Israel Medical Association Journal

Background: Extra peritoneal packing (EPP) is a quick and highly effective method to control pelvic hemorrhage.

Objectives: To determine whether EPP can be as safely and efficiently performed in the emergency department (ED) as in the operating room (OR).

Methods: Retrospective study of 29 patients who underwent EPP in the ED or OR in two trauma centers in Israel 2008–2018.

Results: Our study included 29 patients, 13 in the ED-EPP group and 16 in the OR-EPP group. The mean injury severity score (ISS) was 34.9 ± 11.8. Following EPP, hemodynamic stability was successfully achieved in 25 of 29 patients (86.2%). A raise in the mean arterial pressure (MAP) with a median of 25 mmHg (mean 30.0 ± 27.5, P < 0.001) was documented. All patients who did not achieve hemodynamic stability after EPP had multiple sources of bleeding or fatal head injury and eventually succumbed. Patients who underwent EPP in the ED showed higher change in MAP (P = 0.0458). The overall mortality rate was 27.5% (8/29) with no difference between the OR and ED-EPP. No differences were found between ED and OR-EPP in the amount of transfused blood products, surgical site infections, and length of stay in the hospital. However, patients who underwent ED-EPP were more prone to develop deep vein thrombosis (DVT): 50% (5/10) vs. 9% (1/11) in ED and OR-EPP groups respectively (P = 0.038).

Conclusions: EPP is equally effective when performed in the ED or OR with similar surgical site infection rates but higher incidence of DVT

Background: Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) is associated with decreased perioperative morbidity and mortality.

Objectives: To report the outcomes of EVAR among patients older than 80 years of age.

Methods: In this retrospective study, we reviewed patients older than 80 years of age who underwent elective EVAR at our institution between 2007 and 2017. The demographics, perioperative morbidity and mortality, and long-term results are reported.

Results: During the study period, 444 patients underwent elective EVAR for AAAs. Among them 128 patients (29%) were > 80 years of age. Mean age was 84 ± 3.4 (range 80–96) years, and 110 patients (86%) were male. The EVAR was technically successful in 127 patients (99%) and there were intraoperative mortalities. Within 30 days of the surgery, nine patients (7%) died. Major and minor adverse events occurred in 26 (20%) and 59 (46%) patients, respectively. Factors associated with increased risk of perioperative morbidity and mortality included chronic kidney disease, peripheral artery disease, and the existence of three or more co-morbidities.

Conclusions: EVAR in the elderly can be performed with a high rate of success; however, it is associated with a substantial rate of morbidity and mortality, particularly when patients present with multiple co-morbidities. When performing EVAR in this population group, the risk of rupture must be considered opposed to the life expectancy of these patients and the risk of perioperative morbidity and mortality.

Abstract

Background: Iatrogenic ureteral injury may be seen following abdominopelvic surgeries. While ureteral injuries identified during surgery should be immediately and surgically repaired, those that are postoperatively diagnosed may be treated non-surgically by draining the ipsilateral kidney. Data regarding the outcome of this approach are still missing.

Objectives: To evaluate the success rates of non-surgical management of ureteral injuries diagnosed following abdominopelvic surgeries.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the files of all patients treated for iatrogenic ureteral injuries diagnosed following abdominopelvic surgeries. Patients' ipsilateral kidney was percutaneously drained following diagnosis of injury by either nephrostomy tube (NT)/nephro-ureteral stent (NUS) or double-J stent (DJS) inserted retrogradely. The tube was left in place until a pyelogram confirmed healing or a conservative approach was abandoned due to failure.

Results: Twenty-nine patients were identified as having ureteral injury following abdominopelvic surgery. Median time from injury to renal drainage was 9 days, interquartile range (IQR) 4–17 days. Seven cases (24%) had surgical repair. Among the other 22 patients, in 2 oncology patients the conservative approach was maintained although renal drainage failed to resolve the injury. In the remaining 20, median drainage length was 60 days (IQR 43.5–85). Calculated overall success rates following renal drainage was 69% (18/29), and with NS approached 78.5%.

Conclusions: Ureteral injuries diagnosed following abdominopelvic surgeries can be treated conservatively. Ipsilateral renal drainage should be the first line of treatment before surgical repair, and NUS may be the preferred drainage to obtain spontaneous ureteral healing.