitals. The majority of the surgical departments implemented both persuasive and restrictive interventions (72.8%). The most common types of interventions in surgical departments were dissemination of educational materials (62.5%), expert approval (61.0%), audit and feedback (55.1%), educational outreach (53.7%), and compulsory order forms (51.5%). Conclusion: The survey showed a heterogeneous organization of ASPs worldwide, demonstrating the necessity of a multidisciplinary and collaborative approach in the battle against antimicrobial resistance in surgical infections, and the importance of educational efforts towards this goal.Peer reviewe

Meckel’s diverticulitis causing small bowel obstruction by a novel mechanism

Meckel’s diverticulum occurs in 2% of the general population and majority of patients remain asymptomatic. Gastrointestinal bleeding is the most common presentation in the paediatric population. While asymptomatic and incidentally found Meckel’s diverticulum may be left alone, surgery is essential for treating a symptomatic patient. Despite advances in imaging and technology, pre-operative diagnosis is often difficult. We present a first report of an unusual mechanism of small bowel obstruction due to Meckel’s diverticulitis in a paediatric patient. The diagnosis was only apparent at laparotomy

Laparoscopic versus Open Omental Patch Repair for Early Presentation of Perforated Peptic Ulcer: Matched Retrospective Cohort Study

Introduction. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes between laparoscopic and open omental patch repair (LOPR versus OR) in patients with similar presentation of perforated peptic ulcer (PPU). The secondary aim was to evaluate the outcomes according to the severity of peritonitis. Methods. All patients who underwent omental patch repair at two university-affiliated institutes between January 2010 and December 2014 were reviewed. Matched cohort between LOPR and OR groups was achieved by only including patients that had ulcer perforation 21, LOPR is also shown to benefit, particularly resulting in significant shorter LOS (4 days versus 11 days, p<0.01). Conclusion. LOPR offers improved short-term outcomes in patients who present within 48 hours and with perforation size <2 cm. LOPR also proved to be more beneficial in high MPI cases

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgical Services in Singapore: Retrospective Quantitative Study

BackgroundAt the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, the hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) unit had to reorganize its surgical case volume due to the rationing of health care resources. We report on a local audit evaluating the impact of COVID-19 on the HPB unit and the HPB surgical oncology practice. ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to review the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the HPB unit’s elective and emergency surgical cases. The secondary aims were to investigate the impact on the HPB surgical oncology operative case volume. MethodsWe performed a comparative audit of the HPB unit surgical case volume for January-June 2019 (baseline) and 2020 (COVID-19). Elective and emergency cases performed under general anesthesia were audited. Elective cases included hernia and gallbladder operations and liver and pancreatic resections. Emergency cases included cholecystectomies and laparotomies performed for general surgical indications. We excluded endoscopies and procedures done under local anesthesia. The retrospective data collected during the 2 time periods were compared. This study was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2000040265). ResultsThe elective surgical case volume decreased by 41.8% (351 cases in 2019 compared to 204 cases in 2020) during the COVID-19 pandemic. The number of hernia operations decreased by 63.9% (155 in 2019 compared to 56 in 2020; P<.001) and cholecystectomies decreased by 40.1% (157 in 2019 compared to 94 in 2020; P=.83). The liver and pancreatic resection volume increased by 16.7% (30 cases in 2019 compared to 35 cases in 2020; P=.004) and 111.1% (9 cases in 2019 compared to 19 cases in 2020; P=.001), respectively. The emergency surgical workload decreased by 40.9% (193 cases in 2019 compared to 114 cases in 2020). The most significant reduction in the emergency workload was observed in March (41 to 23 cases, a 43.9% reduction; P=.94), April (35 to 8 cases, a 77.1% reduction; P=.01), and May (32 to 14 cases, a 56.3% reduction; P=.39); however, only April had a statistically significant reduction in workload (P=.01). ConclusionsThe reallocation of resources due to the COVID-19 pandemic did not adversely impact elective HPB oncology work. With prudent measures in place, essential surgical services can be maintained during a pandemic. Trial RegistrationChinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2000040265); https://tinyurl.com/ms9kpr6

Role of social comparison in preparedness for practice as a junior doctor in Singapore: A longitudinal qualitative study

Objectives To date, most research on medical graduates’ preparedness for practice has conceptualised preparedness as something possessed by the individual. However, new doctors work within social settings with other people and, given this, we argue that preparedness has a social and comparative dimension. The aim of this paper is to explore medical students’/graduates’ self-assessments of their preparedness for practice using the lens of social comparison theory. Setting We invited medical students from one of Singapore’s three medical schools who were in their final-year Student Assistantship Programme to participate in semi-structured interviews, and follow-up interviews 6 months later when they were working as junior doctors. Data was collected from two cohorts, in 2018 and 2019. Initial analysis of interview transcripts was inductive and thematic. Social comparison theory was used for subsequent theory-driven analysis. Participants 31 participants took part, of whom 21 also engaged in follow-up interviews. Results We identified three uses of social comparison: as coping strategy to manage uncertainties in transitions where there was no formal, objective testing of their performance; as a means to confirm their self-perceived preparedness (upwards or downwards, eg, being better or worse prepared than comparator others); and as the basis for decision-making (eg, changing career choices). Conclusions Senior medical students and newly-graduated doctors compare themselves with peers and near-peers in terms of prior learning and current performance to evaluate and understand their own performance at work. Future studies need to examine further how the feeling of preparedness or unpreparedness generated from social comparisons may affect subsequent clinical performance and professional development

Baseline Albumin-Bilirubin grade as a predictor of response and outcome of regorafenib therapy in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract Background The use of regorafenib in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is widespread. Albumin-Bilirubin (ALBI) has been shown to be a potential prognostic marker for regorafenib treatment, but its prognostic value remains controversial. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to investigate the value of the baseline ALBI grade in predicting the efficacy and survival outcomes of HCC patients after regorafenib treatment. Methods PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library, Web of Science, CNKI, Wan Fang Data, and Vip Database were searched from January 2010 to October 2022. Studies treating HCC patients with regorafenib and with ALBI as a categorical variable, overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) as outcome indicators were included. After applying Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) to evaluate the quality of the included studies, Review Manager 5.4 was used to statistically analyze. Chi-square Q test and I2 statistics were used to detect heterogeneity. Funnel plot asymmetry, Egger’s and Begg’s test were used to evaluate publication bias. Results A total of 12 studies, comprising 1,918 patients, were included in the meta-analysis. The included studies were all evaluated as high quality. Compared to the high-grade baseline ALBI group, patients in the low-grade group had a longer survival time after receiving regorafenib and also more suitable for regorafenib treatment [odds ratio (OR) = 6.50, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.22–18.96, P < 0.01]. The low-grade baseline ALBI group before sorafenib treatment was significantly correlated with better OS [hazard ratio (HR) = 2.36, 95% CI: 1.68–3.31, P < 0.00001] and PFS (HR = 1.56, 95% CI: 1.16–2.08, P = 0.003). Likewise, the low-grade baseline ALBI group before regorafenib was also significantly correlated with better OS (HR = 1.56, 95% CI: 1.15–2.13, P = 0.005) and PFS (HR = 2.06, 95% CI: 1.37–3.11, P = 0.0005). In addition, the ALBI grade was significantly correlated with disease control rate (DCR) (OR = 2.90, 95% CI: 1.45–5.79, P = 0.003), but not the objective response rate (OR = 1.98, 95% CI: 0.71–5.46, P = 0.19). Conclusions The baseline ALBI grade could be a valuable prognostic indicator for predicting response and outcomes in HCC patients treated with regorafenib

A study of 3013 cases of hepatocellular carcinoma: Etiology and therapy before and during the current decade

10.1002/jgh3.12624JGH OPEN591015-101

The Global Alliance for Infections in Surgery: defining a model for antimicrobial stewardship-results from an international cross-sectional survey

Background: Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs (ASPs) have been promoted to optimize antimicrobial usage and patient outcomes, and to reduce the emergence of antimicrobial-resistant organisms. However, the best strategies for an ASP are not definitively established and are likely to vary based on local culture, policy, and routine clinical practice, and probably limited resources in middle-income countries. The aim of this study is to evaluate structures and resources of antimicrobial stewardship teams (ASTs) in surgical departments from different regions of the world. Methods: A cross-sectional web-based survey was conducted in 2016 on 173 physicians who participated in the AGORA (Antimicrobials: A Global Alliance for Optimizing their Rational Use in Intra-Abdominal Infections) project and on 658 international experts in the fields of ASPs, infection control, and infections in surgery. Results: The response rate was 19.4%. One hundred fifty-six (98.7%) participants stated their hospital had a multidisciplinary AST. The median number of physicians working inside the team was five [interquartile range 4-6]. An infectious disease specialist, a microbiologist and an infection control specialist were, respectively, present in 80.1, 76.3, and 67.9% of the ASTs. A surgeon was a component in 59.0% of cases and was significantly more likely to be present in university hospitals (89.5%, p &lt; 0.05) compared to community teaching (83.3%) and community hospitals (66.7%). Protocols for pre-operative prophylaxis and for antimicrobial treatment of surgical infections were respectively implemented in 96.2 and 82.3% of the hospitals. The majority of the surgical departments implemented both persuasive and restrictive interventions (72.8%). The most common types of interventions in surgical departments were dissemination of educational materials (62.5%), expert approval (61.0%), audit and feedback (55.1%), educational outreach (53.7%), and compulsory order forms (51.5%). Conclusion: The survey showed a heterogeneous organization of ASPs worldwide, demonstrating the necessity of a multidisciplinary and collaborative approach in the battle against antimicrobial resistance in surgical infections, and the importance of educational efforts towards this goal