You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


Advertisement

ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | RSS | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 125 No. 9, September 1990 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Online Only
 •  Online First Table of
Contents
  ORIGINAL ARTICLES
 •Online Features
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 • Reply to article
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (46)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Delicious Add to Digg Add to Facebook Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Peritoneal Lavage in Abdominal Sepsis

A Controlled Clinical Study

Moshe Schein, MD, FCS(SA); Gary Gecelter, MB, BCh; Wolf Freinkel, MB, BCh; Herman Gerding, MB, BCh; Piet J. Becker, PhD

Arch Surg. 1990;125(9):1132-1135.


Abstract



• The value of intraoperative peritoneal lavage (IOPL) with saline solution, with or without antibiotics, in the treatment of peritoneal contamination, continues to be controversial. A prospective trial was carried out in 87 patients who underwent emergency laparotomies for peritonitis. They were randomized to be treated in one of three ways: group 1 (mean acute physiologic and chronic health evaluation [APACHE] II score, 8) received no IOPL; group 2 (mean APACHE II score, 10) received IOPL with saline solution; and group 3 (mean APACHE II score, 8) received IOPL with saline solution and 2 g of chloramphenicol succinate. In groups 1, 2, and 3, the mortality was 21%, 21%, and 10%, respectively (not significant), and correlated well with the preoperative APACHE II scores. In groups 1, 2, and 3, the mean hospital stay was 13, 13, and 10 days, respectively (not significant), and the incidence of wound infections was 20%, 17%, and 17%, respectively; the incidence of surgical complications was 10%, 24% and 7%, respectively (not significant), and of medical complications, 24%, 31%, and 17%, respectively. We concluded that IOPL with saline solution or antibiotics did not influence the outcome following laparotomies for peritonitis.

(Arch Surg. 1990;125:1132-1135)



Author Affiliations



From the Department of Surgery, J. G. Strijdom Hospital and University of the Witwatersrand (Drs Schein, Gecelter, and Freinkel) and the Institute for Biostatistics SAMRC (Dr Becker), Johannesburgh, South Africa.


Footnotes



Accepted for publication September 25, 1989.

Deceased.

Reprint requests to Department of Surgery, Medical School, 7 York Rd, 2193 Parktown, Johannesburg, South Africa (Dr Schein).



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Delicious Delicious   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Chlorhexidine Lavage in the Treatment of Experimental Intra-abdominal Infection
Bondar et al.
Arch Surg 2000;135:309-314.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Inappropriate Hospital Care and of Illness: Results from a Nationwide Study
Booth et al.
American Journal of Medical Quality 1998;13:36-43.
ABSTRACT  

Prognosis and Treatment of Peritonitis: Do We Need New Scoring Systems?
Koperna and Schulz
Arch Surg 1996;131:180-186.
ABSTRACT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | PHYSICIAN JOBS | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1990 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.