

The significance of the rate of progression of purulent peritonitis in patients with acute surgical pathology
https://doi.org/10.30629/0023-2149-2024-102-11-12-894-900
Abstract
In recent years, the periodic literature suggests dividing peritonitis based on the speed of its development into primary peritonitis (PP) and secondary peritonitis (SP). The significance of the speed of development of purulent peritonitis has not been studied yet.
The aim of the study was to assess the impact of the rates of peritonitis development on treatment outcomes in patients with purulent peritonitis.
Materials and Methods: A total of 113 patients with purulent peritonitis were analyzed. The incidence of peritonitis with varying rates of development, its etiological structure, and treatment outcomes were studied.
Results: The PP group included 56 (49.6%) patients, while the SP group included 57 (50.4%) patients. In the PP group, 64.3% of cases had pathology of the upper gastrointestinal tract as the source of peritonitis. In 35.7% of cases, the source of abdominal cavity contamination was the lower gastrointestinal tract and structures localized outside the digestive tract. In the SP group, 70.1% of patients had the lower gastrointestinal tract as the source of peritonitis. In 29.9% of cases, the source was identified as the upper gastrointestinal tract and structures localized outside the digestive tract. The postoperative mortality rate in the PP group reached 62.5%, which correlated with a frequency of somatic complications of 69.4%. Mortality in the SP group was 35.1% (p < 0.05), with somatic complications recorded in 40.3% of cases (p < 0.05).
Conclusion: The rates of development of purulent peritonitis have a significant impact on treatment outcomes for patients.
About the Authors
M. I. BokarevRussian Federation
Mikhail I. Bokarev — Doctor of Medical Sciences, Professor of the Department of Hospital Surger
Moscow
A. I. Mamykin
Russian Federation
Alexander I. Mamykin — Candidate of Medical Sciences, Assistant of the Department of Hospital Surgery
Moscow
A. Menasria
Russian Federation
Menasria Abdessamad — a post-graduate student of the Department of Hospital Surgery
Moscow
D. Y. Belov
Russian Federation
Dmitry Yu. Belov — a surgeon
Moscow
A. V. Arakelov
Russian Federation
Andranik V. Arakelov — a 5th-year student of the Medical Faculty
Moscow
A. I. Demyanov
Russian Federation
Andrey I. Demyanov — Candidate of Medical Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of Hospital Surgery
Moscow
E. V. Stolarchuk
Russian Federation
Elena V. Stolyarchuk — Candidate of Medical Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of Hospital Surgery
Moscow
R. A. Sokolov
Russian Federation
Roman A. Sokolov — Candidate of Medical Sciences, Assistant of the Department of Hospital Surger
Moscow
O. N. Antonov
Russian Federation
Oleg N. Antonov — Doctor of Medical Sciences, Professor of the Department of Hospital Surger
Moscow
G. V. Siniavin
Russian Federation
Gennady V. Sinyavin — Doctor of Medical Sciences, Professor of the Department of Hospital Surgery named after I.M. Sechenov
Moscow
Y. A. Garaev
Russian Federation
Yusup A. Garaev — Candidate of Medical Sciences, Deputy Chief Physician for Surgical Care
Moscow
References
1. Savel’ev V.S., Gel’fand B.R. Abdominal surgical infection. National Recommendations. Moscow, «Borges». 2011.(In Russian).
2. Stjazhkina S.N., Kel’dibekov M.Y., Jacenko A.A. Peritonitis as a Complication of Surgical Diseases. Problems of modern science and education. Moscow. 2019. (In Russian).
3. Erjuhin I.A., Shljapnikov S.A., Efimova I.S. Peritonitis and abdominal sepsis. Infekcii v hirurgii. 2004;2(1):2–8. (In Russian).
4. Savel’ev B.C., Kirienko A.I. Clinical surgery. National Guidelines. GEOTARMedia. 2009;2:832. (In Russian).
5. Nesterenko A.N., Vorob’eva T.I., Yakubenko E.D., Kolesnikova T.I. Pathogenetic justification of the algorithm of emergency targeted organoprotective therapy of surgical sepsis. Ukraїns’kij zhurnal hіrurgії. 2013;1(20):69–79. (In Russian).
6. Robbins S.L., Cotran R.S. Pathologic Basis of Disease. Philadelphia: Elsevier, 2019.
7. Kagan I.I. Topographical anatomy and operative surgery: textbook. GEOTAR-Media. 2016:672. (In Russian).
8. Gray H. Gray’s Anatomy: The Anatomical basis of clinical practice. Philadelphia: Elsevier, 2020.
9. Sobotta J. Sobotta atlas of human anatomy. Munich: Urban & Fischer. 2019.
10. Saraev A.R., Nazarov Sh.K. Pathogenesis and classification of generalized peritonitis. Hirurgija. Zhurnal im. N.I. Pirogova. 2019;12;106–110. DOI: 10.17116/hirurgia2019121106 (In Russian).
11. Wittmann D.H., Schein M., Condon R.E. Management of secondary peritonitis. Ann Surg. 1996;224(1):10–8. DOI: 10.1097/00000658-199607000-00003
12. Calandra T., Cohen J. International sepsis forum definition of infection in the ICU consensus conference. The international sepsis forum consensus conference on definitions of infection in the intensive care unit. Crit. Care Med. 2005;33(7):1538–48. DOI: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000168253.91200.83
13. Mishra S.P., Tiwary S.K., Mishra M., Gupta S.K. An introduction of tertiary peritonitis. J. Emerg. Trauma Shock. 2014;7(2):121–3. DOI: 10.4103/0974-2700.130883
14. Sartelli M, Abu-Zidan FM, Ansaloni L and al. The role of the open abdomen procedure in managing severe abdominal sepsis: WSES position paper. World J. Emerg. Surg. 2015;10:35. PMID: 26269709; PMCID: PMC4534034. DOI: 10.1186/s13017-015-0032-7
15. Sherbatenko V.Y. Programmed relaparotomies in the management of patients with generalized peritonitis. Samara. 2019. (In Russian).
16. Hao W.L., Lee Y.K. Microflora of the gastrointestinal tract: a review. Methods Mol. Biol. 2004;268:491–502. DOI: 10.1385/1-59259-766-1:491
17. LaRosa S.P. Sepsis: Menu of new approaches replaces one therapy for all. Cleve Clin. J. Med. 2002; 69:65–73. DOI:10.3949/ccjm.69.1.65
18. Kupchenko A.M. Aerobic microflora in the etiologic structure of disseminated purulent peritonitis. Novosti hirurgii. 2014;22(5):568–574. (In Russian).
19. Bentley D.W., Nichols R.L., Condon R.E., Gorbach S.L. The microflora of the human ileum and intrabdominal colon: results of direct needle aspiration at surgery and evaluation of the technique. J. Lab. Clin. Med. 1972;79(3):421–9.
20. Leshhishin Y.M., Baranov A.I., Potehin K.V., Jaroshuk S.A., Valujskih Y.V. Application of integral assessment scales in patients with disseminated purulent peritonitis. Medicina v Kuzbasse. 2020;2;20–27. (In Russian).
21. Angus DC, van der Poll T. Severe sepsis and septic shock. N Engl J Med. 2013 Aug 29;369(9):840-51. Erratum in: N. Engl. J. Med. 2013;369(21):2069. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMra1208623
22. Bassetti M., Eckmann C., Giacobbe D.R. Post-operative abdominal infections: epidemiology, operational definitions and outcomes. Intensive Care Medicine. 2019;46;163–172.
23. Clements T.W., Tolonen M., Ball C.G., Kirkpatrick A.W. Secondary peritonitis and intra-abdominal sepsis: an increasingly global disease in search of better systemic therapies. Scandinavian Journal of Surgery. 2021;1;61–65.
24. Kutovoj A.B., Kosul’nikov S.O., Zavizion E.N. et al. Vacuum therapy for generalized peritonitis. Klіnіchna hіrurgіja. 2017;2;38–40. (In Russian).
25. Avdovenko A.L., Naumov I.A., Klimov D.E. Materials of IX All-Russian Conference of general surgeons with international participation “Peritonitis from A to Y”. Yaroslavl. 2016;61–64. (In Russian).
26. BensmanV.M., Savchenko Y.P., Sherba S.N., Avakimjan V.A., Pjatakov S.N., Golikov I.V., Saakjan A.S., Triandafilov K.V. Choice way of closing a wound in the abdominal wall complex surgical treatment of peritonitis prevalence. Kubanskij nauchnyj medicinskij vestnik. 2015;5. (In Russian).
Review
For citations:
Bokarev M.I., Mamykin A.I., Menasria A., Belov D.Y., Arakelov A.V., Demyanov A.I., Stolarchuk E.V., Sokolov R.A., Antonov O.N., Siniavin G.V., Garaev Y.A. The significance of the rate of progression of purulent peritonitis in patients with acute surgical pathology. Clinical Medicine (Russian Journal). 2024;102(11-12):894-900. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.30629/0023-2149-2024-102-11-12-894-900