Browsing by Subject "Debridement"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Biofilm Management in Wound Care
    (Wolters Kluwer, 2021) Sen, Chandan K.; Roy, Sashwati; Mathew-Steiner, Shomita S.; Gordillo, Gayle M.; Surgery, School of Medicine
    Learning objectives: After studying this article, the participant should be able to: 1. Understand the basics of biofilm infection and be able to distinguish between planktonic and biofilm modes of growth. 2. Have a working knowledge of conventional and emerging antibiofilm therapies and their modes of action as they pertain to wound care. 3. Understand the challenges associated with testing and marketing antibiofilm strategies and the context within which these strategies may have effective value. Summary: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimate for human infectious diseases caused by bacteria with a biofilm phenotype is 65 percent and the National Institutes of Health estimate is closer to 80 percent. Biofilms are hostile microbial aggregates because, within their polymeric matrix cocoons, they are protected from antimicrobial therapy and attack from host defenses. Biofilm-infected wounds, even when closed, show functional deficits such as deficient extracellular matrix and impaired barrier function, which are likely to cause wound recidivism. The management of invasive wound infection often includes systemic antimicrobial therapy in combination with débridement of wounds to a healthy tissue bed as determined by the surgeon who has no way of visualizing the biofilm. The exceedingly high incidence of false-negative cultures for bacteria in a biofilm state leads to missed diagnoses of wound infection. The use of topical and parenteral antimicrobial therapy without wound débridement have had limited impact on decreasing biofilm infection, which remains a major problem in wound care. Current claims to manage wound biofilm infection rest on limited early-stage data. In most cases, such data originate from limited experimental systems that lack host immune defense. In making decisions on the choice of commercial products to manage wound biofilm infection, it is important to critically appreciate the mechanism of action and significance of the relevant experimental system. In this work, the authors critically review different categories of antibiofilm products, with emphasis on their strengths and limitations as evident from the published literature.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Outcomes in Endoscopic and Operative Transgastric Pancreatic Debridement
    (Wolters Kluwer, 2021) Maatman, Thomas K.; McGuire, Sean P.; Flick, Katelyn F.; Madison, Mackenzie K.; Al-Haddad, Mohammad A.; Bick, Benjamin L.; Ceppa, Eugene P.; DeWitt, John M.; Easler, Jeffrey J.; Fogel, Evan L.; Gromski, Mark A.; House, Michael G.; Lehman, Glen A.; Nakeeb, Attila; Schmidt, C. Max; Sherman, Stuart; Watkins, James L.; Zyromski, Nicholas J.; Surgery, School of Medicine
    Objectives: Select patients with anatomically favorable walled off pancreatic necrosis may be treated by endoscopic (Endo-TGD) or operative (OR-TGD) transgastric debridement (TGD). We compared our experience with these 2 approaches. Summary background data: Select necrotizing pancreatitis (NP) patients are suitable for TGD which may be accomplished endoscopically or surgically. Limited experience exists contrasting these techniques exists. Methods: Patients undergoing Endo-TGD and OR-TGD at a single, high-volume pancreatic center between 2008 and 2019 were identified from a prospective database. Patient characteristics, procedural details, and outcomes of these 2 groups were compared. Results: Among 498 NP patients undergoing necrosis intervention, 160 (32%) had TGD: 59 Endo-TGD and 101 OR-TGD. The groups were statistically similar in age, comorbidity, pancreatitis etiology, necrosis anatomy, pancreatitis severity, and timing of TGD from pancreatitis insult. OR-TGD required 1.1 ± 0.5 and Endo-TGD 3.0 ± 2.0 debridements/patient. Fewer hospital readmissions and repeat necrosis interventions, and shorter total inpatient length of stay were observed in OR-TGD patients. New-onset organ failure [Endo-TGD (13%); OR-TGD (13%); P = 1.0] was similar between groups. Hospital length of stay after TGD was significantly longer in patients undergoing Endo-TGD (13.8 ± 20.8 days) compared to OR-TGD (9.4 ± 6.1 days; P = 0.047). Mortality was 7% in Endo-TGD and 1% in OR-TGD (P = 0.04). Conclusions: Operative and endoscopic transgastric debridement achieve necrosis resolution with different temporal and procedural profiles. Clear multidisciplinary communication is essential to determine appropriate approach to individual necrotizing pancreatitis patients.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    The role of endoscopic therapy in the minimally invasive management of pancreatic necrosis
    (Korean Association of Internal Medicine, 2021-01) Easler, Jeffrey James; Medicine, School of Medicine
    Pancreatic necrosis is among the most frequently encountered local complications of acute pancreatitis and associates with severe disease. Infected pancreatic necrosis further enhances the risk for morbidity and mortality. Pancreatic fluid collections that result from pancreatic necrosis evolve from acute necrotic collections to walled off necrosis and are defined by their distinct characteristics on cross sectional imaging. A variety of interventions spanning multiple disciplines are available for the drainage and debridement of pancreatic necrosis. Prospective, randomized trials have identified management strategies that incorporate minimally invasive interventions as having the best outcomes for patients with symptomatic pancreatic necrosis. The scientific literature has confidently positioned endoscopic drainage and necrosectomy among the most effective interventions for patients with symptomatic walled off necrosis. Innovations such as the use of metallic stents, chemical debridement and multiple modalities for drainage of pancreatic necrosis show promise in improving outcomes for patients managed with endoscopic interventions.