Adjunctive treatment of abdominal catastrophes and sepsis with direct peritoneal resuscitation: Indications for use in acute care surgery

Phase I clinical trial of the feasibility and safety of direct peritoneal resuscitation in liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Direct peritoneal resuscitation (DPR) is associated with improved outcomes in trauma. Animal models suggest DPR has favorable effects on the liver. We sought to evaluate its safety and assess for improved outcomes in liver transplantation (LT).

METHODS

LT patients with renal dysfunction and/or obesity were enrolled in a phase-I clinical trial. DPR lasted 8-24 ​h depending on postoperative disposition. Primary outcome was percent of patients completing DPR. Secondary outcomes evaluated complications. Controls with either obesity (control-1) or both risk factors (obesity ​+ ​renal dysfunction, control-2) were analyzed.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients were enrolled (seven with both criteria and eight with obesity alone). DPR was completed in 87 ​% of patients, with one meeting stopping criteria. Controls included 45 (control-1) and 24 (control-2) patients. Return to operating room, graft loss, and late infections were lower with DPR.

CONCLUSION

DPR appears to be safe in closed abdomens following LT, warranting a follow-up phase-II trial to assess efficacy.

Damage Control Laparotomy and Management of the Open Abdomen

Management of the open abdomen has been used for decades by general surgeons. Techniques have evolved over those decades to improve control of infection, fluid loss, and improve the ability to close the abdomen to avoid hernia formation. The authors explore the history, indications, and techniques of open abdomen management in multiple settings. The most important considerations in open abdomen management include the reason for leaving the abdomen open, prevention and mitigation of ongoing organ dysfunction, and eventual plans for abdominal closure.

Evaluating the effectiveness and outcomes associated with direct peritoneal resuscitation in damage control surgery patients with and without hemorrhagic shock

INTRODUCTION

This narrative review aims to evaluate the efficacy of adjunct direct peritoneal resuscitation (DPR) in the treatment of adult damage control surgery (DCS) patients both with and without hemorrhagic shock, and its impact on associated outcomes.

METHODS

PubMed, Google Scholar, EMBASE, ProQuest, and Cochrane were searched for relevant articles published through April 13th, 2023. Studies assessing the utilization of DPR in adult DCS patients were included. Outcomes included time to abdominal closure, intra-abdominal complications, in-hospital mortality, and ICU length of stay (ICU LOS).

RESULTS

Five studies evaluating 437 patients were included. In patients with hemorrhagic shock, DPR was associated with reduced time to abdominal closure (DPR 4.1 days, control 5.9 days, p = 0.002), intra-abdominal complications including abscess formation (DPR 27 %, control 47 %, p = 0.04), and ICU LOS (DPR 8 days, control 11 days, p = 0.004). Findings in patients without hemorrhagic shock were conflicting. Closure times were decreased in one study (DPR 5.9 days, control 7.7 days, p < 0.02) and increased in another study (DPR 3.5 days, control 2.5 days, p = 0.02), intra-abdominal complications were decreased in one study (DPR 27 %, control 47 %, p = 0.04) and similar in another, and ICU LOS was decreased in one study (DPR 17 days, control 24 days, p < 0.002) and increased in another (DPR 13 days, control 11.4 days, p = 0.807).

CONCLUSION

In patients with hemorrhagic shock, adjunct DPR is associated with reduced time to abdominal closure, intra-abdominal complications such as abscesses, fistula, bleeding, anastomotic leak, and ICU LOS. Utilization of DPR in patients without hemorrhagic shock showed promising but inconsistent findings.

Damage Control Surgery and Transfer in Emergency General Surgery

Selective non traumatic emergency surgery patients are targets for damage control surgery (DCS) to prevent or treat abdominal compartment syndrome and the lethal triad. However, DCS is still a subject of controversy. As a concept, DCS describes a series of abbreviated surgical procedures to allow rapid source control of hemorrhage and contamination in patients with circulatory shock to allow resuscitation and stabilization in the intensive care unit followed by delayed return to the operating room for definitive surgical management once the patient becomes physiologic stable. If appropriately applied, the DCS morbidity and mortality can be significantly reduced.

Resuscitation and Preparation of the Emergency General Surgery Patient

Traditionally, the workflow surrounding a general surgery patient allows for a period of evaluation and optimization of underlying medical issues to allow for risk modification; however, in the emergency, this optimization period is largely condensed because of its time-dependent nature. Because the lack of optimization can lead to complications, the ability to rapidly resuscitate the patient, proceed to procedural intervention to control the situation, and manage common medical comorbidities is paramount. This article provides an overview on these subjects.

Damage control surgery in emergency general surgery: What you need to know

ABSTRACT

Damage-control surgery (DCS) is a strategy adopted to limit initial operative interventions in the unstable surgical patient, delaying definitive repairs and abdominal wall closure until physiologic parameters have improved. Although this concept of "physiology over anatomy" was initially described in the management of severely injured trauma patients, the approaches of DCS have become common in the management of nontraumatic intra-abdominal emergencies.While the utilization of damage-control methods in emergency general surgery (EGS) is controversial, numerous studies have demonstrated improved outcomes, making DCS an essential technique for all acute care surgeons. Following a brief history of DCS and its indications in the EGS patient, the phases of DCS will be discussed including an in-depth review of preoperative resuscitation, techniques for intra-abdominal source control, temporary abdominal closure, intensive care unit (ICU) management of the open abdomen, and strategies to improve abdominal wall closure.

Effects and Mechanisms of Peritoneal Resuscitation on Acute Kidney Injury After Severe Burns in Rats

INTRODUCTION

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common complication in severe burn patients with poor prognosis and high mortality. Reduced kidney perfusion induced by the decreased effective circulating blood volume after severe burn is a common cause of AKI. Routine intravenous resuscitation (IR) is difficult or delayed in extreme conditions such as war and disaster sites. Peritoneal resuscitation (PR) is a simple, rapid resuscitation strategy via a puncture in the abdominal wall. This study investigated whether PR is a validated resuscitation strategy for AKI after severe burns in rats and explored its mechanisms.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eighty Sprague-Dawley rats were randomized into four groups: (1) sham group; (2) IR group, which was characterized by the full thickness burn of 50% of the total body surface area received IR immediately post-injury; (3) early PR group, in which rats with the same burn model received PR immediately post-injury; and (4) delayed resuscitation (DR) group, in which rats with the same burn model received no resuscitation within 3-hour post-injury. PR and DR groups animals received IR after 3-hour post-injury. The survival rate, mean arterial pressure, renal histopathology, renal function, indicators of renal injury, and renal hypoxia-inducible factor-1α and NADPH oxidase 4 (NOX4) proteins of rats were measured at 3 h, 12 h, and 24 h post-injury.

RESULTS

Compared with rats in the DR group, rats in the PR group had a significantly improved survival rate (100% vs. 58.3% at 24 h, P = 0.0087), an increased mean arterial pressure (92.6 ± 6.6 vs. 65.3 ± 10.7, 85.1 ± 5.7 vs. 61.1 ± 6.9, 90.1 ± 8.7 vs. 74.9 ± 7.4 mmHg, at 3 h, 12 h, and 24 h, P < 0.01), a reduced renal water content rate (51.6% ± 5.0% vs. 70.1% ± 6.8%, 57.6% ± 7.7% vs. 69.5% ± 8.7%, at 12 h and 24 h, P < 0.01), attenuated histopathological damage, reduced serum creatinine expression (36.36 ± 4.27 vs. 49.98 ± 2.42, 52.29 ± 4.31 vs. 71.32 ± 5.2, 45.25 ± 2.55 vs. 81.15 ± 6.44 μmol/L, at 3 h, 12 h, and 24 h, P < 0.01) and BUN expression (7.62 ± 0.30 vs. 10.80 ± 0.58, 8.61 ± 0.32 vs. 28.58 ± 1.99, 8.09 ± 0.99 vs. 20.95 ± 1.02 mmol/L, at 3 h, 12 h, and 24 h, P < 0.01), increased kidney injury markers neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin expression (95.09 ± 7.02 vs. 101.75 ± 6.23, 146.77 ± 11.54 vs. 190.03 ± 9.87, 112.79 ± 15.8 vs. 194.43 ± 11.47 ng/mL, at 3 h, 12 h, and 24 h, P < 0.01) and cystatin C expression (0.185 ± 0.006 vs. 0.197 ± 0.006, 0.345 ± 0.036 vs. 0.382 ± 0.013, 0.297 ± 0.012 vs. 0.371 ± 0.028 ng/mL, at 3 h, 12 h, and 24 h, P < 0.01), and reduced renal hypoxia-inducible factor-1α and NADPH oxidase 4 protein expression (P < 0.01). There was no significant difference between rats in the PR group and the IR group in the above indicators.

CONCLUSIONS

Early PR could protect severe burn injury rats from AKI. It may be an alternative resuscitation strategy in severe burn injury when IR cannot be achieved.

ENDOTHELIAL GLYCOCALYX SHEDDING IN INTRA-ABDOMINAL SEPSIS: A FEASIBILITY STUDY

ABSTRACT

Background: The endothelial glycocalyx layer (EGL) is a complex meshwork of glycosaminoglycans and proteoglycans that protect the vascular endothelium. Cleavage or shedding of EGL-specific biomarkers, such as hyaluronic acid (HA) and syndecan-1 (SDC-1, CD138) in plasma, have been shown to be associated with poor clinical outcomes. However, it is unclear whether levels of circulating EGL biomarkers are representative of the EGL injury within the tissues. The objective of the present feasibility study was to describe a pathway for plasma and tissue procurement to quantify EGL components in a cohort of surgical patients with intra-abdominal sepsis. We sought to compare differences between tissue and plasma EGL biomarkers and to determine whether EGL shedding within the circulation and/or tissues correlated with clinical outcomes. Methods: This was a prospective, observational, single-center feasibility study of adult patients (N = 15) with intra-abdominal sepsis, conducted under an approved institutional review boards. Blood and resected tissue (pathologic specimen and unaffected peritoneum) samples were collected from consented subjects at the time of operation and 24-48 hours after surgery. Endothelial glycocalyx layer biomarkers (i.e., HA and SDC-1) were quantified in both tissue and plasma samples using a CD138 stain and ELISA kit, respectively. Pairwise comparisons were made between plasma and tissue levels. In addition, we tested the relationships between measured EGL biomarkers and clinical status and patient outcomes. Results: Fifteen patients with intra-abdominal sepsis were enrolled in the study. Elevations in EGL-specific circulating biomarkers (HA, SDC-1) were positively correlated with postoperative SOFA scores and weakly associated with resuscitative volumes at 24 hours. Syndecan-1 levels from resected pathologic tissue significantly correlated with SOFA scores at all time points ( R = 0.69 and P < 0.0001) and positively correlated with resuscitation volumes at 24 hours ( R = 0.41 and P = 0.15 for t = 24 hours). Tissue and circulating HA and SDC-1 positively correlated with SOFA >6. Conclusions: Elevations in both circulating and tissue EGL biomarkers were positively correlated with postoperative SOFA scores at 24 hours, with resected pathologic tissue EGL levels displaying significant correlations with SOFA scores at all time points. Tissue and circulating EGL biomarkers were positively correlated at higher SOFA scores (SOFA > 6) and could be used as indicators of resuscitative needs within 24 hours of surgery. The present study demonstrates the feasibility of tissue and plasma procurement in the operating room, although larger studies are needed to evaluate the predictive value of these EGL biomarkers for patients with intra-abdominal sepsis.

Advantages of pyruvate-based fluids in preclinical shock resuscitation-A narrative review

This review focuses on the innate beneficial effects of sodium pyruvate-based fluids, including pyruvate in intravenous solutions, oral rehydration solutions, and peritoneal dialysis solutions, on shock resuscitation with various animal models relative to current commercial fluids over the last two decades. Due to its superior pharmacological properties, pyruvate effectively sustains cytosolic glycolytic pathways and mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation by restoration of redox potentials and reactivation of pyruvate dehydrogenase in hypoxia, even anoxia, and diabetes, reversing the Warburg effect and diabetic glucometabolic aberration. Pyruvate has been demonstrated to protect against multiorgan dysfunction and metabolic disturbance in numerous preclinical studies with various pathogenic injuries. The unique features of pyruvate potential clinical benefits encompass to efficiently correct lethal lactic acidosis via metabolically rapid consumption of intracellular [H⁺] and robustly protect multiorgan metabolism and function, particularly visceral organs in addition to the heart and brain, significantly prolonging survival in various animal models. Pyruvate protection of red blood cell function and preservation of the partial pressure of arterial oxygen should be highly concerned in further studies. Pyruvate is much advantageous over existing anions such as acetate, bicarbonate, chloride, and lactate in commercial fluids. Pyruvate-based fluids act as a therapeutic agent without causing iatrogenic resuscitation injury in addition to being a volume expander, indicating a potential novel generation of resuscitation fluids, including crystalloids and colloids. Pyruvate-based fluids have an enormous potential appeal for clinicians who face the ongoing fluid debate to readily select as the first resuscitation fluid. Clinical trials with pyruvate-based fluids in shock resuscitation are urgently warranted.

Management of the open abdomen: A systematic review with meta-analysis and practice management guideline from the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma

BACKGROUND

Multiple techniques describe the management of the open abdomen (OA) and restoration of abdominal wall integrity after damage-control laparotomy (DCL). It is unclear which operative technique provides the best method of achieving primary myofascial closure at the index hospitalization.

METHODS

A writing group from the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the current literature regarding OA management strategies in the adult population after DCL. The group sought to understand if fascial traction techniques or techniques to reduce visceral edema improved the outcomes in these patients. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology was utilized, meta-analyses were performed, and an evidence profile was generated.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies met inclusion criteria. Overall, the use of fascial traction techniques was associated with improved primary myofascial closure during the index admission (relative risk, 0.32) and fewer hernias (relative risk, 0.11.) The use of fascial traction techniques did not increase the risk of enterocutaneous fistula formation nor mortality. Techniques to reduce visceral edema may improve the rate of closure; however, these studies were very limited and suffered significant heterogeneity.

CONCLUSION

We conditionally recommend the use of a fascial traction system over routine care when treating a patient with an OA after DCL. This recommendation is based on the benefit of improved primary myofascial closure without worsening mortality or enterocutaneous fistula formation. We are unable to make any recommendations regarding techniques to reduce visceral edema.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis; Level IV.

Direct Peritoneal Resuscitation for Trauma

Direct peritoneal resuscitation (DPR) has been found to be a useful adjunct in the management of critically ill trauma patients. DPR is performed following damage control surgery by leaving a surgical drain in the mesentery, placing a temporary abdominal closure, and postoperatively running peritoneal dialysis solution through the surgical drain with removal through the temporary closure. In the original animal models, the peritoneal dialysate infusion was found to augment visceral microcirculatory blood flow reducing the ischemic insult that occurs following hemorrhagic shock. DPR was also found to minimize the aberrant immune response that occurs secondary to shock and contributes to multisystem organ dysfunction. In the subsequent human trials, performing DPR had significant effects in several key categories. Traumatically injured patients who received DPR had a significantly shorter time to definitive fascial closure, had a higher likelihood of achieving primary fascial closure, and experienced fewer abdominal complications. The use of DPR has been further expanded as a useful adjunct for emergency general surgery patients and in the pretransplant care of human cadaver organ donors.

Open abdomen: is a dedicated emergency surgery team needed? A single center retrospective study on 141 consecutive patients

BACKGROUND

Open Abdomen (OA) is widely used when facing a catastrophic abdomen. Still, no indication is validated by a strong and high quality of evidence. The study reports the 5 year experience of a dedicated emergency general surgery (EGS) team.

METHODS

Retrospective observational cohort study. Patients undergoing OA management from 2/01/2015 to 19/07/2020 for trauma, non-traumatic emergencies or rescue surgery.

RESULTS

One hundred and forty-one patients. Age 66.9 ± 15.1. Male 58.2%.9.3% OA for trauma, 64.5% for non-traumatic emergencies and 26.2% for rescue surgery. 40.4% performed by the EGS team 52.4% indication for surgery was a severe intra-abdominal infection. TAC device: commercial negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) (83%), Sandwich VAC (12%), commercial NPWT with polypropylene mesh (5%) for pregressive fascial traction. Enteroatmospheric fistula (EAF) in 3 patients. OA duration 5.3 days (1-25). A 1.8 revision surgeries (0-12) required for definitive closure; ICU stay 9.9 days (0-78). 30-day mortality 23.5%. Overall and 1-year mortality were 47.5% and 43.3%. Overall survival 9.9 months. An increased one-year mortality rate was found in the >65 group (P = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

We reported a wide use of OA in septic abdomen (90% of cases). We had a low rate of EAF, short ICU stay and OA duration. These results are related to the fact that patients were treated by a dedicated EGS team, suggesting that OA management should be cared for as much as possible by trained and experienced surgeons. Prospective studies with more accurate patient selection are needed to prove our conclusions.

Damage-control surgery in patients with nontraumatic abdominal emergencies: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

After the successful implementation in trauma, damage-control surgery (DCS) is being increasingly used in patients with nontraumatic emergencies. However, the role of DCS in the nontrauma setting is not well defined. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of DCS on mortality in patients with nontraumatic abdominal emergencies.

METHODS

Systematic literature search was done using PubMed. Original articles addressing nontrauma DCS were included. Two meta-analyses were performed, comparing (1) mortality in patients undergoing nontrauma DCS versus conventional surgery (CS) and (2) the observed versus expected mortality rate in the DCS group. Expected mortality was derived from Acute Physiology And Chronic Health Evaluation, Simplified Acute Physiology Score, and Portsmouth Physiological and Operative Severity Score for enUmeration of Mortality and Morbidity scores.

RESULTS

A total of five nonrandomized prospective and 16 retrospective studies were included. Nontrauma DCS was performed in 1,238 and nontrauma CS in 936 patients. Frequent indications for surgery in the DCS group were (weighted proportions) hollow viscus perforation (28.5%), mesenteric ischemia (26.5%), anastomotic leak and postoperative peritonitis (19.6%), nontraumatic hemorrhage (18.4%), abdominal compartment syndrome (17.8%), bowel obstruction (15.5%), and pancreatitis (12.9%). In meta-analysis 1, including eight studies, mortality was not significantly different between the nontrauma DCS and CS group (risk difference, 0.09; 95% confidence interval, -0.06 to 0.24). Meta-analysis 2, including 14 studies, revealed a significantly lower observed than expected mortality rate in patients undergoing nontrauma DCS (risk difference, -0.18; 95% confidence interval, -0.29 to -0.06).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis revealed no significantly different mortality in patients undergoing nontrauma DCS versus CS. However, observed mortality was significantly lower than the expected mortality rate in the DCS group, suggesting a benefit of the DCS approach. Based on these two findings, the effect of DCS on mortality in patients with nontraumatic abdominal emergencies remains unclear. Further prospective investigation into this topic is warranted.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic review and meta-analysis, level III.

Diagnostic challenges in postoperative intra-abdominal sepsis in critically ill patients: When to reoperate?

The present paper was done to review common diagnostic techniques used to help surgeons find the most suitable way to diagnose postoperative intra-abdominal sepsis (IAS). The topic was searched on MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. Collected articles were classified and checked for their quality. Findings of selected research were included in this study and analyzed to find the best diagnostic method for intra-abdominal sepsis. IAS presents severe morbidity and mortality, and its early diagnosis can improve the outcome. Currently, there is no consensus among surgeons on a single diagnostic modality that should be used while deciding reoperation in patients with postoperative IAS. Though it has a high sensitivity for abdominal infections, computed tomography has limited applications due to mobility and time constraints. Diagnostic laparoscopy is a safe process that produces usable images, and can be used at the bedside. Diagnostic peritoneal lavage (DPL) has high sensitivity, and the patients testing positive through DPL can be subjected to exploratory laparotomy, depending on severity. Abdominal Reoperation Predictive Index (ARPI) is the only index reported as an aid for this purpose. Serial intra-abdominal pressure measurement has also emerged as a potential diagnostic tool. A proper selection of diagnostic modality is expected to improve the outcome in IAS, which presents high mortality risk and a limited time frame.

The role of direct peritoneal resuscitation in the treatment of hemorrhagic shock after trauma and in emergency acute care surgery: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Direct peritoneal resuscitation (DPR) has been used to help preserve microcirculation by reversing vasoconstriction and hypoperfusion associated with the pathophysiological process of shock, which can occur despite appropriate intravenous resuscitation. This approach depends on infusing a hyperosmolar solution intraperitoneally via a percutaneous catheter with the tip ending near the pelvis or the root of the mesentery. The abdomen is usually left open with a negative pressure abdominal dressing to continuously evacuate the infused dialysate. Hypertonicity of the solution triggers visceral vasodilation to help maintain blood flow, even during shock, and is also associated with reduced local inflammatory cytokines and other mediators, preservation of endothelial cell function, and mitigation of organ edema and necrosis. It also has a direct effect on liver perfusion and edema, more rapidly corrects electrolyte abnormalities compared to intravenous resuscitation alone, and may requireless intravenous fluid to stabilize blood pressure, all of which shortens the time required to close patients' abdomen.

METHODS

An online query using the search term "direct peritoneal resuscitation" was carried out in PubMed, MEDLINE and SciELO, limited to publications indexed from January 2014 to June 2020. Of the 20 articles returned, full text was able to be obtained for 19. A manual review of included articles' references was resulted in the addition of 1 article, for a total of 20 included articles.

RESULTS

The 20 articles were comprised of 15 animal studies, 4 clinical studies,and 1 expert opinion. The benefits include both local and possibly systemic effects on perfusion, hypoxia, acidosis, and inflammation, and are associated with improved outcomes and reduced complications.

CONCLUSION

DPR shows promise in patients with hemorrhagic shock, septic shock, and other conditions resulting in an open abdomen after damage control laparotomy.

Secondary Peritonitis and Intra-Abdominal Sepsis: An Increasingly Global Disease in Search of Better Systemic Therapies

Secondary peritonitis and intra-abdominal sepsis are a global health problem. The life-threatening systemic insult that results from intra-abdominal sepsis has been extensively studied and remains somewhat poorly understood. While local surgical therapy for perforation of the abdominal viscera is an age-old therapy, systemic therapies to control the subsequent systemic inflammatory response are scarce. Advancements in critical care have led to improved outcomes in secondary peritonitis. The understanding of the effect of secondary peritonitis on the human microbiome is an evolving field and has yielded potential therapeutic targets. This review of secondary peritonitis discusses the history, classification, pathophysiology, diagnosis, treatment, and future directions of the management of secondary peritonitis. Ongoing clinical studies in the treatment of secondary peritonitis and the open abdomen are discussed.

Direct Peritoneal Resuscitation: A Novel Adjunct to Damage Control Laparotomy

Direct peritoneal resuscitation is a validated resuscitation strategy for patients undergoing damage control surgery for hemorrhage, sepsis, or abdominal compartment syndrome with open abdomen and planned reexploration after a period of resuscitation in the intensive care unit. Direct peritoneal resuscitation can decrease visceral edema, normalize body water ratios, accelerate primary abdominal wall closure after damage control surgery, and prevent complications associated with open abdomen. This review article describes the physiological benefits of direct peritoneal resuscitation, how this technique fits within management priorities for the patient in shock, and procedural components in the care of open abdomen surgical patients receiving direct peritoneal resuscitation. Strategies for successful implementation of a novel multidisciplinary intervention in critical care practice are explored.

Effect of peritoneal dialysis solution with different pyruvate concentrations on intestinal injury

To investigate the effects of direct peritoneal resuscitation with pyruvate-peritoneal dialysis solution (Pyr-PDS) of different concentrations combined with intravenous resuscitation on acid–base imbalance and intestinal ischemia reperfusion injury in rats with hemorrhagic shock. Sixty rats were randomly assigned to group SHAM, group intravenous resuscitation, and four direct peritoneal resuscitation groups combined with intravenous resuscitation: group NS, LA, PY1, and PY2, that is, normal saline, lactate-PDS (Lac-PDS), lower concentration Pyr-PDS (Pyr-PDS1), and higher concentration Pyr-PDS (Pyr-PDS2), respectively. Two hours after hemorrhagic shock and resuscitation, the pH, oxygen partial pressure, carbon dioxide partial pressure (PCO2), base excess, and bicarbonate ion concentration (HCO3−) of the arterial blood were measured. The intestinal mucosal damage index and intercellular adhesion molecule 1 (ICAM-1), tumor necrosis factor-α, interleukin-6, zonula occludens-1, claudin-1, and occludin levels in intestinal issues were detected. Two hours after resuscitation, group PY2 had higher mean arterial pressure, pH, oxygen partial pressure, and base excess and lower PCO2of arterial blood than group PY1 ( P <  0.05). Tumor necrosis factor-α and interleukin-6 levels in group PY2 were significantly lower than those in group PY1 ( P <  0.05). Zonula occludens-1, claudin-1, and occludin expression levels were significantly higher in group PY2 than in group PY1 ( P <  0.05). Direct peritoneal resuscitation with Pyr-PDS2 combined with intravenous resuscitation enhanced the hemodynamics, improved the acid–base balance, and alleviated intestinal ischemia reperfusion injury from hemorrhagic shock and resuscitation in rats. The mechanisms might include correction of acidosis, inhibition of inflammatory response, enhancement of systemic immune status, regulation of intestinal epithelial permeability, and maintenance of intestinal mucosal barrier function.

Impact statement

Hemorrhagic shock is a life-threatening condition after trauma or during surgery. Acid–base imbalance and intestinal ischemia reperfusion injury are two significant causes in the pathogenetic process and multiple organ dysfunction. As a result, it is urgent and necessary to find an effective method of resuscitation in order to reverse the acid–base imbalance and protect organ function. This current study confirmed the protection against hypoxic acidosis and intestinal ischemia reperfusion injury by peritoneal resuscitation with pyruvate combined with intravenous resuscitation in rats with hemorrhagic shock. And the peritoneal dialysis solution with pyruvate of high concentration plays a crucial role in the process. It provided a new idea and possible direction of fluid resuscitation for alleviating organ injuries, protecting organ functions, and improving clinical prognosis after hemorrhagic shock and resuscitation.

Direct peritoneal resuscitation reduces inflammation in the kidney after acute brain death

Brain death is associated with significant inflammation within the kidneys, which may contribute to reduced graft survival. Direct peritoneal resuscitation (DPR) has been shown to reduce systemic inflammation after brain death. To determine its effects, brain dead rats were resuscitated with normal saline (targeted intravenous fluid) to maintain a mean arterial pressure of 80 mmHg; DPR animals also received 30 cc of intraperitoneal peritoneal dialysis solution. Rats were euthanized at 0, 2, 4, and 6 h after brain death. Pro-inflammatory cytokines were measured using ELISA. Levels of IL-1β, TNF-α, and IL-6 in the kidney were significantly increased as early as 2 h after brain death and significantly decreased with DPR. Levels of leukocyte adhesion molecules ICAM and VCAM increased after brain death and were decreased with DPR (ICAM 2.33 ± 0.14 vs. 0.42 ± 0.04, P = 0.002; VCAM 82.6 ± 5.8 vs. 37.3 ± 1.9, P = 0.002 at 4 h) as were E-selectin and P-selectin (E-selectin 25,605 vs. 16,144, P = 0.005; P-selectin 82.5 ± 3.3 vs. 71.0 ± 2.3, P = 0.009 at 4 h). Use of DPR reduces inflammation and adhesion molecule expression in the kidneys, and is associated with reduced macrophages and neutrophils on immunohistochemistry. Using DPR in brain dead donors has the potential to reduce the immunologic activity of transplanted kidneys and could improve graft survival.

Abdominal compartment syndrome and the open abdomen: any unresolved issues?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article reviews the key principles of abdominal compartment syndrome and the open abdomen, exploring some of the unresolved issues. It reviews new concepts in care.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent use of peritoneal resuscitation, and benefits of mesh-mediated traction are discussed. Abdominal compartment syndrome remains a result of complex interaction between general haemorrhage, sepsis and fluid resuscitation. Improved resuscitation and sepsis control has decreased but not abolished the need for the open abdomen and progression for abdominal compartment syndrome. Fourth-generation abdominal wall dressings need to be combined with a dynamic closure system; currently, negative pressure wound therapy at the index open abdomen coupled with mesh-mediated tractions offers the best outcome.

SUMMARY

The key to optimizing outcome is early abdominal closure within 7 days because failure to do so will increase morbidity, mortality and fistulae formation. Novel techniques complementing existing de-resuscitation techniques are discussed.

The gut in trauma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to describe established and emerging mechanisms of gut injury and dysfunction in trauma, describe emerging strategies to improve gut dysfunction, detail the effect of trauma on the gut microbiome, and describe the gut-brain connection in traumatic brain injury.

RECENT FINDINGS

Newer data suggest intraluminal contents, pancreatic enzymes, and hepatobiliary factors disrupt the intestinal mucosal layer. These mechanisms serve to perpetuate the inflammatory response leading to multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS). To date, therapies to mitigate acute gut dysfunction have included enteral nutrition and immunonutrition; emerging therapies aimed to intestinal mucosal layer disruption, however, include protease inhibitors such as tranexamic acid, parenteral nutrition-supplemented bombesin, and hypothermia. Clinical trials to demonstrate benefit in humans are needed before widespread applications can be recommended.

SUMMARY

Despite resuscitation, gut dysfunction promotes distant organ injury. In addition, postresuscitation nosocomial and iatrogenic 'hits' exaggerate the immune response, contributing to MODS. This was a provocative concept, suggesting infectious and noninfectious causes of inflammation may trigger, heighten, and perpetuate an inflammatory response culminating in MODS and death. Emerging evidence suggests posttraumatic injury mechanisms, such as intestinal mucosal disruption and shifting of the gut microbiome to a pathobiome. In addition, traumatic brain injury activates the gut-brain axis and increases intestinal permeability.

A Randomized Controlled Trial on Intra-Abdominal Irrigation during Emergency Trauma Laparotomy; Time for Yet Another Paradigm Shift

OBJECTIVE

To determine the optimal volume of abdominal irrigation that will prevent surgical site infections (both deep and superficial), eviscerations and fistula formations; and improve 30-day mortality in trauma patients.

METHODS

We conducted a three-arm parallel clinical superiority randomized controlled trial comparing different volumes of effluent (5, 10 and 20 liters) used in trauma patients (both blunt and penetrating) age 14 and above undergoing an emergency laparotomy between April 2002 and July 2004 in a busy urban Level 1 trauma center.

RESULTS

After randomization, a total of 204 patients were analyzed. All patient groups were comparable with respect to age, gender distribution, admission injury severity score, and mechanism of injury, estimated blood loss and degree of contamination. The mortality rate overall was 1.96% (4/204).No differences were noted with respect to contamination, wound infection, fistula formation, and evisceration. The twenty liter group (Group III) showed a trend toward an increased incidence of deep surgical site infections when compared to the five liter (Group I) (p=0.051) and ten liter (Group II) (p=0.057) groups. This did not however reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

The old surgical adage "the solution to pollution is dilution" is not applicable to trauma patients. Our results suggest that using more irrigation, even when large amounts of contamination have occurred, does not reduce post-operative complications or affect mortality; and it may predispose patients to increased incidence of abscess formation. (Trial registration number: ISRCTN66454589).

Temporary abdominal closure for trauma and intra-abdominal sepsis: Different patients, different outcomes

BACKGROUND

Temporary abdominal closure (TAC) after damage control surgery (DCS) for injured patients has been generalized to septic patients. However, direct comparisons between these populations are lacking. We hypothesized that patients with intra-abdominal sepsis would have different resuscitation requirements and lower primary fascial closure rates than trauma patients.

STUDY DESIGN

We performed a 3-year retrospective cohort analysis of patients managed with TAC for trauma (n = 77) or intra-abdominal sepsis (n = 147). All patients received negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) TAC with intention for planned relaparotomy and sequential abdominal closure attempts at 24- to 48-hour intervals.

RESULTS

At presentation, trauma patients had higher rates of hypothermia (31% vs. 18%), severe acidosis (27% vs. 14%), and coagulopathy (68% vs. 48%), and septic patients had higher vasopressor infusion rates (46% vs. 27%). Forty-eight hours after presentation, septic patients had persistently higher vasopressor infusion rates (37% vs. 17%), and trauma patients had received more red blood cell transfusions (6.0 U vs. 0.0 U), fresh frozen plasma (5.0 U vs. 0.0 U), and crystalloid (8,290 vs. 7,159 ml). Among patients surviving to discharge, trauma patients had higher primary fascial closure (PFC) rates (90% vs. 76%). For trauma patients, independent predictors of failure to achieve PCF were ≥2.5 L NPWT output at 48 hours, ≥10 L crystalloid administration at 48 hours, and ≥10 U PRBC + FFP at 48 hours. For septic patients, relaparotomy within 48 hours predicted successful PFC; requirement for ≥3 diagnostic/therapeutic laparotomies predicted failure to achieve PFC.

CONCLUSIONS

Traumatic injury and intra-abdominal sepsis are associated with distinct pathophysiologic insults, resuscitation requirements, and outcomes. Failure to achieve primary fascial closure in trauma patients was attributable to the triad of hypothermia, acidosis, and coagulopathy; failure to achieve fascial closure in septic patients was dependent upon operative course. Indications and optimal techniques for TAC may differ between these populations.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic study, level IV; prognostic study, level III.

Nontrauma open abdomens: A prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Damage-control surgery with open abdomen (OA) is described for trauma, but little exists regarding use in the emergency general surgery. This study aimed to better define the following: demographics, indications for surgery and OA, fascial and surgical site complications, and in-hospital/long-term mortality. We hypothesize that older patients will have increased mortality, patients will have protracted stays, they will require specialized postdischarge care, and the indications for OA will be varied.

METHODS

A prospective observational study of emergency general surgery OA patients from June 2013 to June 2014 was performed. Demographics, clinical/operative variables, comorbidities, indications for procedure and OA, wound/fascial complications, and disposition were collected. Patients were stratified into age groups (≤ 60, 61-79, and ≥ 80 years). Six-month and 1-year mortality was determined by query of the Social Security Death Index.

RESULTS

A total of 338 laparotomies were performed, of which 96 (28%) were managed with an OA. Median age was 61 years (interquartile range [IQR], 0-68 years), and 51% were male. The median Charlson Comorbidity Index was 2 (IQR, 1.5-5.1), and the median hospital stay was 25 days (IQR, 15-50 days). The most common indications for operation were perforated viscus/free air (20%), mesenteric ischemia (17%), peritonitis (16%), and gastrointestinal hemorrhage (12%). The most common indication for OA was damage control (37%). In the 63 patients with fascial closure, there were 9 (14%) wound infections and 6 (10%) fascial dehiscences. A total of 30% of the patients died in the hospital, and an additional six patients died 6 months after discharge. Patients in the oldest age stratum were more likely to die at 6 months than those in the lower strata.

CONCLUSION

Older patients were more likely to die by 6 months, the median hospital stay was 3 weeks, and there were multiple indications for OA management. With a 6-month mortality of 36% and 70% of survivors requiring postdischarge care, this population represents a critically ill population meriting additional study.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic and epidemiologic study, level III.

Not All Abdomens Are the Same: A Comparison of Damage Control Surgery for Intra-abdominal Sepsis versus Trauma

Damage control surgery (DCS) was developed to manage exsanguinating trauma patients, but is increasingly applied to the management of peritoneal sepsis and abdominal catastrophes. Few manuscripts compare the outcomes of these surgeries on disparate patient populations. A multi-institutional three group propensity score matched case cohort study comparing penetrating trauma (PT-DCS), blunt trauma (BT-DCS), and intraperitoneal sepsis (IPS-DCS) was performed comparing patients treated with DSC between 2008 and 2013. Propensity scoring was performed using demographic and presenting physiologic data. Four hundred and twelve patients were treated with DCS across two institutions. Propensity matching for age, gender, and initial Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score 80 identified 80 patients per group for comparison. Rate of primary fascial closure was lowest in the IPS-DCS group, and highest in the penetrating trauma DCS group. Intra-abdominal complication rates were highest in the IPS-DCS group. IPS-DCS had increased time to definitive closure compared with the other two groups (RR 1.8; 1.3–2.2; P < 0.03). Mortality at 90 days was highest in the IPS-DCS group and patients whose definitive closure was delayed >eight days were more than twice the risk of death at 90 days across all groups. (RR 2.15; 1.2–3.5; P < 0.002). Expected outcomes after the use of DCS for trauma and emergency general surgery are quite different. Despite this difference, prompt abdominal closure at the earliest possible opportunity afforded the best outcome in patients managed via DCS.

Direct Peritoneal Resuscitation Alters Hepatic miRNA Expression after Hemorrhagic Shock

BACKGROUND

MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are small segments of noncoding RNA that regulate gene expression and protein function, and therefore are key regulators of cellular processes including those of the inflammatory cascade after hemorrhagic shock (HS). We have previously shown that direct peritoneal resuscitation (DPR), as an adjunct to traditional IV fluid resuscitation, improves visceral blood flow and reduces pro-inflammatory cytokines released during HS. The effects of DPR on hepatic miRNA (miR) expression patterns after resuscitated HS are not known.

STUDY DESIGN

Male Sprague-Dawley rats were divided into 3 groups: sham (no HS); conventional resuscitation (CR; HS, then resuscitated with shed blood and 2 volumes of saline); and DPR (CR plus 30 mL peritoneal dialysis solution). Animals were sacrificed at 4 hours, and miRNAs were measured using reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction.

RESULTS

Use of DPR downregulated 68 of 92 hepatic miRNAs compared with only 2 of 92 upregulated when compared with CR alone, p < 0.01). Specifically, miR-9-5p, miR-122-5p, and miR-146, which regulate NFκB, were downregulated 4.1-, 3.4-, and 0.86-fold, respectively; miR-29a and miR-126 were upregulated 0.88- and 3.7-fold when DPR was compared with CR.

CONCLUSIONS

Adding DPR downregulated most hepatic miRNAs compared with CR alone. Some miRNAs were affected more significantly, suggesting that although this clinical intervention causes a near-global downregulation of hepatic miRNA, it still targets specific inflammatory pathways. Use of DPR for resuscitation of patients in HS may reduce hepatic inflammation to improve patient outcomes after hemorrhage.

Management of the lower gastrointestinal system in burn: A comprehensive review

BACKGROUND

Burn produces complex gastrointestinal (GI) responses. Treatment, including large volume fluid resuscitation and opioid analgesia, may exacerbate GI dysfunction. Complications include constipation and opioid-induced bowel dysfunction (OBD), acute colonic pseudo-obstruction (ACPO), bacterial translocation and sepsis, and abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS). Contamination of perineal burns contributes to delayed healing, skin graft failure and sepsis and may impact upon morbidity and mortality. The authors carried out a literature review on management of the lower GI system in burn. This study aimed to explain: current prevention and treatment modalities; drawbacks and complications associated with available treatments, and to provide direction for development of best practice guidelines. ACS is associated with high mortality and should be treated with careful fluid resuscitation and diuresis, to minimise and remove oedema.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of English language literature was performed on PubMed, Medline and Embase. Both MeSH and keywords searches were used.

RESULTS

Evidence available on the management of lower gastrointestinal system in burn is summarised. Levels of evidence available are generally low (level III-IV).

CONCLUSION

Structured, graded interventions are required for prevention and treatment of constipation and OBD. Correction of electrolyte imbalance, adequate enteral intake and mobilisation are pre-requisites. Laxatives should be used according to World Gastroenterology Organisation recommendations. Resistant constipation may respond to changes in medication, but ACPO should be suspected and treated when present. Other complications, such as bacterial translocation and ACS are common in major burns. There is evidence that selective digestive tract decontamination reduces mortality and infectious episodes in major burns. ACS is associated with high mortality and should be treated with careful fluid resuscitation and diuresis. Surgery is reserved for non-responsive and severe cases. Perineal burns present challenges in wound and bowel management. Faecal management systems and negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) may improve wound control and hygiene, but diversion colostomy will still be beneficial in some cases. There is a clear need for rigorous studies to guide practice more effectively in these challenging conditions.

Direct peritoneal resuscitation improves survival and decreases inflammation after intestinal ischemia and reperfusion injury

BACKGROUND

Direct peritoneal resuscitation (DPR) has previously been shown to alter blood flow in the small bowel mesenteric vessels in models of intestinal ischemia. However, a survival advantage or its effects on local tissue inflammation have not been previously demonstrated. We hypothesized that DPR would increase survival and decrease intestinal tissue inflammation after intestinal ischemia and reperfusion (I/R) injury.

METHODS

Eight-week-old male C57Bl6J mice were anesthetized and underwent midline laparotomy. I/R and DPR groups were exposed to superior mesenteric artery occlusion for 60 min with a nontraumatic clamp. Immediately after removal of the clamp, 1 mL of phosphate-buffered saline, 1 mL of minimal essential media, or 1 mL of minimal essential media supplemented with fetal bovine serum, penicillin and/or streptomycin, and glutamine were placed into the abdominal cavity of DPR groups. Animals were then closed in two layers and allowed to reperfuse for 6 h (cytokine analysis, n = 6 per group) or 7 d (survival analysis, n = 10 per group). After 6 h of reperfusion, animals were euthanized. Intestines were harvested and homogenized. Extracts were quantified for total protein content (Bradford assay), myeloperoxidase activity, tissue inflammatory cytokine, and growth factor production. P < 0.05 was significant.

RESULTS

I/R caused marked intestinal ischemia, significant mortality, and a significant increase in tissue cytokine and growth factor levels (P < 0.05). Seven-day survival was 30% for I/R without treatment and rose to 60% with DPR therapy using phosphate-buffered saline as the dialysate. DPR using plain MEM or MEM with supplements after ischemia increased 7-d survival to 90% (P < 0.05). DPR also significantly decreased intestinal tissue levels of myeloperoxidase, as well as intestinal tissue levels of multiple growth factors and inflammatory cytokines.

CONCLUSIONS

DPR increases survival and decreases intestinal inflammation after intestinal I/R injury. Translational applications are readily achievable and should be considered for patients with intestinal ischemic pathology.

Addition of direct peritoneal lavage to human cadaver organ donor resuscitation improves organ procurement

BACKGROUND

Brain dead organ donors have altered central hemodynamic performance, impaired hormone physiology, exaggerated systemic inflammatory response, end-organ microcirculatory dysfunction, and tissue hypoxia. A new treatment, direct peritoneal resuscitation (DPR), stabilizes vital organ blood flow after conventionally resuscitated shock to improve these derangements.

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective case-control study of adjunctive DPR compared 26 experimental patients (brain dead organ donors) to 52 controls (protocolized conventionally resuscitated donors). Actual organ procurement rates were compared with the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipient predicted organ yield per patient. Achievement of donor management goals and effective hepatic blood flow were recorded.

RESULTS

Fourteen of 26 (53.8%) patients treated with DPR achieved all donor management goals compared with 17 of 52 (32.7%) patients treated with conventionally resuscitated (odds ratio = 2.4; 95% CI, 0.92-6.3; p = 0.06). Patients treated with DPR were more than 2 times as likely to achieve final pO2 >100 on 40% FiO2 compared with controls (odds ratio = 2.8; 95% CI, 1-7.69; p = 0.03). Also, DPR-treated patients required less IV crystalloid during the first 12 hours of management (DPR: 3,167 ± 1,893 mL vs 4,154 ± 2,100 mL; p = 0.046) and required less vasopressor agents at 12 hours post resuscitation (odds ratio = 7.7; 95% CI, 0.82-42; p = 0.02). Direct peritoneal resuscitation patients had enhanced effective hepatic blood flow and significantly higher organs transplanted per donor rates compared with controls (3.7 ± 1.7 vs 3.1 ± 1.3; p = 0.024).

CONCLUSIONS

Direct peritoneal resuscitation reduced IV fluid requirement and IV pressor use as well as increased hepatic blood flow and organs transplanted per donor. Direct peritoneal resuscitation studies show it to be a safe, effective method to augment organ donor resuscitation and additional large-scale trials should be conducted to validate these findings.