Browsing by Author "Beka, Solomon G."

Now showing 1 - 6 of 6
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Follow-up strategies for patients with splenic trauma managed non-operatively: the 2022 World Society of Emergency Surgery consensus document
    (2022-10-12) Podda, Mauro; De Simone, Belinda; Ceresoli, Marco; Virdis, Francesco; Favi, Francesco; Wiik Larsen, Johannes; Coccolini, Federico; Sartelli, Massimo; Pararas, Nikolaos; Beka, Solomon G.; Bonavina, Luigi; Bova, Raffaele; Pisanu, Adolfo; Abu-Zidan, Fikri; Balogh, Zsolt; Chiara, Osvaldo; Wani, Imtiaz; Stahel, Philip; Di Saverio, Salomone; Scalea, Thomas; Soreide, Kjetil; Sakakushev, Boris; Amico, Francesco; Martino, Costanza; Hecker, Andreas; de’Angelis, Nicola; Chirica, Mircea; Galante, Joseph; Kirkpatrick, Andrew; Pikoulis, Emmanouil; Kluger, Yoram; Bensard, Denis; Ansaloni, Luca; Fraga, Gustavo; Civil, Ian; Tebala, Giovanni D.; Di Carlo, Isidoro; Cui, Yunfeng; Coimbra, Raul; Agnoletti, Vanni; Sall, Ibrahima; Tan, Edward; Picetti, Edoardo; Litvin, Andrey; Damaskos, Dimitrios; Inaba, Kenji; Leung, Jeffrey; Maier, Ronald; Biffl, Walt; Leppaniemi, Ari; Moore, Ernest; Gurusamy, Kurinchi; Catena, Fausto
    Abstract Background In 2017, the World Society of Emergency Surgery published its guidelines for the management of adult and pediatric patients with splenic trauma. Several issues regarding the follow-up of patients with splenic injuries treated with NOM remained unsolved. Methods Using a modified Delphi method, we sought to explore ongoing areas of controversy in the NOM of splenic trauma and reach a consensus among a group of 48 international experts from five continents (Africa, Europe, Asia, Oceania, America) concerning optimal follow-up strategies in patients with splenic injuries treated with NOM. Results Consensus was reached on eleven clinical research questions and 28 recommendations with an agreement rate ≥ 80%. Mobilization after 24 h in low-grade splenic trauma patients (WSES Class I, AAST Grades I–II) was suggested, while in patients with high-grade splenic injuries (WSES Classes II–III, AAST Grades III–V), if no other contraindications to early mobilization exist, safe mobilization of the patient when three successive hemoglobins 8 h apart after the first are within 10% of each other was considered safe according to the panel. The panel suggests adult patients to be admitted to hospital for 1 day (for low-grade splenic injuries—WSES Class I, AAST Grades I–II) to 3 days (for high-grade splenic injuries—WSES Classes II–III, AAST Grades III–V), with those with high-grade injuries requiring admission to a monitored setting. In the absence of specific complications, the panel suggests DVT and VTE prophylaxis with LMWH to be started within 48–72 h from hospital admission. The panel suggests splenic artery embolization (SAE) as the first-line intervention in patients with hemodynamic stability and arterial blush on CT scan, irrespective of injury grade. Regarding patients with WSES Class II blunt splenic injuries (AAST Grade III) without contrast extravasation, a low threshold for SAE has been suggested in the presence of risk factors for NOM failure. The panel also suggested angiography and eventual SAE in all hemodynamically stable adult patients with WSES Class III injuries (AAST Grades IV–V), even in the absence of CT blush, especially when concomitant surgery that requires change of position is needed. Follow-up imaging with contrast-enhanced ultrasound/CT scan in 48–72 h post-admission of trauma in splenic injuries WSES Class II (AAST Grade III) or higher treated with NOM was considered the best strategy for timely detection of vascular complications. Conclusion This consensus document could help guide future prospective studies aiming at validating the suggested strategies through the implementation of prospective trauma databases and the subsequent production of internationally endorsed guidelines on the issue.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Source control in emergency general surgery: WSES, GAIS, SIS-E, SIS-A guidelines
    (2023-07-21) Coccolini, Federico; Sartelli, Massimo; Sawyer, Robert; Rasa, Kemal; Viaggi, Bruno; Abu-Zidan, Fikri; Soreide, Kjetil; Hardcastle, Timothy; Gupta, Deepak; Bendinelli, Cino; Ceresoli, Marco; Shelat, Vishal G.; Broek, Richard t.; Baiocchi, Gian L.; Moore, Ernest E.; Sall, Ibrahima; Podda, Mauro; Bonavina, Luigi; Kryvoruchko, Igor A.; Stahel, Philip; Inaba, Kenji; Montravers, Philippe; Sakakushev, Boris; Sganga, Gabriele; Ballestracci, Paolo; Malbrain, Manu L. N. G.; Vincent, Jean-Louis; Pikoulis, Manos; Beka, Solomon G.; Doklestic, Krstina; Chiarugi, Massimo; Falcone, Marco; Bignami, Elena; Reva, Viktor; Demetrashvili, Zaza; Di Saverio, Salomone; Tolonen, Matti; Navsaria, Pradeep; Bala, Miklosh; Balogh, Zsolt; Litvin, Andrey; Hecker, Andreas; Wani, Imtiaz; Fette, Andreas; De Simone, Belinda; Ivatury, Rao; Picetti, Edoardo; Khokha, Vladimir; Tan, Edward; Ball, Chad; Tascini, Carlo; Cui, Yunfeng; Coimbra, Raul; Kelly, Michael; Martino, Costanza; Agnoletti, Vanni; Boermeester, Marja A.; De’Angelis, Nicola; Chirica, Mircea; Biffl, Walt L.; Ansaloni, Luca; Kluger, Yoram; Catena, Fausto; Kirkpatrick, Andrew W.
    Abstract Intra-abdominal infections (IAI) are among the most common global healthcare challenges and they are usually precipitated by disruption to the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. Their successful management typically requires intensive resource utilization, and despite the best therapies, morbidity and mortality remain high. One of the main issues required to appropriately treat IAI that differs from the other etiologies of sepsis is the frequent requirement to provide physical source control. Fortunately, dramatic advances have been made in this aspect of treatment. Historically, source control was left to surgeons only. With new technologies non-surgical less invasive interventional procedures have been introduced. Alternatively, in addition to formal surgery open abdomen techniques have long been proposed as aiding source control in severe intra-abdominal sepsis. It is ironic that while a lack or even delay regarding source control clearly associates with death, it is a concept that remains poorly described. For example, no conclusive definition of source control technique or even adequacy has been universally accepted. Practically, source control involves a complex definition encompassing several factors including the causative event, source of infection bacteria, local bacterial flora, patient condition, and his/her eventual comorbidities. With greater understanding of the systemic pathobiology of sepsis and the profound implications of the human microbiome, adequate source control is no longer only a surgical issue but one that requires a multidisciplinary, multimodality approach. Thus, while any breach in the GI tract must be controlled, source control should also attempt to control the generation and propagation of the systemic biomediators and dysbiotic influences on the microbiome that perpetuate multi-system organ failure and death. Given these increased complexities, the present paper represents the current opinions and recommendations for future research of the World Society of Emergency Surgery, of the Global Alliance for Infections in Surgery of Surgical Infection Society Europe and Surgical Infection Society America regarding the concepts and operational adequacy of source control in intra-abdominal infections.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Strategies to prevent blood loss and reduce transfusion in emergency general surgery, WSES-AAST consensus paper
    (2024-07-16) Coccolini, Federico; Shander, Aryeh; Ceresoli, Marco; Moore, Ernest; Tian, Brian; Parini, Dario; Sartelli, Massimo; Sakakushev, Boris; Doklestich, Krstina; Abu-Zidan, Fikri; Horer, Tal; Shelat, Vishal; Hardcastle, Timothy; Bignami, Elena; Kirkpatrick, Andrew; Weber, Dieter; Kryvoruchko, Igor; Leppaniemi, Ari; Tan, Edward; Kessel, Boris; Isik, Arda; Cremonini, Camilla; Forfori, Francesco; Ghiadoni, Lorenzo; Chiarugi, Massimo; Ball, Chad; Ottolino, Pablo; Hecker, Andreas; Mariani, Diego; Melai, Ettore; Malbrain, Manu; Agostini, Vanessa; Podda, Mauro; Picetti, Edoardo; Kluger, Yoram; Rizoli, Sandro; Litvin, Andrey; Maier, Ron; Beka, Solomon G.; De Simone, Belinda; Bala, Miklosh; Perez, Aleix M.; Ordonez, Carlos; Bodnaruk, Zenon; Cui, Yunfeng; Calatayud, Augusto P.; de Angelis, Nicola; Amico, Francesco; Pikoulis, Emmanouil; Damaskos, Dimitris; Coimbra, Raul; Chirica, Mircea; Biffl, Walter L.; Catena, Fausto
    Abstract Emergency general surgeons often provide care to severely ill patients requiring surgical interventions and intensive support. One of the primary drivers of morbidity and mortality is perioperative bleeding. In general, when addressing life threatening haemorrhage, blood transfusion can become an essential part of overall resuscitation. However, under all circumstances, indications for blood transfusion must be accurately evaluated. When patients decline blood transfusions, regardless of the reason, surgeons should aim to provide optimal care and respect and accommodate each patient’s values and target the best outcome possible given the patient’s desires and his/her clinical condition. The aim of this position paper was to perform a review of the existing literature and to provide comprehensive recommendations on organizational, surgical, anaesthetic, and haemostatic strategies that can be used to provide optimal peri-operative blood management, reduce, or avoid blood transfusions and ultimately improve patient outcomes.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF): the WSES and CWIS position paper
    (2024-10-18) Sermonesi, Giacomo; Bertelli, Riccardo; Pieracci, Fredric M.; Balogh, Zsolt J.; Coimbra, Raul; Galante, Joseph M.; Hecker, Andreas; Weber, Dieter; Bauman, Zachary M.; Kartiko, Susan; Patel, Bhavik; Whitbeck, SarahAnn S.; White, Thomas W.; Harrell, Kevin N.; Perrina, Daniele; Rampini, Alessia; Tian, Brian; Amico, Francesco; Beka, Solomon G.; Bonavina, Luigi; Ceresoli, Marco; Cobianchi, Lorenzo; Coccolini, Federico; Cui, Yunfeng; Dal Mas, Francesca; De Simone, Belinda; Di Carlo, Isidoro; Di Saverio, Salomone; Dogjani, Agron; Fette, Andreas; Fraga, Gustavo P.; Gomes, Carlos A.; Khan, Jim S.; Kirkpatrick, Andrew W.; Kruger, Vitor F.; Leppäniemi, Ari; Litvin, Andrey; Mingoli, Andrea; Navarro, David C.; Passera, Eliseo; Pisano, Michele; Podda, Mauro; Russo, Emanuele; Sakakushev, Boris; Santonastaso, Domenico; Sartelli, Massimo; Shelat, Vishal G.; Tan, Edward; Wani, Imtiaz; Abu-Zidan, Fikri M.; Biffl, Walter L.; Civil, Ian; Latifi, Rifat; Marzi, Ingo; Picetti, Edoardo; Pikoulis, Manos; Agnoletti, Vanni; Bravi, Francesca; Vallicelli, Carlo; Ansaloni, Luca; Moore, Ernest E.; Catena, Fausto
    Abstract Background Rib fractures are one of the most common traumatic injuries and may result in significant morbidity and mortality. Despite growing evidence, technological advances and increasing acceptance, surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) remains not uniformly considered in trauma centers. Indications, contraindications, appropriate timing, surgical approaches and utilized implants are part of an ongoing debate. The present position paper, which is endorsed by the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), and supported by the Chest Wall Injury Society, aims to provide a review of the literature investigating the use of SSRF in rib fracture management to develop graded position statements, providing an updated guide and reference for SSRF. Methods This position paper was developed according to the WSES methodology. A steering committee performed the literature review and drafted the position paper. An international panel of experts then critically revised the manuscript and discussed it in detail, to develop a consensus on the position statements. Results A total of 287 studies (systematic reviews, randomized clinical trial, prospective and retrospective comparative studies, case series, original articles) have been selected from an initial pool of 9928 studies. Thirty-nine graded position statements were put forward to address eight crucial aspects of SSRF: surgical indications, contraindications, optimal timing of surgery, preoperative imaging evaluation, rib fracture sites for surgical fixation, management of concurrent thoracic injuries, surgical approach, stabilization methods and material selection. Conclusion This consensus document addresses the key focus questions on surgical treatment of rib fractures. The expert recommendations clarify current evidences on SSRF indications, timing, operative planning, approaches and techniques, with the aim to guide clinicians in optimizing the management of rib fractures, to improve patient outcomes and direct future research.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    The 2023 WSES guidelines on the management of trauma in elderly and frail patients
    (2024-05-31) De Simone, Belinda; Chouillard, Elie; Podda, Mauro; Pararas, Nikolaos; de Carvalho Duarte, Gustavo; Fugazzola, Paola; Birindelli, Arianna; Coccolini, Federico; Polistena, Andrea; Sibilla, Maria G.; Kruger, Vitor; Fraga, Gustavo P.; Montori, Giulia; Russo, Emanuele; Pintar, Tadeja; Ansaloni, Luca; Avenia, Nicola; Di Saverio, Salomone; Leppäniemi, Ari; Lauretta, Andrea; Sartelli, Massimo; Puzziello, Alessandro; Carcoforo, Paolo; Agnoletti, Vanni; Bissoni, Luca; Isik, Arda; Kluger, Yoram; Moore, Ernest E.; Romeo, Oreste M.; Abu-Zidan, Fikri M.; Beka, Solomon G.; Weber, Dieter G.; Tan, Edward C. T. H.; Paolillo, Ciro; Cui, Yunfeng; Kim, Fernando; Picetti, Edoardo; Di Carlo, Isidoro; Toro, Adriana; Sganga, Gabriele; Sganga, Federica; Testini, Mario; Di Meo, Giovanna; Kirkpatrick, Andrew W.; Marzi, Ingo; déAngelis, Nicola; Kelly, Michael D.; Wani, Imtiaz; Sakakushev, Boris; Bala, Miklosh; Bonavina, Luigi; Galante, Joseph M.; Shelat, Vishal G.; Cobianchi, Lorenzo; Mas, Francesca D.; Pikoulis, Manos; Damaskos, Dimitrios; Coimbra, Raul; Dhesi, Jugdeep; Hoffman, Melissa R.; Stahel, Philip F.; Maier, Ronald V.; Litvin, Andrey; Latifi, Rifat; Biffl, Walter L.; Catena, Fausto
    Abstract Background The trauma mortality rate is higher in the elderly compared with younger patients. Ageing is associated with physiological changes in multiple systems and correlated with frailty. Frailty is a risk factor for mortality in elderly trauma patients. We aim to provide evidence-based guidelines for the management of geriatric trauma patients to improve it and reduce futile procedures. Methods Six working groups of expert acute care and trauma surgeons reviewed extensively the literature according to the topic and the PICO question assigned. Statements and recommendations were assessed according to the GRADE methodology and approved by a consensus of experts in the field at the 10th international congress of the WSES in 2023. Results The management of elderly trauma patients requires knowledge of ageing physiology, a focused triage, including drug history, frailty assessment, nutritional status, and early activation of trauma protocol to improve outcomes. Acute trauma pain in the elderly has to be managed in a multimodal analgesic approach, to avoid side effects of opioid use. Antibiotic prophylaxis is recommended in penetrating (abdominal, thoracic) trauma, in severely burned and in open fractures elderly patients to decrease septic complications. Antibiotics are not recommended in blunt trauma in the absence of signs of sepsis and septic shock. Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis with LMWH or UFH should be administrated as soon as possible in high and moderate-risk elderly trauma patients according to the renal function, weight of the patient and bleeding risk. A palliative care team should be involved as soon as possible to discuss the end of life in a multidisciplinary approach considering the patient’s directives, family feelings and representatives' desires, and all decisions should be shared. Conclusions The management of elderly trauma patients requires knowledge of ageing physiology, a focused triage based on assessing frailty and early activation of trauma protocol to improve outcomes. Geriatric Intensive Care Units are needed to care for elderly and frail trauma patients in a multidisciplinary approach to decrease mortality and improve outcomes. Graphical abstract
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    The LIFE TRIAD of emergency general surgery
    (2022-07-25) Coccolini, Federico; Sartelli, Massimo; Kluger, Yoram; Osipov, Aleksei; Cui, Yunfeng; Beka, Solomon G.; Kirkpatrick, Andrew; Sall, Ibrahima; Moore, Ernest E.; Biffl, Walter L.; Litvin, Andrey; Pisano, Michele; Magnone, Stefano; Picetti, Edoardo; de Angelis, Nicola; Stahel, Philip; Ansaloni, Luca; Tan, Edward; Abu-Zidan, Fikri; Ceresoli, Marco; Hecker, Andreas; Chiara, Osvaldo; Sganga, Gabriele; Khokha, Vladimir; di Saverio, Salomone; Sakakushev, Boris; Campanelli, Giampiero; Fraga, Gustavo; Wani, Imtiaz; Broek, Richard t.; Cicuttin, Enrico; Cremonini, Camilla; Tartaglia, Dario; Soreide, Kjetil; Galante, Joseph; de Moya, Marc; Koike, Kaoru; De Simone, Belinda; Balogh, Zsolt; Amico, Francesco; Shelat, Vishal; Pikoulis, Emmanouil; Di Carlo, Isidoro; Bonavina, Luigi; Leppaniemi, Ari; Marzi, Ingo; Ivatury, Rao; Khan, Jim; Maier, Ronald V.; Hardcastle, Timothy C.; Isik, Arda; Podda, Mauro; Tolonen, Matti; Rasa, Kemal; Navsaria, Pradeep H.; Demetrashvili, Zaza; Tarasconi, Antonio; Carcoforo, Paolo; Sibilla, Maria G.; Baiocchi, Gian L.; Pararas, Nikolaos; Weber, Dieter; Chiarugi, Massimo; Catena, Fausto
    Abstract Emergency General Surgery (EGS) was identified as multidisciplinary surgery performed for traumatic and non-traumatic acute conditions during the same admission in the hospital by general emergency surgeons and other specialists. It is the most diffused surgical discipline in the world. To live and grow strong EGS necessitates three fundamental parts: emergency and elective continuous surgical practice, evidence generation through clinical registries and data accrual, and indications and guidelines production: the LIFE TRIAD.