Abstract Purpose Staple line reinforcement (SLR) during laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is controversial. The purpose of this study was to perform a comprehensive evaluation of the most commonly utilized techniques for SLR. Materials and Methods Network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare no reinforcement (NR), suture oversewing (SR), glue reinforcement (GR), bioabsorbable staple line reinforcement (Gore® Seamguard®) (GoR), and clips reinforcement (CR). Risk Ratio (RR), weighted mean difference (WMD), and 95% credible intervals (CrI) were used as pooled effect size measures. Results Overall, 3994 patients (17 RCTs) were included. Of those, 1641 (41.1%) underwent NR, 1507 (37.7%) SR, 689 (17.2%) GR, 107 (2.7%) GoR, and 50 (1.3%) CR. SR was associated with a significantly reduced risk of bleeding (RR=0.51; 95% CrI 0.31–0.88), staple line leak (RR=0.56; 95% CrI 0.32–0.99), and overall complications (RR=0.50; 95% CrI 0.30–0.88) compared to NR while no differences were found vs. GR, GoR, and CR. Operative time was significantly longer for SR (WMD=16.2; 95% CrI 10.8–21.7), GR (WMD=15.0; 95% CrI 7.7–22.4), and GoR (WMD=15.5; 95% CrI 5.6–25.4) compared to NR. Among treatments, there were no significant differences for surgical site infection (SSI), sleeve stenosis, reoperation, hospital length of stay, and 30-day mortality. Conclusions SR seems associated with a reduced risk of bleeding, leak, and overall complications compared to NR while no differences were found vs. GR, GoR, and CR. Data regarding GoR and CR are limited while further trials reporting outcomes for these techniques are warranted. Graphical abstract
Foreign body (FB) impaction accounts for 4% of emergency endoscopies in clinical practice. Flexible endoscopy (FE) is recommended as the first-line therapeutic option because it can be performed under sedation, is cost-effective, and is well tolerated. Rigid endoscopy (RE) under general anesthesia is less used but may be advantageous in some circumstances. The aim of the study was to compare the efficacy and safety of FE and RE in esophageal FB removal. PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were consulted matching the terms "Rigid endoscopy AND Flexible endoscopy AND foreign bod*". Pooled effect measures were calculated using an inverse-variance weighted or Mantel-Haenszel in random effects meta-analysis. Heterogeneity was evaluated using I2 index and Cochrane Q test. Five observational cohort studies, published between 1993 and 2015, matched the inclusion criteria. One thousand four hundred and two patients were included; FE was performed in 736 patients and RE in 666. Overall, 101 (7.2%) complications occurred. The most frequent complications were mucosal erosion (26.7%), mucosal edema (18.8%), and iatrogenic esophageal perforations (10.9%). Compared to FE, the estimated RE pooled success OR was 1.00 (95% CI 0.48–2.06; p = 1.00). The pooled OR of iatrogenic perforation, other complications, and overall complications were 2.87 (95% CI 0.96–8.61; p = 0.06), 1.09 (95% CI 0.38–3.18; p = 0.87), and 1.50 (95% CI 0.53–4.25; p = 0.44), respectively. There was no mortality. FE and RE are equally safe and effective for the removal of esophageal FB. To provide a tailored or crossover approach, patients should be managed in multidisciplinary centers where expertise in RE is also available. Formal training and certification in RE should probably be re-evaluated.
Background. Severe postoperative complications (SPCs) may occur after curative esophagectomy for cancer and are associated with prolonged hospital stay, augmented costs, and increased in-hospital mortality. However, the effect of SPCs on survival after esophagectomy is uncertain. Aim. To assess the impact of severe postoperative complications (SPCs) on long-term survival following curative esophagectomy for cancer, we conducted a systematic search of PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science databases up to December 2023. The included studies examined the relationship between SPCs and survival outcomes, defining SPCs as Clavien–Dindo grade > 3. The primary outcome measure was long-term overall survival (OS). We used restricted mean survival time difference (RMSTD) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to calculate pooled effect sizes. Additionally, we applied the GRADE methodology to evaluate the certainty of the evidence. Results. Ten studies (2181 patients) were included. SPCs were reported in 651 (29.8%) patients. The RMSTD overall survival analysis shows that at 60-month follow-up, patients experiencing SPCs lived for 8.6 months (95% Cis −12.5, −4.7; p < 0.001) less, on average, compared with no-SPC patients. No differences were found for 60-month follow-up disease-free survival (−4.6 months, 95% CIs −11.9, 1.9; p = 0.17) and cancer-specific survival (−6.8 months, 95% CIs −11.9, 1.7; p = 0.21). The GRADE certainty of this evidence ranged from low to very low. Conclusions. This study suggests a statistically significant detrimental effect of SPCs on OS in patients undergoing curative esophagectomy for cancer. Also, a clinical trend toward reduced CSS and DFS was perceived.
Background: The most common types of true epithelial exocrine pancreatic cystic neoplasms are serous cystic neoplasms (SCNs), mucinous cystic neoplasms (MCNs), intra-ductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs), and solid pseudo-papillary neoplasms (SPPNs). Both open and laparoscopic pancreatic surgeries are major procedures with significant morbidity and mortality rates. This study aimed to determine the outcomes of laparoscopic pancreatic surgery in managing true exocrine epithelial pancreatic cystic neoplasms in terms of postoperative pancreatic fistula and recurrence rate and to identify associated risk factors.
Abstract Background The laparoscopic Roux en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) is performed worldwide and is considered by many the gold standard treatment for morbid obesity. However, the difficult access to the gastric remnant and duodenum represents intrinsic limitations. The functional laparoscopic gastric bypass with fundectomy and gastric remnant exploration (LRYGBfse) is a new technique described in attempt to overcome the limitations of the LRYGB. The purpose of this video was to demonstrate the LRYGBfse in a 48-year-old man with type II diabetes and hypertension. Methods An intraoperative video has been anonymized and edited to demonstrate the feasibility of LRYGBfse. Results The operation started with the opening of the gastrocolic ligament. Staying close to the gastric wall, the stomach is prepared up to the angle of His. After the placement of a 36-Fr orogastric probe, gastric fundectomy is completed in order to create a 30cc gastric pouch. A polytetrafluoroethylene banding (ePTFE) is placed at the gastro-gastric communication, 7cm below the cardia, and gently closed after bougie retraction. The bypass is completed by the creation of an antecolic Roux-en-Y 150cm alimentary and 150cm biliopancreatic limb. Conclusion The LRYGBfse is a feasible and safe technique. The possibility to endoscopically explore the excluded stomach with an easy access to the Vater’s papilla is a major advantage. Further studies are warranted to deeply explore and compare outcomes with the standard LRYGB.
Trauma pneumonectomy has been historically associated with an exceedingly high morbidity and mortality. The recent advent of standardized reporting and data-collecting measures has facilitated large volume data analysis on predictors and outcomes of trauma pneumonectomy. The purpose of this study is to describe patient characteristics and outcomes of the patients who underwent trauma pneumonectomy in the modern era and identify clinical factors associated with postoperative mortality.Data between 2007 and 2014 from the National Trauma Data Bank were used for analysis, which included patients with both blunt and penetrating trauma who underwent pneumonectomy within 24 hours after admission. Patient characteristics, injury data, and outcomes were analyzed. Postoperative survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify variables associated with postoperative mortality.A total of 261 patients were included for analysis. Of those, 163 (62.5%) patients sustained penetrating trauma. Less invasive lung resections were performed before pneumonectomy in 12.6% of patients. First 24-hour and in-hospital mortality were significantly higher in blunt trauma patients compared with penetrating trauma patients (54.1% vs. 34.1% and 77.6% vs. 49.1%, respectively; p < 0.01). In our multivariate logistic regression analysis, an admission Glasgow Coma Scale of less than 9 (odds ratio [OR], 2.16, 95% CI: 1.24-3.77, p < 0.01) and associated brain injury (OR, 2.11, 95% CI: 1.01-4.42, p = 0.048) were significantly associated with in-hospital death, whereas penetrating mechanism (OR, 0.36, 95% CI 0.19-0.70, p < 0.01) and less invasive lung resections before pneumonectomy (OR, 0.39, 95% CI: 0.17-0.87, p = 0.02) were significantly associated with survival to hospital discharge.Trauma pneumonectomy remains a highly morbid procedure even in the modern era and should be reserved for carefully selected patients.Prognostic study, level IV.
'%3e%3cpath fill='%23012169' d='M0 0v30h60V0z'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23fff' stroke-width='6' d='m0 0 60 30m0-30L0 30'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23C8102E' stroke-width='4' d='m0 0 60 30m0-30L0 30' clip-path='url(%23b)'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23fff' stroke-width='10' d='M30 0v30M0 15h60'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23C8102E' stroke-width='6' d='M30 0v30M0 15h60'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3c/svg%3e)
