Israel Medical Association Journal

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a significant impact on healthcare systems worldwide. The fear of seeking medical attention to avoid the possibility of being infected may have altered the course of some diseases.

Objectives: To describe our experience with the management of patients with acute cholecystitis during the pandemic at our medical center.

Methods: We compared patients treated for acute cholecystitis between 1 March and 31 August 2020 (Group I) to patients admitted with the same diagnosis during the same months in 2019 (Group II). We evaluated demographics, presenting symptoms, laboratory and imaging findings at presentation, the disease's clinical course, management, and outcome.

Results: Group I consisted of 101 patients and group II included 94 patients. No differences were noted for age (66 years, IQR 48–78 vs. 66 years, IQR 47–76; P = 0.50) and sex (57.4% vs. 51.1% females; P = 0.39) between the two groups. The delay between symptom onset and hospital admission was longer for Group I patients (3 days, IQR 2–7 vs. 2 days, IQR 1–3; P = 0.002). Moderate to severe disease was more commonly encountered in Group I (59.4% vs. 37.2%, P = 0.003). Group I patients more often failed conservative management (36% vs. 6%, P = 0.001) and had a higher conversion rate to open surgery (15.4% vs. 0%, P = 0.025).

Conclusions: Patients presenting with acute cholecystitis during the COVID-19 pandemic more often presented late to the emergency department and more showed adverse outcomes

Background: Selective management of stable patients with anterior abdomen stab wounds (AASWs) has become a gold standard management approach throughout the world. Evidenced-based options for supporting selective management include clinical follow-up, local wound exploration with or without diagnostic peritoneal lavage, diagnostic laparoscopy, and abdominal computerized tomography. The presence of multiple AASWs might signify a more aggressive attack and limit the safety of a selective management approach.

Objectives: To evaluate whether multiple AASWs are associated with an increased risk of intra-abdominal injury requiring emergency surgery.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed all AASW patients admitted to Assaf Harofeh Medical Center, Zerifin, Israel, and Hillel Yaffe Medical Center in Hadera, Israel, from 2007 to 2015. Patients were divided into two groups based on the number of stab wounds: single or multiple. Data were coded for demographics, severity of injury, presence of intra-abdominal injury, laparotomy rate, length of hospital stay (LOS), length of stay in the intensive care unit (LICU), and survival.

Results: The study included 169 patients. Of these, 143 patients had a single AASW and 26 had multiple AASWs. There were no differences between the groups regarding demographics, severity of injury, intra-abdominal penetration, specific organ injury, LOS, or LICU. There was no difference in the percentage of patients requiring laparotomy. The overall mortality was 2.36% (4/169). There was no significant difference in the mortality rate between the groups (P = 0.11).

Conclusions: The presence of multiple AASWs is not a risk factor for increased frequency and severity of intra-abdominal injury.

Background: Damage control laparotomy (DCL) is the widely accepted procedure of choice in management of severely injured trauma patient. It has been implemented in non-trauma-related surgical pathology in the last decade.

Objectives: To evaluate our experience with planned re-laparotomy (PRL) in non-trauma patients and compare it to other reports.

Methods: Charts of all patients admitted to Assaf Harofeh Medical Center who underwent PRL for non-trauma-related abdominal pathology during a 6 year period were reviewed. Data regarding demographics, vital signs, laboratory tests, indications for surgery, length of hospital stay, and mortality were obtained from medical charts. Indications for surgery, risk factors, and mortality were analyzed.

Results: The study was comprised of 181 patients. Primary abdominal sepsis (50), postoperative sepsis (49), mesenteric event (32), and intestinal obstruction (28) were the most common indications for PRL. Mortality rate was 48.6%. Factors correlating with increased mortality were advanced age, hypotension, hypothermia, metabolic acidosis, and renal failure. Bowel resection was performed on 122 patients (67%) and primary intestinal anastomosis constructed in 46.7%. Mortality rate was lower in patients who underwent PRL with primary anastomosis compared to patients with postponed bowel anastomosis (33.3% vs. 55.4%, P = 0.018).

Conclusions: PRL in abdominal emergencies carries a high mortality rate. Primary anastomosis may be considered in non-trauma-related PRL.

Background: Trauma patients diagnosed with pancreatic duct injury (PDI) have a high complication rate and prolonged hospital stay. The role of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in the diagnosis of PDI remains unclear. During the last decade, our trauma unit incorporated ERCP into the management protocol for suspected PDI cases. 

Objectives: To determine whether ERCP is a sensitive tool to detect PDI. 

Methods: This retrospective trauma patient series study assessed the diagnostic yield of ERCP in trauma cases with suspected PDI on computed tomography (CT) or intraoperatively. Between 1 January 2004 and 31 December 2011, 13 patients admitted to our medical center underwent ERCP for suspected PDI. Patient demographics, mechanism of injury, Injury Severity Score (ISS), time from injury to ERCP, and ERCP-related complications were documented and assessed. 

Results: Of the 13 patients included in the analysis, 8 stable patients with suspected PDI on CT had no leak from the main pancreatic duct on ERCP. Two of them underwent surgery for suspected pancreatic transection. ERCP confirmed a main pancreatic duct leak in three patients. Two patients underwent ERCP for suspected PDI after “damage control” surgery. No leak from the pancreatic ducts was diagnosed. No pancreas-related complications or ERCP-related complications were observed.

Conclusions: ERCP is a sensitive and relatively safe tool for the diagnosis of PDI, and its use might prevent unnecessary surgical interventions in selected trauma cases.