G Weiss1, F Meyer, H Lippert. 1. Department of Surgery, University Hospital, Magdeburg, Germany. guenter.weiss@klinikum-magdeburg.de
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The tertiary peritonitis causes the highest mortality in intraabdominal infections. Surgical interventions and antibiotic therapy may only provide an incomplete impact on nosocomial infections acquired at an intensive care unit (ICU) [Nathens et al., World J Surg 22:158-163, 28]. To open up new resources in the management, in particular, in the previous infectious diagnostic, the aim was to investigate the infectious course as well as the diagnostic value of laboratory parameters and microbiological monitoring. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective patient cohort study from the Surgical ICU of a University Hospital (capacity, n=12), overall, 60 patients with a tertiary peritonitis were enrolled. RESULTS: Approximately 20% of the patients with an intraabdominal infection developed a tertiary peritonitis. A tertiary peritonitis can more frequently develop in nosocomial intraabdominal infections, in particular, in case of necrotizing pancreatitis. The device-associated infection rate in the spectrum of nosocomial infections is sevenfold higher than in all ICU patients. Compared with the secondary peritonitis, its mortality is double as high: 35%. In the diagnostic characterizing the course of the nosocomial, prognosis-relevant infections, usual inflammatory parameters show a considerable loss of their sensitivity with a range from 35-57%. By the mean of a routine microbiological monitoring, 47.3% of the analysed subsequent infections could be identified at an early stage. CONCLUSION: In patients with a severe infection, an early diagnostic and treatment of infectious "second hits" can improve the complication rate and prognosis. During the prolonged and complicated septic course of tertiary peritonitis, an additional routine microbiological monitoring contributed effectively to early detection and diagnostic of nosocomial infections. Further studies to investigate the value and efficacy of such monitoring, which have been abandoned, should be undertaken in infectious high-risk patients.
BACKGROUND: The tertiary peritonitis causes the highest mortality in intraabdominal infections. Surgical interventions and antibiotic therapy may only provide an incomplete impact on nosocomial infections acquired at an intensive care unit (ICU) [Nathens et al., World J Surg 22:158-163, 28]. To open up new resources in the management, in particular, in the previous infectious diagnostic, the aim was to investigate the infectious course as well as the diagnostic value of laboratory parameters and microbiological monitoring. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective patient cohort study from the Surgical ICU of a University Hospital (capacity, n=12), overall, 60 patients with a tertiary peritonitis were enrolled. RESULTS: Approximately 20% of the patients with an intraabdominal infection developed a tertiary peritonitis. A tertiary peritonitis can more frequently develop in nosocomial intraabdominal infections, in particular, in case of necrotizing pancreatitis. The device-associated infection rate in the spectrum of nosocomial infections is sevenfold higher than in all ICU patients. Compared with the secondary peritonitis, its mortality is double as high: 35%. In the diagnostic characterizing the course of the nosocomial, prognosis-relevant infections, usual inflammatory parameters show a considerable loss of their sensitivity with a range from 35-57%. By the mean of a routine microbiological monitoring, 47.3% of the analysed subsequent infections could be identified at an early stage. CONCLUSION: In patients with a severe infection, an early diagnostic and treatment of infectious "second hits" can improve the complication rate and prognosis. During the prolonged and complicated septic course of tertiary peritonitis, an additional routine microbiological monitoring contributed effectively to early detection and diagnostic of nosocomial infections. Further studies to investigate the value and efficacy of such monitoring, which have been abandoned, should be undertaken in infectious high-risk patients.
Authors: Rodger D MacArthur; Mark Miller; Timothy Albertson; Edward Panacek; David Johnson; Leah Teoh; William Barchuk Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2003-12-22 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Jan Hayon; Corinne Figliolini; Alain Combes; Jean-Louis Trouillet; Najibi Kassis; Marie Christine Dombret; Claude Gibert; Jean Chastre Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2002-01-01 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Olivier Leroy; Agnès Meybeck; Thibaud d'Escrivan; Patrick Devos; Eric Kipnis; Hugues Georges Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2003-09-12 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Eric A J Hoste; Stijn I Blot; Norbert H Lameire; Raymond C Vanholder; Dirk De Bacquer; Francis A Colardyn Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2004-02 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Anthony W Chow; Gerald A Evans; Avery B Nathens; Chad G Ball; Glen Hansen; Godfrey Km Harding; Andrew W Kirkpatrick; Karl Weiss; George G Zhanel Journal: Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol Date: 2010 Impact factor: 2.471
Authors: Peter Panhofer; Barbara Izay; Markus Riedl; Veronika Ferenc; Martin Ploder; Raimund Jakesz; Peter Götzinger Journal: Langenbecks Arch Surg Date: 2008-03-15 Impact factor: 3.445
Authors: Hanna Santos Marques; Glauber Rocha Lima Araújo; Filipe Antônio França da Silva; Breno Bittencourt de Brito; Paulo Victor Dias Versiani; Jaqueline Silva Caires; Thiago de Carvalho Milet; Fabrício Freire de Melo Journal: World J Clin Cases Date: 2021-04-06 Impact factor: 1.337