| 1. |
- DeAngelis, Nicola, et al.
(author)
-
2020 WSES guidelines for the detection and management of bile duct injury during cholecystectomy
- 2021
-
In: World Journal of Emergency Surgery. - : BMC. - 1749-7922. ; 16:1
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Bile duct injury (BDI) is a dangerous complication of cholecystectomy, with significant postoperative sequelae for the patient in terms of morbidity, mortality, and long-term quality of life. BDIs have an estimated incidence of 0.4-1.5%, but considering the number of cholecystectomies performed worldwide, mostly by laparoscopy, surgeons must be prepared to manage this surgical challenge. Most BDIs are recognized either during the procedure or in the immediate postoperative period. However, some BDIs may be discovered later during the postoperative period, and this may translate to delayed or inappropriate treatments. Providing a specific diagnosis and a precise description of the BDI will expedite the decision-making process and increase the chance of treatment success. Subsequently, the choice and timing of the appropriate reconstructive strategy have a critical role in long-term prognosis. Currently, a wide spectrum of multidisciplinary interventions with different degrees of invasiveness is indicated for BDI management. These World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) guidelines have been produced following an exhaustive review of the current literature and an international expert panel discussion with the aim of providing evidence-based recommendations to facilitate and standardize the detection and management of BDIs during cholecystectomy. In particular, the 2020 WSES guidelines cover the following key aspects: (1) strategies to minimize the risk of BDI during cholecystectomy; (2) BDI rates in general surgery units and review of surgical practice; (3) how to classify, stage, and report BDI once detected; (4) how to manage an intraoperatively detected BDI; (5) indications for antibiotic treatment; (6) indications for clinical, biochemical, and imaging investigations for suspected BDI; and (7) how to manage a postoperatively detected BDI.
|
|
| 2. |
- Lavigne, Gilles, et al.
(author)
-
Research routes on improved sleep bruxism metrics : Toward a standardised approach
- 2021
-
In: Journal of Sleep Research. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 0962-1105 .- 1365-2869. ; 30:5
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- A recent report from the European Sleep Research Society's task force "Beyond AHI" discussed an issue that has been a long-term subject of debate - what are the best metrics for obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) diagnosis and treatment outcome assessments? In a similar way, sleep bruxism (SB) metrics have also been a recurrent issue for >30 years and there is still uncertainty in dentistry regarding their optimisation and clinical relevance. SB can occur alone or with comorbidities such as OSA, gastroesophageal reflux disorder, insomnia, headache, orofacial pain, periodic limb movement, rapid eye movement behaviour disorder, and sleep epilepsy. Classically, the diagnosis of SB is based on the patient's dental and medical history and clinical manifestations; electromyography is used in research and for complex cases. The emergence of new technologies, such as sensors and artificial intelligence, has opened new opportunities. The main objective of the present review is to stimulate the creation of a collaborative taskforce on SB metrics. Several examples are available in sleep medicine. The development of more homogenised metrics could improve the accuracy and refinement of SB assessment, while moving forward toward a personalised approach. It is time to develop SB metrics that are relevant to clinical outcomes and benefit patients who suffer from one or more possible negative consequences of SB.
|
|
| 3. |
- Thymi, Magdalini, et al.
(author)
-
Signal acquisition and analysis of ambulatory electromyographic recordings for the assessment of sleep bruxism : A scoping review
- 2021
-
In: Journal of Oral Rehabilitation. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 1365-2842 .- 0305-182X. ; 48:7, s. 846-871
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background Ambulatory electromyographic (EMG) devices are increasingly being used in sleep bruxism studies. EMG signal acquisition, analysis and scoring methods vary between studies. This may impact comparability of studies and the assessment of sleep bruxism in patients. Objectives (a) To provide an overview of EMG signal acquisition and analysis methods of recordings from limited-channel ambulatory EMG devices for the assessment of sleep bruxism; and (b) to provide an overview of outcome measures used in sleep bruxism literature utilising such devices. Method A scoping review of the literature was performed. Online databases PubMed and Semantics Scholar were searched for studies published in English until 7 October 2020. Data on five categories were extracted: recording hardware, recording logistics, signal acquisition, signal analysis and sleep bruxism outcomes. Results Seventy-eight studies were included, published between 1977 and 2020. Recording hardware was generally well described. Reports of participant instructions in device handling and of dealing with failed recordings were often lacking. Basic elements of signal acquisition, for example amplifications factors, impedance and bandpass settings, and signal analysis, for example rectification, signal processing and additional filtering, were underreported. Extensive variability was found for thresholds used to characterise sleep bruxism events. Sleep bruxism outcomes varied, but typically represented frequency, duration and/or intensity of masticatory muscle activity (MMA). Conclusion Adequate and standardised reporting of recording procedures is highly recommended. In future studies utilising ambulatory EMG devices, the focus may need to shift from the concept of scoring sleep bruxism events to that of scoring the whole spectrum of MMA.
|
|
