View clinical trials related to Peritonitis.
Filter by:Short Post-operative Antibacterial Therapy in Complicated Appendicitis: Oral Versus Intravenous is a prospective randomized controlled trial comparing 24 hour intravenous antibacterial therapy to 24 hour oral antibacterial therapy after surgery in complicated appendicitis.
Hospitals, and more specifically Intensive Care Units (ICU), face the challenging issue of emergence and rapid spread of multi-drug resistant bacteria (MDR). In some cases, the therapeutic choice is extremely limited. Prevention and adequacy of antibiotic therapy (AB) are the key responses applied toward these threats. A delayed adequate AB is a known factor of poor prognosis. Intra-abdominal infections (IAI) are frequent, polymicrobial and life threatening diseases. Source control and adequate AB are instrumental issues in this setting. Despite technical advances, susceptibility testing of the microorganisms collected from peritoneal samples is not usually available before day two or three after surgery. In this time lapse, empiric AB might be inadequate (not targeting all the pathogens, which leads to a prolonged duration of AB and potential increased morbidity/mortality risk) or too broad (with the two issues of ecology with an increased risk of selection of MDR bacteria and additional costs). In a pilot study evaluating the potential benefit of a direct culture of peritoneal samples from resuscitation patients treated for peritonitis, we observed that conventional treatment made it possible to obtain microbiological results within a median of 3 [extremes 2-7] days whereas a direct microbiological technique by E-test gave results in 1 [1-2] days (p <0.0001). With this technique close to conventional microbiological, a change in antibiotic therapy could have been achieved within an average of 1 [1-2] days versus 4 [1-11] days with conventional management (p = 0, 0006). The development of modern molecular techniques suggests that a large margin of improvement for the rendering and the precision of the results is possible.
Patients undergoing emergency surgery for peritonitis are at increased risk of abdominal wall-related complications. In patients with peritonitis the risk of incisional hernia (IH) is extremely elevated. The incidence of IH in patients operated with peritonitis is up to 54 %, compared with an incidence of 11-26 % in the general surgical population. Moreover, up to 24.1 % of patients with peritonitis undergoing emergency laparotomy may develop fascial dehiscence. The evaluation of quality of life of patients with IH showed lower mean scores on physical components of health-related quality of life and body image. The prophylactic mesh implantation demonstrated to reduce the incisional hernia rate in patients undergoing vascular or bariatric procedures. However, the intraperitoneal non absorbable mesh implantation in infected fields is generally considered at least of doubtful safety because of the theoretical increased risk of chronic mesh infection and enterocutaneous fistula. Most incisional hernias develop during the first three months after surgery, which represents the critical period for the healing of transected muscular and fibrous layers of the abdominal wall. However, most studies recommended a long-term follow up period of up to at least 5 years for midline abdominal incisions to determine the real incisional hernia rate. The midline abdominal incision is preferred in abdominal surgery, as it provides wide and rapid access compared other incisions. However, the incidence of incisional hernias is higher following midline abdominal incisions than in other abdominal incisions. In emergency surgery the midline incision in the majority of cases is a necessity. Several factors affect the process of wound healing: surgical site infection, poor surgical technique, and patient-related factors (i.e. peritonitis, old age, obesity, diabetes mellitus, nutritional deficiencies, hepatic cirrhosis, jaundice, renal impairment, malignancy, cardiac disease, chest problems, previous abdominal incisions, steroid therapy). Data about the use of biological prosthesis in infected fields are scarce and derive principally from case reports and case series. However, indications about their use and usefulness in infected fields have been recently published by the Italian Biological Prosthesis Working Group (IBPWG). A previously published prospective observational study evaluated the efficacy of implantation of biological prosthesis in high risk patients in order to reduce the incidence of incisional hernia. This study suggested the efficacy of this kind of prosthesis in reducing incisional hernia rate in patients with multiple risk factors. A recently published meta-analysis showed as the use of biological prosthesis in ventral hernia repair resulted in a lower infectious wound complication rate but in an similar recurrence rate. These results supports the application of biological prosthesis in high risk patients. One recent systematic review evaluated the positive effect on incisional hernia rate of the prophylactic mesh positioning in high risk patients. No randomized trials have been published since now about the use of biological prosthesis in contaminated or infected fields. The rationale of the trial is to evaluate the efficacy of the use of swine dermal collagen prosthesis implanted preperitoneally as a prophylactic procedure against incisional hernia in patients operated in urgency/emergency setting in contaminated/infected fields with peritonitis. The aim of the study is to reduce the incidence of incisional hernia from 50% to 20%.
This study is designed to be a multicentre, prospective, comparative, randomised trial, evaluating the efficacy of two surgical strategies for the treatment of generalised peritonitis due to perforated diverticulitis. Results will be analysed according to an intention to treat principle (after selection and patient consent). Immediately before surgery, the patient will be randomly assigned to sigmoidectomy with primary anastomosis or to sigmoidectomy with primary anastomosis and diverting stoma. Sigmoidectomy will be performed through a midline laparotomy or laparoscopically according to the standard technique. In the control arm, a protective stoma will be performed at the end of surgery. A stoma reversal operation will be performed at least 3 months after the first operation and after performing a cologram by water soluble contrast between 4 and 8 weeks to check for the absence of fistula or stenosis at the level of the anastomosis. Stoma reversal will be performed with a trephine incision. Post-stoma closure follow-ups will be planned and all morbidity/mortality will be recorded. All patients will be examined at 6, 12, and 24 weeks after the initial surgery, in the surgical department where they were operated; a final study visit will be carried out 12 months (evaluation of primary endpoint) after surgery. The parameters explored at medical examinations will be: • Occurrence of complications • Quality of life assessment
A multi-center prospective cohort study will be conducted to explore the change trend of eosinophil in peritoneal dialysis effluent during peritoneal dialysis-associated peritonitis, and to explore the relationship between eosinophil increase, peritonitis severity and antibiotic use. This study will provide evidence for routine eosinophil testing
The role of Albumin in prevention and Treatment of Acute Kidney Injury (AKI) in patients with Spontaneous Bacterial Peritonitis (SBP) who are at high risk of AKI development has been clearly defined , which decreases the morbidity and mortality. But the role of Albumin in patient with SBP who are at low risk of AKI development (Serum Bilirubin <4mg/dl, Creatinine <1mg/dl at the time of presentation) has been controversial and there are no placebo controlled trials. We propose that Albumin at the standard doses is beneficial in preventing development of AKI in patients with SBP who are at low risk of AKI development.
Perforated diverticulitis of the colon can be complicated by peritonitis, either purulent or fecal. Both are life threatening conditions requiring emergency surgery. The background in terms of reasons for inflammation (diverticulitis) and perforation to develop is unknown. In this study we focus on specific changes associated with inflammation, both in tissues and of fecal and mucosal microbiota.
The best approach for the treatment of perforated diverticulitis of the sigmoid colon is still under debate. Concurrent techniques are 1) resection with primary colorectal anastomosis with or without additional loop ileostomy; 2) end colostomy (Hartmann´s procedure); 3) Damage control strategy; 4) laparoscopic lavage and placement of a drainage. It is hypothesized, that the use of the damage control strategy leads to a significant reduction of the stoma rate. The damage control strategy constitutes a two stage procedure. Emergency surgery: limited resection of the diseased colonic segment with oral and aboral blind closure, abdominal lavage, temporary vacuum assisted abdominal closure Second look surgery (48-72 hours later): Reexploration with 1. definite reconstruction (Colorectal anastomosis -/+ diverting ileostomy vs. end colostomy) 2. lavage, vacuum assisted abdominal closure, third look 72 hours after emergency surgery Within the study, data of DCS-procedures will be collected retrospectively in a multicentric and transnational approach. Those will be compared to a cohort of patients treated with a "no-DCS"-technique (resection with primary anastomosis or Hartmann´s procedure).
Study population: A total of 90 consecutive patients of decompensated cirrhosis of any etiology, presenting to the Institute of Liver and Biliary Sciences with SBP with septic shock will be included. Study design: Randomized controlled trial Study period: August 2019 to December 2021. Sample size: Assuming that the response rate is 90% with GM-CSF and 60% without GM-CSF after day 5. With alpha 5 and power 80,we need to enroll 76 cases (38 cases with each). Further assuming 20 % drop-out due to various reasons, it was decided to enroll 90 cases randomly allocated into two groups (i.e., 45 in each) by block randomization method by taking block size as 6. So for the present study, it was decided to enroll 90 cases in all. Group A will be given Imipenem and Tigecycline. Patients with recent hospitalisation will be given Colistin in addition. Group B will be given: To another group we will give Imipenem and Tigecycline and GMCSF.Patients with recent hospitalisation will be given Colistin in addition. The dose of antibiotic will be given at dosage Inj Imipenem 1gm i.v. TDS Inj Tigecycline 100mg stat f/b 50mg i.v. OD Inj GM-CSF 500mcg s.c. OD Inj Colistin 9 MIU i.v. stat f/b 4.5 MIU i.v. BD Monitoring and assessment At the baseline, all patients will undergo investigational evaluation as described Daily monitoring of following parameters: - Haemoglobin, - Total peripheral leucocyte counts, - Platelet counts, - Renal function tests - Liver function tests and - Chest X rays will be undertaken - Ascitic fluid analysis will be done on day 0, day 2 and day 5 Stopping rule:If the patient develops a TLC of more than 50,000, the dose of the GM CSF will be reduced to half and the treatment continued. If, even after the reduction, the TLC rises to more than 50,000, then the treatment will be stopped and the patient excluded. Expected outcome of the project: Addition of GM-CSF to standard antibiotic regimen helps resolve SBP and improves outcome in decompensated liver cirrhotic patients.
oral Gemifloxacin versus intravenous Cefotaxime in treatment of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis