BACKGROUND: Temporary abdominal closure (TAC) techniques are essential in managing open abdomen cases, particularly in damage control surgery. Skin-only closure (SC) and Bogota bag closure (BBC) are commonly used methods for TAC, but their comparative effectiveness in achieving primary fascial closure (PFC) remains unclear. The objective of this study was to evaluate the rates of PFC between patients undergoing SC and BBC techniques for TAC in peritonitis or abdominal trauma cases at a tertiary care hospital.
METHODS: A retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted at the Surgical A Unit of Hayatabad Medical Complex, Peshawar, from January 2022 to July 2023. Approval was obtained from the institutional review board, and patient consent was secured for data use. Patients undergoing temporary abdominal closure using either skin-only or Bogota bag techniques were included. Exclusions comprised patients younger than 15 or older than 75 years, those with multiple abdominal wall incisions, and those with prior abdominal surgeries. Data analysis utilized SPSS version 25. The study aimed to assess outcomes following damage control surgery, focusing on primary fascial closure rates and associated factors. Closure techniques (skin-only and Bogota bag) were chosen based on institutional protocols and clinical context. Indications for damage control surgery (DCS) included traumatic and non-traumatic emergencies. Intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) was measured using standardized methods. Patients were divided into SC and BBC groups for comparison. Criteria for reoperation and primary fascial closure were established, with timing and technique determined based on clinical assessment and multidisciplinary team collaboration. The decision to leave patients open during the index operation followed damage control surgery principles.
RESULTS: A total of 193 patients were included in this study, with 59.0% undergoing skin-only closure (SC) and 41.0% receiving Bogota bag closure (BBC). Patients exhibited similar demographic characteristics across cohorts, with a majority being male (73.1%) and experiencing acute abdomen of non-traumatic origin (58.0%). Among the reasons for leaving the abdomen open, severe intra-abdominal sepsis affected 51.3% of patients, while 42.0% experienced hemodynamic instability. Patients who received SC had significantly higher rates of primary fascial closure (PFC) compared to BBC (85.1% vs. 65.8%, p = 0.04), with lower rates of fascial dehiscence (1.7% vs. 7.6%, p = 0.052) and wound infections (p = 0.010). Multivariate regression analysis showed SC was associated with a higher likelihood of achieving PFC compared to BBC (adjusted OR = 1.7, 95% CI: 1.3-3.8, p < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: In patients with peritonitis or abdominal trauma, SC demonstrated higher rates of PFC compared to BBC for TAC in our study population. However, further studies are warranted to validate these results and explore the long-term outcomes associated with different TAC techniques.

UNASSIGNED: This study aimed to compare open abdominal management (OAM) between visible negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) and commercial NPWT to determine whether NPWT can detect intestinal ischemia in its early stages without causing complications or worsening prognosis, and to determine whether the actual visualization results in early detection.
UNASSIGNED: Patients were divided into two groups: those who underwent OAM with visible NPWT (A: 32 patients) and those who underwent OAM with commercial NPWT (B: 12 patients). We compared background factors, disease severity, vital signs, blood test values, and 28-day outcomes between the two groups. We also checked the records to determine how many visualized cases were detected early and operated on. We then examined the weaknesses of this method.
UNASSIGNED: No differences were observed in the background factors or disease severity between the two groups. The duration of the open abdomen and intensive care unit stay were significantly shorter for group A than for group B. The groups showed no significant differences in lactate levels, 28-day outcomes, complications during OAM, or other factors. After a review of the medical records, ischemic progression was detected early, and surgery could be performed in seven cases in the visible NPWT group. The progression of ischemia was confirmed at the time of the second-look operation in two cases in the ascending colon.
UNASSIGNED: The visualization device allowed us to gain insights into the intra-abdominal cavity and determine the appropriate time for closing the abdomen without worsening the prognosis.

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.

During damage control laparotomy, surgery is abbreviated to allow for the correction of physiologic disturbances, with a plan to return to the operating theatre for definitive surgical repair. Re-entry into the abdomen is facilitated by temporary abdominal closure (TAC). Skin-only closure is one of the many techniques described for TAC Numerous sources advise against the use of this technique because of the risk of complications. This case report describes the use of skin-only closure during a damage control laparotomy. We reviewed the literature surrounding the various options for TAC to elucidate the potential role of skin-only closure after damage control laparotomy.

BACKGROUND: Damage control surgery (DCS) with temporary abdominal closure (TAC) is increasingly utilized in emergency general surgery (EGS). As the population ages, more geriatric patients (GP) are undergoing EGS operations. Concern exists for GP\'s ability to tolerate DCS. We hypothesize that DCS in GP does not increase morbidity or mortality and has similar rates of primary closure compared to non-geriatric patients (NGP).
METHODS: A retrospective chart review from 2014-2020 was conducted on all non-trauma EGS patients who underwent DCS with TAC. Demographics, admission lab values, fluid amounts, length of stay (LOS), timing of closure, post-operative complications and mortality were collected. GP were compared to NGP and results were analyzed using Chi square and Wilcox signed rank test.
RESULTS: Ninety-eight patients (n = 50, <65 y; n = 48, ≥65 y) met inclusion criteria. There was no significant difference in median number of operations (3 versus 2), time to primary closure (2.5 versus 3 d), hospital LOS (19 versus 17.5 d), ICU LOS (11 versus 8 d), rate of primary closure (66% versus 56%), post op ileus (44% versus 48%), abscess (14% versus 10%), need for surgery after closure (32% versus 19%), anastomotic dehiscence (16% versus 6%), or mortality (34% versus 42%). Average time until take back after index procedure did not vary significantly between young and elderly group (45.8 versus 38.5 h; P = 0.89). GP were more likely to have hypertension (83% versus 50%; P ≤ 0.05), atrial fibrillation (25% versus 4%; P ≤ 0.05) and lower median heart rate compared to NGP (90 versus 103; P ≤ 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: DCS with TAC in geriatric EGS patients achieves similar outcomes and mortality to younger patients. Indication, not age, should factor into the decision to perform DCS.

Background Obtaining primary fascial closure following laparostomy can be difficult; especially with fascial retraction or large pre-existing fascial defects. Various techniques have been described in the literature which attempt to improve reapproximation rates. Most techniques described comprise the use of adjuncts including Bogota Bags, negative pressure dressings, anchor devices and various types of mesh. While most techniques achieve primary closure, less achieve primary fascial closure. Botulinum toxin A (BTA) has proven a beneficial adjunct in repairing large ventral herniae. While there is limited research in the use of BTA in the acute setting of laparostomy closure its benefits in elective repair may prove transferrable with the appropriate protocols. Method This retrospective study reviewed 12 cases where BTA was used as an adjunct to close laparostomy. It compared primary fascial closure rates to historical controls at the same institution.  Results Seven males and five females. Median age 63.5 years. Median BMI 32.95. Median days from BTA injection to primary fascial closure 9.5. Median 18 days from primary operation to primary fascial closure. 83% of patients achieved primary fascial closure with the rest achieving partial closure with the residual defect bridged with biological mesh. At the time of review, there was only one resulting ventral hernia in a patient with a BMI of 51.7 at the time of surgery. Conclusion While BTA does not guarantee primary fascial closure in laparostomy this study would indicate it improves primary fascial closure rates and can be added to any other existing method for managing the open abdomen. As BTA can be injected via the open abdomen or with ultrasound guidance it can be performed by any appropriately trained surgeon, anaesthetist or radiologist making its use widely achievable. Retrospectively registered.

BACKGROUND: Many commercial and artisanal devices are utilized for temporary abdominal closure in patients being managed with an open abdomen for abdominal sepsis. The costs of materials required to treat patients with an open abdomen varies drastically. In Costa Rica, due to the lack of accurate information relating to the actual cost to manage a patient entails that the method with the least expensive materials is usually selected.
METHODS: A single-center retrospective review of 46 patients diagnosed with abdominal sepsis and successfully treated with an open abdomen and one of the three temporary abdominal closure methods during the year 2018 in a tertiary hospital was evaluated using a gross-cost pricing model developed by the authors. The three temporary abdominal closure methods were a locally manufactured Bogota Bag, and commercial abdominal negative pressure therapy dressing and negative pressure therapy with 0.9% saline solution instillation. The per-unit-costs were hospital day and intensive care day, number of surgical procedures per patient, cost negative pressure therapy kits.
RESULTS: Statistically significant cost reduction was observed in the cohort treated with negative pressure therapy with instillation as compared to the other temporary abdominal closure methods. The reduction of hospital length of stay, as well as fewer number of surgeries were the main contributing factors in diminishing costs. On average, the costs to treat a patient utilizing negative pressure therapy with instillation was nearly 50% lower than using the other two temporary abdominal closure methods.
CONCLUSIONS: The costs relating to managing abdominal sepsis in the septic open abdomen vary greatly according to the temporary abdominal closure utilized. If the hospital length of stay, intensive care unit length of stay and number of surgeries required are the main parameters used in determining costs, the use of negative pressure therapy with 0.9% saline solution instillation reduces costs by nearly 50% in comparison to conventional negative pressure wound therapy and Bogota Bag. In this instance, the more expensive method at first glance, obtained a considerable cost reduction when compared to therapies that utilize less expensive materials.

Background: Fungal infections are associated with increased morbidity and death. Few studies have examined risk factors associated with post-operative fungal intra-abdominal infections (FIAIs) in trauma patients after exploratory laparotomy. In this study, we evaluated potential risk factors for acquiring post-operative FIAIs and their impact on clinical outcomes. Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of trauma patients admitted from 2005 to 2018 who underwent exploratory laparotomy and subsequently had development of intra-abdominal infection (IAI). Demographics, comorbidities, culture data, antimicrobial usage, Injury Severity Scores (ISS), and clinical outcomes were abstracted. All post-operative IAIs were evaluated and stratified as either bacterial, fungal, combined, and with or without colonization. All groups were compared. Risk factors for the development of post-operative IAI and clinical outcomes were analyzed by Student t test and chi-square test. Multi-variable logistic regression was used to determine independent predictors of post-operative FIAIs. Results: There were 1675 patients identified as having undergone exploratory laparotomy in the setting of traumatic injury, 161 of whom were suspected of having IAI. A total of 105 (6.2%) patients had a diagnosis of IAI. Of these patients, 40 (38%) received a diagnosis of FIAI. The most common fungal pathogens were unspeciated yeast (48.3%), followed by Candida albicans (42.7%), C. glabrata (4.5%), C. dubliniensis (2.25%), and C. tropicalis (2.25%). There were no significant differences in demographics, comorbidities, and percentage of gastric perforations between FIAI and bacterial IAI (BIAI) groups. Patients with FIAIs, however, had a 75% temporary abdominal closure (TAC) rate compared with 51% in BIAIs (p = 0.01). The FIAI group had higher ISS (27 vs. 22, p = 0.03), longer hospital days (34 vs. 25, p = 0.02), and longer intensive care unit (ICU) days (17 vs. 9, p = 0.006) when compared with BIAI. The FIAI group also had a five-fold greater mortality rate. Logistic regression identified TAC as an independent risk factor for the development of post-operative FIAIs (odds ratio [OR] 6.16, confidence interval [CI] 1.14-28.0, p = 0.02). Conclusions: An FIAI after exploratory laparotomy was associated with greater morbidity and death. A TAC was associated independently with increased risk of FIAI after exploratory laparotomy in the setting of traumatic injury. Clinicians should suspect fungal infections in trauma patients in whom post-operative IAI develops after undergoing exploratory laparotomy using TAC techniques.

OBJECTIVE: The abdomen is the second most common source of sepsis and secondary peritonitis, which likely lead to death. In the present study, we hypothesized that instillation of local anesthetics into the peritoneum might mitigate the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) in the open abdomen when combined with negative-pressure therapy (NPT) to treat severe peritonitis.
METHODS: We performed a study in 21 pigs applying a model of sepsis based on ischemia/reperfusion and fecal spread into the peritoneum. The pigs were randomized into three groups, and treated for 6 h as follows: Group A: temporary abdominal closure with ABTHERA™ Open Abdomen Negative-Pressure Therapy; Group B: temporary abdominal closure with ABTHERA™ Open Abdomen Negative-Pressure Therapy plus abdominal instillation with physiological saline solution (PSS); and Group C: temporary abdominal closure with ABTHERA™ Open Abdomen Negative-Pressure Therapy plus peritoneal instillation with a solution of ropivacaine in PPS.
RESULTS: A comparison between the three groups revealed no statistically significant difference for any of the parameters registered (p > 0.05), i.e., intra-abdominal pressure, blood pressure, heart rate, O2 saturation, diuresis, body temperature, and blood levels of interleukin 6 (IL-6), tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFα), and c-reactive protein (CRP). In addition, histological studies of the liver, ileum, kidney and lung showed no difference between groups.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of abdominal instillation (with or without ropivacaine) did not change the effect of 6 h of NPT after sepsis in animals with open abdomen. The absence of adverse effects suggests that longer treatments should be tested.

UNASSIGNED: Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is regularly performed in small-sized infants. Computed tomography (CT)-based donor liver volumetry is used to estimate the graft size. The aim of our study was to assess the results of CT liver volumetry and their impact on the clinical outcome after LDLT in extremely small-sized infants.
UNASSIGNED: In this study, we included all patients with a body weight of ≤10 kg who underwent living related liver transplantation at our centre between January 2004 and December 2014. In all cases of LDLT, a preoperative CT scan of the donor liver was performed, and the total liver and graft volumes were calculated. The graft shape was estimated by measuring the ventro-dorsal (thickness), cranio-caudal, and transversal (width) diameter of segment II/III. We assessed the impact of CT donor liver volumetry and other risk factors on the outcome, defined as patient and graft survival.
UNASSIGNED: In the study period, a total of 48 living related liver transplantations were performed at our centre in infants ≤10 kg [20 male (42%), 28 female (58%)]. The mean weight was 7.3 kg (range 4.4-10 kg). Among the recipients, 33 (69%) received primary abdominal closure and 15 (31%) had temporary abdominal closure. The patient and graft survival rates were 85% and 81%, respectively. In CT volumetry, the mean estimated graft volume was 255 mL (range 140-485 mL) and the actual measured mean graft weight was 307 g (range 127-463 g). The mean ventro-dorsal diameter of segment II/III was 6.9 cm (range 4.3-11.2 cm), the mean cranio-caudal diameter was 9 cm (range 5-14 cm), and the mean width was 10.5 cm (range 6-14.7 cm). The mean graft-body weight ratio (GBWR) was 4.38% (range 1.41-8.04%). A high graft weight, a GBWR >4%, and a large ventro-dorsal diameter of segment II/III were risk factors for poorer patient survival.
UNASSIGNED: Preoperative assessment of the graft size is a crucial investigation before LDLT. For extremely small-sized recipients, not only the graft weight but also the graft shape seems to affect the outcome.