Rare causes of acute abdomen and review of literature: Primary/secondary omental torsion, isolated segmental omental necrosis, and epiploic appendagitis.

BACKGROUND: Primary/secondary omental torsion (POT/SOT), isolated segmental omental necrosis (ISON), and primary epiploic appendagitis (PEA) are rare causes of acute abdominal pain that often lead to misdiagnosis. Although the differential diagnosis may vary according to the localization and severity of the pain, and associated symptoms such as nausea-vomiting and fever, depending on the disease and site of involvement, the character of the pain is generally similar and in a continuous form. Depending on pain localization, it can mimic different clinical pictures such as acute appendicitis, acute diverticulitis, ovarian pathologies, urinary tract stones and acute cholecystitis, and patients are often diagnosed after surgical exploration. With the increased availability of computed tomography and awareness of these diseases, more patients can be diagnosed in the preoperative process and unnecessary operations can be avoided. In particular, PEA is a self-limiting local inflammatory disease and can often be managed conservatively. For all diagnoses, the surgical treatment option is local excision of the relevant epiploic appendix or omental segment, preferably laparoscopically. The most common surgical indication is diagnostic confusion and the second is persistent pain. METHODS: The data of patients followed up and treated for a diagnosis of POT, SOT, ISON or PEA between 2006 and 2021 were recorded in a specially prepared database. The demographic characteristics of the patients, and the data regarding the diagnosis and treatment process were evaluated retrospectively and discussed in the light of the relevant literature. RESULTS: The reason for hospitalization and treatment in 12 of the 42 patients included in the study was necrosis of a part of the omentum. Of these patients, 4 were followed up and treated with a diagnosis of POT, 3 with SOT, 5 with ISON and 30 with a diagnosis of PEA. Thirty-three of the patients were diagnosed preoperatively, and 9 intraoperatively, 22 patients were operated on, and 20 patients with PEA were treated conservatively. After surgical or medical treatment, all the patients were discharged without complications. In the comparisons between the patients, no significant difference was observed in terms of clinical and laboratory findings. CONCLUSION: POT, SOT, ISON and PEA should be considered in the differential diagnosis of patients with acute abdominal findings. In patients with PEA diagnosed in the preoperative period, a conservative approach should be considered first. In patients with a diagnosis of POT, SOT, and ISON, a surgical or conservative approach should be evaluated according to the patient's clinical condition.

Linguistic validation of a widely used recovery score: quality of recovery-15 (QoR-15).

BACKGROUND: The quality of recovery-15 (QoR-15) is a patient reported outcome questionnaire that measures the quality of recovery after surgery and anesthesia. The QoR-15 has been validated in many languages; Turkish version of the QoR-15 has not yet been established. The aims of this study were to translate the QoR-15 questionnaire into Turkish and to perform a full psychometric evaluation of the Turkish version. METHODS: After translating the original English version of the QoR-15 scale into Turkish, the QoR-15T scale was psychometrically validated. This process included validity, reliability, responsiveness, feasibility. The QoR-15T was evaluated before the surgery and 24 h after surgery. RESULTS: A total of 210 patients completed the pre- and postoperative questionnaires, providing a completion rate of 93.75%. The correlation coefficient between QoR-15T score and VAS score was 0.644 on postoperative day 1 (p < 0.001). Inter item Cronbach's alpha was 0.863. Global test-retest concordance coefficient was 0.98 (95% CI: 0.94-1.00). DISCUSSION: The QoR-15T scale is a reliable and valid instrument for evaluating postoperative quality of recovery in Turkish speaking patients. The psychometric characteristics used to assess postoperative quality of recovery were similar to those in the English version.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on emergency general surgery outcomes: A single-center retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the health-care system unpredictably. Restrictions and precautions have had a significant impact on the volume and nature of admissions in emergency services. In this study, we hypothesized that the pandemic would result in a change in the number of emergencies admitted to the general surgery inpatient service and a worse patient outcome compared to the previous year. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of emergency general surgical admissions during the first 6 months of the pandemic and the same period in 2019 was conducted. Demographics, laboratory assessments, diagnosis, treatment strategies, and postoperative out-comes were analyzed. RESULTS: 761 patients were admitted to the general surgery service during two 6-month periods (392 vs. 369, respectively). This represented a 5.9% reduction in admissions. However, in the first 2 months of the pandemic, the number of emergency general surgical admissions decreased by 37.1% and 43.7%, respectively. Comparison of periods demonstrated no significant differences in demograph-ics, laboratory values, incidence of emergencies, treatment strategies, and hospital stay. Acute appendicitis, cholecystitis, and bowel obstruction were the three most common surgical emergencies in the pandemic. However, there was no significant difference in outcomes between the periods when each surgical emergency was evaluated separately. CONCLUSION: Pandemic appears to affect general surgical admissions with a fluctuating pattern, an increasing trend following a sig-nificant 2-month decrease. These findings suggest that patients presented with a delayed presentation; however, contrary to concerns, there was no difference in patient outcomes between the two periods. This study provides a perspective in management strategies for surgical emergencies in such unusual conditions.

Upper gastrointestinal system bleedings in COVID-19 patients: Risk factors and management/a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Upper gastrointestinal system bleeding (UGIB) that occurs with the effect of coagulopathy due to COVID-19 disease itself and drugs such as LMWH and steroids used in the treatment negatively affects the outcomes. In this study, we aimed to examine the frequency of gastrointestinal system bleeding in COVID-19 patients, risk factors, effect on outcomes, and management. METHODS: Institutional center (a third-level pandemic center) database was searched for patients hospitalized for COVID-19 between March 11, 2020, and December 17, 2020, retrospectively. Patients with UGIB symptoms/signs were included in the study. Age, gender, body mass index (kg/m2), hospital department where bleeding was diagnosed, previous bleeding history, comorbidities, and medication were steroid, anticoagulant, low weight molecule heparin, and proton-pomp inhibitor, endoscopic findings/treatment, transfusion, and mortality rates were evaluated. Patients were divided into two groups as survivors and non-survivors and parameters were compared. RESULTS: Forty-five of a total 5484 patients under COVID-19 treatment had upper gastrointestinal bleeding (0.8%). The average age of the patients was 70.1 years and 73% bleeders were male. Nineteen patients (44%) underwent endoscopy. The most common etiologies of bleeding were gastric/duodenal ulcer (n=9), erosive gastritis (n=4), and hemorrhagic gastritis (n=3). Active bleeding re-quiring intervention was detected in only one patient; therapeutic band ligation was applied to only 1 (2%) of all patients. The most common etiologies of bleeding were gastric/duodenal ulcer (n=9), erosive gastritis (n=4), and hemorrhagic gastritis (n=3). In terms of statistical significance, it was observed that the rate of steroid treatment (77% vs. 39%) and the number of days of steroid treatment were higher in non-survivor group. CONCLUSION: UGIB is less common in COVID-19 patients compared to other hospitalized patients. However, it significantly increases mortality. Mortality risk increases even more in patients using steroids. These risks should be considered in patients under COVID-19 treatment. The majority of the bleeding patients does not require endoscopic treatment and should be managed conser-vatively. It is worth considering reducing unnecessary endoscopies in the pandemic.

Life-threatening hematomas in COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused over 1.75 million deaths in the world to date. Although the leading cause of mortality is respiratory disorders and thromboembolic pathologies, other rare pathologies may also increase mortality and morbidity. In our study, we aimed to examine life-threatening hematomas, risk factors, and management during COVID-19. METHODS: Institutional center (a third level pandemic center) database was searched for patients hospitalized for COVID-19 during 10 months period between March 11, 2020, and December 17, 2020, retrospectively. Patients with bleeding symptoms/signs were de-tected. Patients with gastrointestinal system bleeding were excluded from the study. Patients with hematomas were included in the study. RESULTS: Eleven of a total 5484 patients had hematomas (0.2%). Median age was 76 (min-max: 56-90). Seven (63.6%) patients were male and 4 (36.4%) were female. All patients had at least one comorbidities, been under treatment dose of low-molecular-weight hep-arin (LMWH) and severe or critical COVID-19 disease. Seven retroperitoneal hematomas, two rectus sheath hematomas, one breast hematoma, and in one patient both retroperitoneal and breast hematomas were diagnosed. Angiographic arterial embolization was applied to 5 (45.5%) patients. Overall mortality rate in patients with bleeding complications was 54.5% (n=6), and the male-to-female ratio was 66.7% (n=4) versus 33.3% (n=2). CONCLUSION: Hematomas are rare, but mortality increasing phenomena in COVID-19 patients. Age, male gender, severe or critical COVID-19 disease, comorbidities, and treatment dose of LMWH may be risk factors. New onset of abdominal/back pain and ecchymotic skin lesions may be signs of bleeding in this patient group. Mortality can be reduced by early diagnosis of hematoma and interventional methods.

Impact of coronavirus disease on acute appendicitis cases.

BACKGROUND: Disease profiles have changed in the COVID-19 pandemic. In this study, we aimed to compare acute appendicitis cases before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A total of 130 patients were diagnosed with AA and operated between the days of first COVID-19 case on March 11, 2020, and May 11, 2020, and the same period of the previous year. Data of the patients were extracted from electronic archive of the hospital. Those patients were stratified into two groups; pandemic group and pre-pandemic group. The pandemic group comprised 46 patients and the pre-pandemic group, 84 patients. The two groups were compared in terms of age, gender, duration of symptoms, length of hospital stay, white blood cell count, C-reactive protein levels, and post-operative complications. RESULTS: The median days passed from onset of abdominal pain to submission were 6.5 days in the pandemic period. However, it was 3 days in the pre-pandemic group (p<0.001). Other parameters were not statistically different between the groups (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 pandemic period, delay in hospital submissions has attracted attention. However, delayed treatment did not reflect to the clinic as more severe disease.

Is combined rather than single antibiotic therapy actually reasonable in patients with acute calculous cholecystitis?

OBJECTIVE: Acute calculous cholecystitis (AC) is a frequently encountered emergency surgery disease and its standard treatment is cholecystectomy. In patients with high risk in surgery, antibiotic treatment (AT) is important. In routine clinical practices, antibiotics are frequently used either as single or in combination in the treatment of AC. This study examined whether or not combined antibiotic treatment (CAT) had superiority over single antibiotic treatment (SAT) in AC. METHODS: Patients with cholecystitis who received treatment in the period of 2016-2019 were retrospectively examined. The treatment procedures applied, patient findings, and laboratory data were analyzed using relevant statistical software. The patients were categorized into groups based on the treatment approaches applied, and the effects of SAT and CAT on infection parameters were analyzed. RESULTS: In all, 184 patients received treatment for AC, with a mean age of 57.7, and the female-to-male ratio was 77:107. Of these, 139 patients received SAT and 45 received CAT. No significant difference was found in terms of effectiveness between the SAT and CAT in the patients who received early cholecystectomy treatment and those who received medical treatment with noninvasive intervention. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with AC, antibiotics are commonly used either as single or in combination for prophylaxis and therapeutic purposes. As no significant difference was observed between single and combined use in terms of treatment effectiveness and hospitalization duration, CAT is not recommended due to its possibility of allergic side effects, toxicity, and cost-increasing effects.

Is combined rather than single antibiotic therapy actually reasonable in patients with acute calculous cholecystitis?

SUMMARY OBJECTIVE Acute calculous cholecystitis (AC) is a frequently encountered emergency surgery disease and its standard treatment is cholecystectomy. In patients with high risk in surgery, antibiotic treatment (AT) is important. In routine clinical practices, antibiotics are frequently used either as single or in combination in the treatment of AC. This study examined whether or not combined antibiotic treatment (CAT) had superiority over single antibiotic treatment (SAT) in AC. METHODS Patients with cholecystitis who received treatment in the period of 2016-2019 were retrospectively examined. The treatment procedures applied, patient findings, and laboratory data were analyzed using relevant statistical software. The patients were categorized into groups based on the treatment approaches applied, and the effects of SAT and CAT on infection parameters were analyzed. RESULTS In all, 184 patients received treatment for AC, with a mean age of 57.7, and the female-to-male ratio was 77:107. Of these, 139 patients received SAT and 45 received CAT. No significant difference was found in terms of effectiveness between the SAT and CAT in the patients who received early cholecystectomy treatment and those who received medical treatment with noninvasive intervention. CONCLUSIONS In patients with AC, antibiotics are commonly used either as single or in combination for prophylaxis and therapeutic purposes. As no significant difference was observed between single and combined use in terms of treatment effectiveness and hospitalization duration, CAT is not recommended due to its possibility of allergic side effects, toxicity, and cost-increasing effects.

Publication rates of abstracts presented at the annual congress of the Turkish Society of Colorectal Surgery (years 2003-2011).

OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study is to examine the Publication Rate of Congress of Turkish Society of Colorectal Surgery meeting abstracts and determine the factors affecting publication rate. MATERIAL AND METHODS: All presentations at Congress of Turkish Society of Colorectal Surgery congresses held in 2003, 2007, 2009, 2011 were retrospectively assessed. Manuscripts indexed in Google-Scholar database were included. The meeting year, study type, presentation type, title and time to publication of studies were assessed. Actual impact factor values were assessed to introduce the scientific power of the journals. RESULTS: Among a total of 614 abstracts presented at these congresses, 139 (22.6%) presentations were published in various medical journals. The publication rate was higher in oral presentations as group compared to poster presentations (29.7% vs. 19.5%) (p<0.001). Mean time to publication period was 20.4 (±21.1) months. 78 (56.1%) of published articles were published in SCI-E journals while 61 (43.9%) were published in non-SCI-E journals. Experimental studies had a higher Publication Rate in analysis of publication rate according to study type (p<0.001). Prospective clinical studies had a higher publication rate than retrospective studies. The journals in which oral presentations had been published had greater impact factor than journals in which poster presentations had been published (p=0.02). If published; prospective clinical studies were published in journals with greater impact factor than retrospective studies (p=0.04). CONCLUSION: The quality of a meeting is correlated with the publication of abstracts accepted as presentations. Congress of Turkish Society of Colorectal Surgery congress is an efficient meeting for researchers, and have a lower PR as compared to international congresses while having a similar publication rate to equivalent scientific meetings. Being more selective during abstract acceptance should increase the Publication Rate and quality of Congress of Turkish Society of Colorectal Surgery congresses.

Publication Rate of Abstracts Presented at the Annual Congress of the European Society for Surgical Research during 2008-2011.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: The presentation of scientific studies at major meetings serves to rapidly share study results with the scientific community. On the other hand, full-text publication of abstracts in peer-reviewed journals ensures the dissemination of science. This study examines the publication rate (PR) of meeting abstracts presented at the European Society for Surgical Research (ESSR) congresses and determines/compares the factors affecting the PRs. METHODS: All presentations at the ESSR congresses held during 2008-2011 were retrospectively assessed. Manuscripts indexed in PubMed were included. The meeting year, journal impact factor (IF) in the publication year, study type, presentation type, time to publication and geographic origin of studies were assessed. RESULTS: Among a total of 1,368 oral and poster abstracts, 48.7% (n = 391) of the oral presentations (OPs) and 29.7% (n = 168) of the poster presentations (PPs) were published in medical journals indexed in PubMed. The mean IF of the journals was 2.696 (0.17-14.95). The journals that published OPs had a higher IF than the journals in which PPs were published (2.944 vs. 2.118; p < 0.001). The PR was also higher in the OP group than in the PP group of journals (p < 0.001). The time to publication was 17.5 months (-166 to 82) and was shorter for PPs than for OPs (14.02 vs. 19.09 months; p = 0.01). According to the study type, experimental studies had a significantly higher PR (53.7%; p < 0.001); however, there was no significant difference in PR in terms of the prospective or retrospective nature of clinical studies. The clinical studies were also compared according to the IF values of the journals in terms of the prospective or retrospective nature of the study, and no significant difference was found (p = 0.62). CONCLUSION: The ESSR congress is an efficient meeting for researchers from varied surgical disciplines and has a PR equivalent to that of similar scientific meetings. The congress has achieved a PR of 40.9% over 4 years with an average IF of 2.696 and a mean time to publication of 17.5 months, which is equivalent to that of similar scientific meetings. OPs have a higher PR in journals with greater IF values as compared with PPs.