| 1. |
- Axman, E., et al.
(författare)
-
Chronic pain and risk for reoperation for recurrence after inguinal hernia repair using self-gripping mesh
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Surgery. - : Elsevier BV. - 0039-6060 .- 1532-7361. ; 167:3, s. 609-613
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Improved recurrence rates after groin hernia surgery have led to chronic pain becoming the most troublesome postoperative complication. Self-gripping mesh was developed to decrease the risk for development of chronic pain. The aim of this nationwide cohort study was to compare recurrence rate and chronic pain 1 year after an open, anterior mesh repair of inguinal hernias with either a self-gripping mesh or other lightweight mesh. Method: All operations registered as open anterior mesh repair (Lichtenstein) in the Swedish Hernia Registry between September 2012 and October 2016 were selected. At 1 year after repair, patients were sent a pain questionnaire assessing chronic pain. We compared the prevalence of chronic pain and reoperation for recurrence using lightweight, sutured mesh or self-gripping mesh. Results: We analyzed the 1,803 repairs using self-gripping mesh and 16,567 repairs using lightweight mesh. We found no difference in the prevalence of chronic pain 1 year after the hernia repair between selfgripping mesh and sutured lightweight mesh (OR 0.92, CI 95% 0.80-1.06, P = .257). There was no increase in reoperation for recurrence when using self-gripping mesh (HR 0.71, CI 95% 0.45-1.14, P = .156). Mean operation time was considerably less when using self-gripping mesh (43 vs 70 minutes; P > .001). Conclusion: The use of self-gripping mesh does not decrease the incidence of chronic pain and reoperation for recurrence compared with lightweight, sutured mesh for open anterior mesh repair of inguinal hernias. Furthermore, the use of self-gripping mesh is associated with a clinically important, lesser operation time. (C) 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
|
|
| 2. |
- Balci, Deniz, et al.
(författare)
-
Revival of associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: An international multicenter study with promising outcomes
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Surgery. - : MOSBY-ELSEVIER. - 0039-6060 .- 1532-7361. ; 173:6, s. 1398-1404
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy for per-ihilar cholangiocarcinoma has been considered to be contraindicated due to the initial poor results. Given the recent reports of improved outcomes, we aimed to collect the recent expe-riences of different centers performing associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma to analyze factors related to improved outcomes. Methods: This proof-of-concept study collected contemporary cases of associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma and analyzed for morbidity, short and long-term survival, and factors associated with outcomes. Results: In total, 39 patients from 8 centers underwent associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma from 2010 to 2020. The median preoperative future liver remnant volume was 323 mL (155-460 mL). The median future liver remnant increase was 58.7% (8.9%-264. 5%) with a median interstage interval of 13 days (6-60 days). Post-stage 1 and post-stage 2 biliary leaks occurred in 2 (7.7%) and 4 (15%) patients. Six patients (23%) after stage 1 and 6 (23%) after stage 2 experienced grade 3 or higher complica-tions. Two patients (7.7%) died within 90 days after stage 2. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival was 92%, 69%, and 55%, respectively. A subgroup analysis revealed poor survival for patients under-going additional vascular resection and lymph node positivity. Lymph node-negative patients showed excellent survival demonstrated by 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival of 86%, 86%, and 86%. Conclusion: This study highlights that the critical attitude toward associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma needs to be revised. In selected patients with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma, associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy can achieve favorable survival that compares to the outcome of established surgical treatment strategies reported in benchmark studies for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma including 1-stage hepatectomy and liver transplantation. (c) 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
|
|
| 3. |
- Celentano, Valerio, et al.
(författare)
-
Standardization of ileoanal J-pouch surgery technique: Quality assessment of minimally invasive ileoanal J-pouch surgery videos
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Surgery. - : MOSBY-ELSEVIER. - 0039-6060 .- 1532-7361. ; 172:1, s. 53-59
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Ileal pouch anal anastomosis is a complex procedure associated with significant morbidity, with several complications after ileal pouch anal anastomosis surgery leading to pouch failure. The aim of the study is to evaluate the heterogeneity surrounding the technique of ileoanal J-pouch surgery by assessing the safety and quality of published online peer-reviewed surgical videos.Methods: Ileal pouch anal anastomosis videos published on peer-reviewed surgical journals and video channels were edited and anonymized to demonstrate specific steps of the surgical procedure: mobilization and division of the rectum, formation of the ileoanal J-pouch reservoir, anastomosis, and lengthening techniques. The anonymized videos were presented to a group of reviewers with expertise in ileal pouch anal anastomosis blinded to the names and affiliations of the surgeons performing the procedure. Primary outcome was the rate of interobserver variability in the assessment of specific technical steps of the ileal pouch anal anastomosis surgery procedure. Secondary outcome was the appropriateness of the use of surgical videos review as an assessment tool for ileal pouch anal anastomosis surgery, measured as rate of reviewers being unable to answer for poor video quality.Results: In total, 29 video fragments were distributed, and 13 assessors completed a 60-item survey, organized in 7 major domains. The survey completion rate was 93.4%. Out of a total 729 answers, in 23 (3.2%) the reviewers indicated they were unable to comment due to poor video image, and in 48 (6.5%) were unable to comment due to the particular step not being shown in the procedure. The proportion of assessors rating rectal mobilization technically appropriate ranged from 30.7% to 92.3% and from 7.7% to 69.2% for safety. The level of rectal division was considered appropriate in 0 to 53.8% of the videos, whereas the stapling technique used for rectal division was appropriate in 0 to 70% of the videos.Conclusion: Our study assessed published peer-reviewed videos on ileal pouch anal anastomosis surgery and reported heterogeneity in the safety of the demonstrated techniques. Blind assessment of published peer-reviewed ileal pouch anal anastomosis videos reported a high rate of unsafe or inappropriate technique for rectal mobilization and transection in the reviewed videos, with fair interobserver agreement among reviewers. There is a need for consensus on what is considered safe and appropriate in ileal pouch anal anastomosis surgery. Peer review of ileal pouch anal anastomosis surgery videos could facilitate training and accreditation in this complex procedure.(c) 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
|
|
| 4. |
- Dhanasekara, Chathurika S., et al.
(författare)
-
A comparison of outcomes including bile duct injury of subtotal cholecystectomy versus open total cholecystectomy as bailout procedures for severe cholecystitis : A multicenter real-world study
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Surgery. - : Elsevier. - 0039-6060 .- 1532-7361. ; 176:3, s. 605-613
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Dense inflammation obscuring the hepatocystic anatomy can hinder the ability to perform a safe standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy in severe cholecystitis, requiring use of a bailout procedure. We compared clinical outcomes of laparoscopic and open subtotal cholecystectomy against the traditional standard of open total cholecystectomy to identify the optimal bailout strategy for the difficult gallbladder.METHODS: A multicenter, multinational retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent bailout procedures for severe cholecystitis. Procedures were compared using one-way analysis of variance/Kruskal-Wallis tests and χ2 tests with multiple pairwise comparisons, maintaining a family-wise error rate at 0.05. Multiple multivariate linear/logistical regression models were created.RESULTS: In 11 centers, 727 bailout procedures were conducted: 317 laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomies, 172 open subtotal cholecystectomies, and 238 open cholecystectomies. Baseline characteristics were similar among subgroups. Bile leak was common in laparoscopic and open fenestrating subtotal cholecystectomies, with increased intraoperative drain placements and postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography(P < .05). In contrast, intraoperative bleeding (odds ratio = 3.71 [1.9, 7.22]), surgical site infection (odds ratio = 2.41 [1.09, 5.3]), intensive care unit admission (odds ratio = 2.65 [1.51, 4.63]), and length of stay (Δ = 2 days, P < .001) were higher in open procedures. Reoperation rates were higher for open reconstituting subtotal cholecystectomies (odds ratio = 3.43 [1.03, 11.44]) than other subtypes. The overall rate of bile duct injury was 1.1% and was not statistically different between groups. Laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomy had a bile duct injury rate of 0.63%.CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomy is a feasible surgical bailout procedure in cases of severe cholecystitis where standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy may carry undue risk of bile duct injury. Open cholecystectomy remains a reasonable option.
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Ivanics, Tommy, et al.
(författare)
-
Long-term outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma : A propensity score matched analysis of a high-volume North American center
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Surgery. - : Elsevier. - 0039-6060 .- 1532-7361. ; 171:4, s. 982-991
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Laparoscopic liver resections for malignancy are increasing worldwide, and yet data from North America are lacking. We aimed to assess the long-term outcomes of patients undergoing laparoscopic liver resection and open liver resection as a treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma.Methods: Patients undergoing liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma between January 2008 and December 2019 were retrospectively studied. A propensity score matching was performed using patient demographics, laboratory parameters, etiology of liver disease, liver function, and tumor characteristics. Primary outcomes included overall survival and cumulative incidence of recurrence. Kaplan-Meier and competing risk cumulative incidence were used for survival analyses. Multivariable Cox regression and Fine-Gray proportional hazard regression were performed to determine hazard for death and recurrence, respectively.Results: Three hundred and ninety-one patients were identified (laparoscopic liver resection: 110; open liver resection: 281). After propensity score matching, 149 patients remained (laparoscopic liver resection: 57; open liver resection: 92). There were no significant differences between groups with regard to extent of hepatectomy performed and tumor characteristics. The laparoscopic liver resection group experienced a lower proportion of >= Clavien-Dindo grade III complications (14% vs 29%; P = .01). In the matched cohort, the 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival rate in the laparoscopic liver resection versus open liver resection group was 90.9%, 79.3%, 70.5% vs 91.3%, 88.5%, 83.1% (P = .26), and the cumulative incidence of recurrence 31.1%, 59.7%, 62.9% vs 18.9%, 40.6%, 49.2% (P = .06), respectively.Conclusion: This study represents the largest single institutional study from North America comparing long-term oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection and open liver resection as a treatment for primary hepatocellular carcinoma. The combination of reduced short-term complications and equivalent long-term oncologic outcomes favor the laparoscopic approach when feasible.
|
|
| 9. |
- Ivanics, Tommy, et al.
(författare)
-
Long-term outcomes of retransplantation after live donor liver transplantation : A Western experience
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Surgery. - : Elsevier. - 0039-6060 .- 1532-7361. ; 173:2, s. 529-536
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Despite most liver transplants in North America being from deceased donors, the number of living donor liver transplants has increased over the last decade. Although outcomes of liver retransplantation after deceased donor liver transplantation have been widely published, outcomes of retransplant after living donor liver transplant need to be further elucidated. Method: We aimed to compare waitlist outcomes and survival post-retransplant in recipients of initial living or deceased donor grafts. Adult liver recipients relisted at University Health Network between April 2000 and October 2020 were retrospectively identified and grouped according to their initial graft: living donor liver transplants or deceased donor liver transplant. A competing risk multivariable model evaluated the association between graft type at first transplant and outcomes after relisting. Survival after retransplant waitlisting (intention-to-treat) and after retransplant (per protocol) were also assessed. Multivariable Cox regression evaluated the effect of initial graft type on survival after retransplant. Results: A total of 201 recipients were relisted (living donor liver transplants, n = 67; donor liver transplants, n = 134) and 114 underwent retransplant (living donor liver transplants, n = 48; deceased donor liver transplants, n = 66). The waitlist mortality with an initial living donor liver transplant was not significantly different (hazard ratio = 0.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.23-1.10; P = .08). Both unadjusted and adjusted graft loss risks were similar post-retransplant. The risk-adjusted overall intentionto-treat survival after relisting (hazard ratio = 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.44-1.32; P =.30) and per protocol survival after retransplant (hazard ratio:1.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.54-4.19; P =.40) were equivalent in those who initially received a living donor liver transplant. Conclusion: Patients requiring relisting and retransplant after either living donor liver transplants or deceased donor liver transplantation experience similar waitlist and survival outcomes.
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
