RESUMO
INTRODUCTION AND AIM: Normally, the bile ducts are sterile, but up to 4.2% of healthy persons can present with positive cultures. Certain circumstances favor that situation, such as gallstones or biliary tree manipulation. The aim of the present study was to determine the factors that influence the presence of bacteriobilia, as well as its implications for clinical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective study was conducted on bile cultures from patients that underwent cholecystectomy at our hospital center within the time frame of 2013 to 2015. RESULTS: The study included 196 patients (42.3% women and 57.7% men) that underwent either open or laparoscopic cholecystectomy and in whom bile fluid samples were taken. The clinical, epidemiologic, and laboratory test characteristics of the patients were analyzed, as well as the surgical indication (urgent surgery or programmed surgery). With respect to microbiology, 47% of the bile cultures were positive: 56.5% presented with one microorganism, 25% with two, and 18.5% with three or more. CONCLUSION: Microbiologic bile analysis should not be systematically performed, given that its result is relevant only in cases that present with demonstrated risk factors. However, in those cases, said analysis is essential to establish adequate antibiotic treatment, in relation to activity spectrum and duration, to prevent complications and an increase in microbial resistance.
Assuntos
Bile/microbiologia , Colecistectomia , Adulto , Idoso , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos ProspectivosRESUMO
INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: Abdominal ultrasonography is very useful for diagnosing acute appendicitis and has 59-96% sensitivity and 83-98% specificity. The aim of the present study was to determine the diagnostic yield of abdominal ultrasound imaging for acute appendicitis and identify the patient subgroups with the best results. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients at a general hospital that underwent appendectomy due to the clinical suspicion of appendicitis, who also had a diagnostic radiologic study, within the time frame of January 2007 to December 2010, were analyzed. Ultrasound studies were considered positive when there were radiologic signs suggestive of acute appendicitis. The sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of the diagnostic study were determined through the logistic regression method. RESULTS: A total of 646 patients were operated on due to clinical suspicion of acute appendicitis. A diagnostic abdominal ultrasound study was carried out on 383 (59.3%) of those patients, resulting in 79% sensitivity (74-83, 95% CI), 58% specificity (39-75, 95% CI), 95% positive predictive value (92-97, 95% CI), and 20% negative predictive value (13-30, 95% CI). CONCLUSIONS: Abdominal ultrasound imaging in patients with a high suspicion of appendicitis had a mediocre diagnostic yield, but better results could be achieved in different specific subgroups.
Assuntos
Abdome/diagnóstico por imagem , Apendicite/diagnóstico por imagem , Doença Aguda , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Apendicectomia , Apendicite/patologia , Apendicite/cirurgia , Feminino , Humanos , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Retrospectivos , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Ultrassonografia , Adulto JovemRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Report our experience in the diagnosis and treatment of Boerhaave syndrome by retrospective study from 1997 to 2013. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted covering the time frame of 1997 to 2013. RESULTS: There were a total of 5 men (71%) and 2 women (29%) and the mean age was 54 years (range: 33-80 years). Diagnosis was made through computed tomography scan in 5 cases (71%) and esophagogram in 2 cases (19%). Six patients (86%) had emergency surgery, whereas one case (14%) was managed conservatively. The surgical technique employed was primary suture and repair in 4 patients (67%) and esophageal resection and subsequent cervical esophagostomy in 2 patients (33%). CONCLUSIONS: Boerhaave's syndrome is a clinically rare entity with an elevated mortality rate. Therefore, a high degree of suspicion is necessary for making the diagnosis and providing early treatment that can result in improved outcome.
Assuntos
Perfuração Esofágica/terapia , Doenças do Mediastino/terapia , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Endoscopia Gastrointestinal , Perfuração Esofágica/diagnóstico , Perfuração Esofágica/cirurgia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Doenças do Mediastino/diagnóstico , Doenças do Mediastino/cirurgia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Retrospectivos , Tomografia Computadorizada por Raios XRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The laparoscopic approach to bowel obstruction is still controversial. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate our initial results in the laparoscopic treatment of bowel obstruction. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective study on patients diagnosed with bowel obstruction that underwent laparoscopic surgery within the time frame of January 2008 to June 30, 2012. The variables employed were: age, sex, occlusion etiology, previous surgeries, clinical progression, pneumoperitoneum creation, use of an auxiliary incision, anesthesia duration, conversion rate, postoperative hospital stay, time needed to tolerate liquids, and complications. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients, 18 women (69.2%) and 8 men (30.8%), with a mean age of 64.35 years (range: 21-92 years) were analyzed. The most frequent obstruction etiology was secondary to adhesions and presented in 12 cases. Nine patients (34.6%) underwent a completely laparoscopic approach and laparoscopy was complemented by an auxiliary incision in another 9 patients (34.6%), resulting in 18 cases (69.2%) of successful laparoscopic approach. Eight patients (30.8%) required conversion to open surgery. The mean anesthesia duration was 95min (range: 55-165min), mean postoperative hospital stay was 6 days (range: 3-72 days), and the mean amount of time needed to tolerate liquids was 3 days (range: 1-10 days). The patients that underwent complete laparoscopic approach presented with shorter hospital stay, they were able to ingest liquids earlier, and they presented with a lower number of postoperative complications; this latter variable was the only one that was statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: The initial results of our experience were good, although more patients are needed in order to standardize and extend the use of this technique.
Assuntos
Procedimentos Cirúrgicos do Sistema Digestório/métodos , Obstrução Intestinal/cirurgia , Laparoscopia/métodos , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Feminino , Humanos , Obstrução Intestinal/etiologia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Retrospectivos , Resultado do Tratamento , Adulto JovemRESUMO
BACKGROUND: There is no international consensus on the approach of choice for performing appendectomy. AIMS: To analyze and compare open and laparoscopic approaches in the surgical treatment of acute appendicitis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective study was carried out on patients over 14-years-old operated on for suspected acute appendicitis between January 2007 and December 2009. Variables were: age, sex, body mass index, specialized surgeon or resident in training, progression duration, conversion rate, use of drains, abdominal cavity irrigation, macroscopic appearance of the appendix, onset time of anesthesia, ASA classification, postoperative hospital stay, resumption of intake of liquids, and complications. The patients were divided into two groups: laparoscopic approach (LA) and open approach (OA). RESULTS: A total of 533 patients were enrolled (290 LA and 243 OA). Onset time of anesthesia was 75 min (30-190 min) in LA vs 55 min (20-160 min) in OA (p<0,0001). COMPLICATIONS: intraabdominal abscesses in 17 LA cases vs 13 OA cases (p=0,79); surgical wound alterations in 16 LA cases vs 47 OA cases (p=0,0001); incisional hernias in 2 LA cases (1%) vs 10 OA cases (p=0,008). There were no statistically significant differences in postoperative hospital stay (3 days), resumption of intake of liquids (1 day) or readmission rate (8%). CONCLUSIONS: There are fewer surgical wound alterations and incisional hernias with the laparoscopic approach, but there is higher cost, lengthier surgery duration, and a longer learning curve. Our results cannot provide a clear indication for one approach or the other, and therefore each case must be evaluated on an individual basis.