Analysis of surgical treatment tactics and treatment results for common purulent peritonitis in a multidisciplinary surgical hospital
https://doi.org/10.1234/YMJ.2022.77.14
Abstract
The aim of the study was a retrospective analysis of the choice of surgical treatment tactics and the results of CPP treatment in a multidisciplinary urgent surgical hospital. Material and methods. The study is based on a retrospective analysis of the results of complex treatment of 253 patients with CPP who were treated in the emergency surgical departments of the Republican Hospital №2 - Emergency Medical Aid Center (RH№ 2-CEMA) of the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia) in the period from 2015 to 2022. Results. In the clinic under consideration, the CPP tactic was most often used for CPP – 47,4%, while the share of ROD accounted for at least 27,7%, which is largely due to the profile of the clinic (Center for Emergency Medical Aid of the third level), but already at 31,4 In% of cases, after ROD, the transition to RAP was carried out, which led to a low mortality rate even with HS and SS – 16,7%. Moreover, in more than 91,7% of cases with CPP, as a rule, no more than two or three sanitizing relaparotomy were performed. The widespread introduction into surgical treatment practice of integral scales for assessing the severity of the general condition and the nature of damage to the abdominal organs ‒ APACHE II, SOFA, MIP and ACI made it possible to more objectively assess the clinical situation and choose surgical treatment tactics. Conclusion. The results of the clinical study presented by us allow us to conclude that the use on an ongoing basis of the currently existing systems for assessing the severity of the condition and the nature of damage to the abdominal organs, along with intensive therapy, can reduce the level of postoperative mortality to 20-30% even with the development of HS.
About the Authors
V. V. Saveliev
M.K. Ammosov North-Eastern Federal University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Vyacheslav V. Saveliev – gr. PhD, professor of the department of surgery, urology, oncology and otorhinolaryngology of the Medical Institute, M.K. Ammosov North-Eastern Federal University.
M. M. Vinokurov
M.K. Ammosov North-Eastern Federal University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Mikhail M. Vinokurov ‒ gr. PhD, professor, head of the department of surgery, urology, oncology and otorhinolaryngology of the Medical Institute of M.K. Ammosov North-Eastern Federal University.
V. V. Popov
Republic Hospital №2-Center for Emergency
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Vladimir V. Popov ‒ surgeon of the Republic Hospital №2-Center for Emergency.
V. V. Badaguyeva
M.K. Ammosov North-Eastern Federal University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Veronica V. Badaguyeva ‒ 5th year student of the department of the Medical Institute of M.K. Ammosov North-Eastern Federal University.
References
1. Criteria for choosing an effective tactics of surgical treatment of generalized peritonitis / V.S. Saveliev, B.R. Gelfand, M.I. Filimonov [et al.] // Annals of Surgery. ‒ 2013. ‒ №. 2. ‒ P. 48-54.
2. Maskin S.S. Program and emergency relaparotomies in the treatment of generalized peritonitis / S.S. Maskin, V.A. Golbraikh, T.V. Derbentsev // Bulletin of Volgograd State Medical University. – 2012. ‒ №. 4(44). ‒ P. 105-107.
3. Acute perforated ulcers of the small intestine in patients with common purulent peritonitis / V.А. Holbreich, S.S. Maskin, A.V. Bobyrin [et al.] // Bulletin of experimental and clinical surgery. ‒ 2012. – №. 1. ‒ P. 51-53.
4. Polenok P.V. Tactics of staged surgical treatment of patients with emergency abdominal disease / P.V. Polenok // Kazan Medical Journal. ‒ 2015. ‒ №. 1. ‒ P. 22-27.
5. Programmed relaparotomy in the treatment of diffuse purulent peritonitis / V.А. Avakimyan, G.K. Karipidi, S.V. Avakimyan [et al.] // Kuban Scientific Medical Bulletin. ‒ 2017. ‒ №. 24 (6). ‒ P. 12-16. doi: 10.25207/1608-6228-2017-24-6-12-16.
6. Common peritonitis: evolution of surgical treatment methods / I.S. Malkov, V.A. Filippov, V.N. Korobkov [et al.] // Practical Medicine. ‒ 2017. ‒ №. 6(107). ‒ P. 46-49.
7. Relaparotomy in patients with peritonitis / M.N. Agzamova, Zh.S. Abdullaev, A.M. Usarov [et el.] // Young scientist. ‒ 2017. ‒ №. 18(152). ‒ P. 111-112.
8. Saveliev V.S. Peritonitis (a practical guide) / V.S. Saveliev, B.R. Gelfand, M.I. Filimonov. ‒ Moscow: Litterra Publishing House, 2006. - 208 p.
9. Sukovatykh B.S. Optimization of the technology of video endoscopic sanitation of the abdominal cavity in case of widespread purulent peritonitis. Sukovatykh, Yu.Yu. Blinkov, P.A. Ivanov // Surgery. ‒ 2012. ‒ №. 7. ‒ P. 53-57.
10. Sukovatykh B.S. New methods of treating generalized peritonitis / B.S. Sukovatykh, Yu.Yu. Blinkov // Bulletin of Experimental and Clinical Surgery. ‒ 2014. ‒ №. 2. ‒ P. 165-176.
11. Tertiary peritonitis: state of the problem and possible prospects / А.А. Shchegolev, R.S. Tovmasyan, A.Yu. Chevokin [et al.] / General Medicine. ‒ 2018. ‒ №. 4. ‒ P. 32-35. doi.org/10.24411/2071-5315-2018-12063
12. Surgical aspects of the treatment of patients with generalized peritonitis / B.V. Sigua, V.P. Zemlyanoy, S.V. Petrov [et al.] // Zhurnal im. N.V. Sklifosovsky Research Institute for Emergency Medicine. ‒ 2021. ‒ №. 10 (1). ‒ P. 58-65. doi.org/10.23934/2223-9022-2021-10-1-58-65.
13. Chernyadev S.A. Differentiated approach in the treatment of patients with generalized peritonitis requiring sanitization relaparotomy / S.A. Chernyadyev, K.A. Kubasov, E.I. Bulaeva // Bulletin of the Ural State Medical University. ‒ 2020. – №. 1. ‒ P. 72-74.
14. Evaluation of prognosis in patients’ with perforation peritonitis using Mannheim’s peritonitis index / T. Dani, L. Ramachandra, R. Nair [et el.] // International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications. ‒ 2015. ‒ №. 5(5). ‒ P. 126-131.
15. Evaluation of various prognostic factors in perforative peritonitis management / S. Budamala, A. Penugonda, G.V. Prakash, N.V. Ramaniah [et el.] // Journal of Evidence based Medicine and Healthcare. ‒ 2015. ‒ №. 2(38). ‒ P. 6027-6035. doi: 10.18410/jebmh/2015/831.
16. External validation of a decision tool to guide post-operative management of patients with secondary peritonitis / J.J. Atema, K. Ram, M.J. Schultz [et al.] // Surg. Infect. (Larchmt). ‒ 2017. ‒ №. 18(2). ‒ P. 189-195. doi: 10.1089/sur.2016.017.
17. Postoperative peritonitis after digestive tract surgery: surgical management and risk factors for morbidity and mortality, a cohort of 191 patients / T. Bensignor, J.H. Lefevre, B. Creavin [et el.] // World J. Surg. – 2018. – №. 42 (11). – P. 3589-3598. doi: 10.1007/s00268-018-4687-6.
18. Siqueira J. De. Managing the open abdomen in a district general hospital / J. De Siqueira, O. Tawfiq, G. Garner // Ann. R. Coll. Surg. Engl. – 2014. ‒ №. 96(3). ‒ P. 194-198. doi: 10.1308/003588414X13814021678556.
19. The usefulness of the Mannheim peritonitis index score in assessing the condition of patients treated for peritonitis / P. Budzynski, J. Dworak, M. Natkaniec [et al.] // Pol. Przegl. Chir. – 2015. – №. 87 (6). – P. 301-306. doi: 10.1515/pjs-2015-0058.
Review
For citations:
Saveliev V.V., Vinokurov M.M., Popov V.V., Badaguyeva V.V. Analysis of surgical treatment tactics and treatment results for common purulent peritonitis in a multidisciplinary surgical hospital. Yakut Medical Journal. 2022;(1):53-57. https://doi.org/10.1234/YMJ.2022.77.14
Views:
21
Email this article 