| 1. |
- Silfvenius, Annie U.K., et al.
(författare)
-
Laparoscopic ventral hernia repair : early follow-up of a randomized controlled study of primary fascial closure before mesh placement
- 2024
-
Ingår i: British Journal of Surgery. - : Oxford University Press. - 0007-1323 .- 1365-2168. ; 111:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Suturing of the hernia aperture in laparoscopic ventral hernia repair has increased during the past decade. The primary aim of this is to restore the anatomy of the abdominal wall. Closure of the aperture, however, may cause additional tension in the abdominal wall which could increase postoperative pain. The aim of this study was to investigate whether suturing of the hernia aperture affects postoperative pain and hernia-site complications, including seroma, infection, pseudohernia, and mesh migration, 3 months after repair.Methods: Some 192 patients with a midline hernia between 2 and 8 cm in transverse diameter were included in a randomized controlled double-blinded multicentre study. Patients were randomized to mesh repair with (intervention) or without (control) suturing of the hernia aperture before mesh placement. Patients completed the Ventral Hernia Pain Questionnaire before and 3 months after surgery. Abdominal wall pain and hernia-site complications were assessed 3 months after surgery.Results: Ninety-seven patients were randomized to the intervention group and 95 to the control group. Among all patients, median age and BMI was 56 years and 31 kg/m2 respectively. Overall pain experienced decreased by 3 months after operation (P < 0.001). There was no difference between groups regarding hernia-site complications or pain experienced during the past week (13 versus 23 patients; P = 0.111). Seroma and pseudohernia occurred in 13 and 11 patients in the intervention and control groups respectively (P = 0.975 and P = 0.977).Conclusion: Restoration of the abdominal wall anatomy by suturing the hernia aperture before mesh placement does not increase the risk of hernia-site complication or pain 3 months after surgery. This implies that fascial suturing of the aperture can be justified if there are potential long-term benefits such as lower recurrence and/or complication rates.Registration number: ISRCTN51495042 (http://www.controlled-trials.com).
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Gkekas, Ioannis, et al.
(författare)
-
Mismatch repair status predicts survival after adjuvant treatment in stage II colon cancer patients.
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Journal of Surgical Oncology. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 0022-4790 .- 1096-9098. ; 121:2, s. 392-401
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Stage II colon cancer is primarily a surgical disease. Only a still not well-defined subset of patients may benefit from postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy. The relationship between adjuvant chemotherapy and survival after relapse is furthermore still not definitely explored in this group of patients. A number of reports suggest some association between defective mismatch repair (dMMR) and colorectal cancer stage II prognosis, but due to contradictory results from existing studies, the exact predictive role is still not fully understood.METHODS: Retrospective multicenter study including 451 stage II colon cancer patients. The proficiency or deficiency of mismatch repair was tested using immunohistochemistry and analyzed in relationship to two survival outcomes: overall survival (OS) and postrelapse survival.RESULTS: Patients with dMMR (20.4%) derived no OS benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR], 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.47-2.38; P = .897). Patients with proficient mismatch repair (pMMR) tumors receiving adjuvant chemotherapy had the significantly better OS in comparison to those not receiving chemotherapy (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.35-0.82; P = .004). This relationship remained significant in multivariable analysis (HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.22-0.78; P = .007). Patients with pMMR relapsing after adjuvant treatment lived significantly longer than those relapsing without previous adjuvant treatment (HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.32-0.96; P = .033) and this result remained significant in the multivariable model (HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.26-0.93; P = .030).CONCLUSION: In stage II CC patients, adjuvant chemotherapy improves therapeutic outcomes only in patients with pMMR tumors. Survival after relapse in patients having received adjuvant chemotherapy is significantly longer for patients with pMMR. No survival benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy was seen among patients with dMMR tumors.
|
|
| 5. |
- Gran, M. V., et al.
(författare)
-
Antibiotic treatment for appendicitis in Norway and Sweden : a nationwide survey on treatment practices
- 2022
-
Ingår i: BMC Surgery. - : BioMed Central. - 1471-2482. ; 22:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Appendicitis is one of the most common causes of acute abdomen. Uncomplicated appendicitis is as an inflamed appendix without perforation, gangrene or abscess formation. Recent trials show that one can safely treat uncomplicated appendicitis with antibiotics, given patient approval and appropriate follow-up. A recent study has also indicated no difference between antibiotic treatment and placebo. Our aim was to investigate if Norwegian and Swedish surgical departments treat uncomplicated appendicitis with antibiotics and to explore their opinions on this treatment practice.METHODS: A questionnaire was distributed to all heads of department in hospitals that treat appendicitis in Norway and Sweden. Answers were collected using a REDCap survey. Answers were compared between centers and nations and the results were presented anonymously.RESULTS: We sent the questionnaire to 94 eligible recipients and received 61 (65%) answers. In total, 8/61 (13%) departments stated that they have established antibiotic treatment as sole treatment for uncomplicated appendicitis. Almost half of the responders stated that they have used antibiotics sporadically to treat uncomplicated appendicitis. Lack of evidence and guidelines were noted as reasons why antibiotic treatment has not been implemented as sole treatment.CONCLUSIONS: Most Norwegian and Swedish departments have not implemented antibiotic treatment as the sole treatment for uncomplicated appendicitis. Despite several recent large trials on this subject, lack of evidence and guidelines was the most frequently reported reason in our survey.
|
|
