The CIAO Study (“C omplicated Intra-A bdominal infection O bservational” Study) is a multicenter investigation performed in 68 medical institutions throughout Europe over the course of a 6-month observational period (January-June 2012). Patients with either community-acquired or healthcare-associated complicated intra-abdominal infections (IAIs) were included in the study. 2,152 patients with a mean age of 53.8 years (range: 4–98 years) were enrolled in the study. 46.3% of the patients were women and 53.7% were men. Intraperitoneal specimens were collected from 62.2% of the enrolled patients, and from these samples, a variety of microorganisms were collectively identified. The overall mortality rate was 7.5% (163/2.152). According to multivariate analysis of the compiled data, several criteria were found to be independent variables predictive of patient mortality, including patient age, the presence of an intestinal non-appendicular source of infection (colonic non-diverticular perforation, complicated diverticulitis, small bowel perforation), a delayed initial intervention (a delay exceeding 24 hours), sepsis and septic shock in the immediate post-operative period, and ICU admission. Given the sweeping geographical distribution of the participating medical centers, the CIAO Study gives an accurate description of the epidemiological, clinical, microbiological, and treatment profiles of complicated intra-abdominal infections (IAIs) throughout Europe.

No definitive data about open abdomen (OA) epidemiology and outcomes exist. The World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) and the Panamerican Trauma Society (PTS) promoted the International Register of Open Abdomen (IROA). A prospective observational cohort study including patients with an OA treatment. Data were recorded on a web platform (Clinical Registers®) through a dedicated website: www.clinicalregisters.org . Four hundred two patients enrolled. Adult patients: 369 patients; Mean age: 57.39±18.37; 56% male. OA indication: Peritonitis (48.7%), Trauma (20.5%), Vascular Emergencies/Hemorrhage (9.4%), Ischemia (9.1%), Pancreatitis (4.2%),Post-operative abdominal-compartment-syndrome (3.9%), Others (4.2%). The most adopted Temporary-abdominal-closure systems were the commercial negative pressure ones (44.2%). During OA 38% of patients had complications; among them 10.5% had fistula. Definitive closure: 82.8%; Mortality during treatment: 17.2%. Mean duration of OA: 5.39(±4.83) days; Mean number of dressing changes: 0.88(±0.88). After-closure complications: (49.5%) and Mortality: (9%). No significant associations among TACT, indications, mortality, complications and fistula. A linear correlationexists between days of OA and complications (Pearson linear correlation = 0.326 p<0.0001) and with the fistula development (Pearson = 0.146 p= 0.016). Pediatric patients: 33 patients. Mean age: 5.91±(3.68) years; 60% male. Mortality: 3.4%; Complications: 44.8%; Fistula: 3.4%. Mean duration of OA: 3.22(±3.09) days. Temporary abdominal closure is reliable and safe. The different techniques account for different results according to the different indications. In peritonitis commercial negative pressure temporary closure seems to improve results. In trauma skin-closure and Bogotà-bag seem to improve results. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02382770

BACKGROUND: During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak, a general decrease in surgical activity was observed. There is perception that this phenomenon has involved also surgical emergency, but no extensive data have been presented to date. The aim of this study was to analyze the real number of admissions and procedures for emergency surgical disease during COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This is a multicenter study including 18 general surgery units performing emergency surgery in hospitals of the “Red Zone” in Lombardy. Data about admissions from emergency department and surgical emergency procedures performed during March 2019 and March 2020 were collected in an online database. Additional data were collected according to the different indications for surgical treatment. The primary outcomes were the overall rate of admissions for emergent surgical disease and the overall rate of emergency surgical procedures in the study periods. The secondary outcome was the overall surgical rates (among all the diagnosed surgical diseases). RESULTS: Emergency surgical admissions and surgical operations significantly decreased with a fall in value of 45% (p < 0.001) and 41% (p = 0.001), respectively. This reduction was confirmed by the analysis according to different surgical indications, with the exceptions of admissions and operations for gastrointestinal bleeding and operations for abdominal trauma. The overall ratio between surgical procedures and diseases was not significantly different (54% vs. 63%; p = 0.619). This ratio was significantly different only for bowel obstruction and for gastrointestinal perforation. CONCLUSIONS: It seems correct to consider “true” the dramatic decrease of surgical problems during COVID-19 outbreak, despite any therapeutic strategies and logistic difficulties. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Epidemiological, level III.