Poisoning of reintroduced red kites (Milvus milvus) in England

Programmes to reintroduce predatory birds are resource intensive and expensive, yet there are few long-term studies on the health of these reintroduced birds following release. A total of 326 red kites (Milvus milvus) were released at four sites in England between 1989 and 2006 as part of efforts to reintroduce this species to England and Scotland, resulting in the establishment of several rapidly expanding populations in the wild. Detailed post-mortem examinations were carried out on 162 individuals found dead between 1989 and 2007, involving both released and wild-fledged birds. Toxicological analysis of one or more compounds was performed on 110 of the 162 birds. Poisoning was diagnosed in 32 of these 110 kites, 19 from second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides, 9 from other pesticides and 6 from lead. Criteria for diagnosing anticoagulant rodenticide poisoning included visible haemorrhage on gross post-mortem examination and levels of anticoagulant rodenticide exceeding 100 ng/g, but levels were elevated above 100 ng/g in a further eight red kites without visible haemorrhages, suggesting poisoning may have occurred in more birds. The anticoagulant rodenticides difenacoum and bromadiolone were the most common vertebrate control agents involved during this period. Poisoning of red kites may be slowing their rate of population recovery and range expansion in England. Simple modifications of human activity, such as best practice in rodent control campaigns, tackling the illegal use of pesticides and the use of non-toxic alternatives to lead ammunition, can reduce our impact on red kites and probably other populations of predatory and scavenging species

Surgeons’ practice and preferences for the anal fissure treatment: results from an international survey

The best nonoperative or operative anal fissure (AF) treatment is not yet established, and several options have been proposed. Aim is to report the surgeons’ practice for the AF treatment. Thirty-four multiple-choice questions were developed. Seven questions were about to participants’ demographics and, 27 questions about their clinical practice. Based on the specialty (general surgeon and colorectal surgeon), obtained data were divided and compared between two groups. Five-hundred surgeons were included (321 general and 179 colorectal surgeons). For both groups, duration of symptoms for at least 6 weeks is the most important factor for AF diagnosis (30.6%). Type of AF (acute vs chronic) is the most important factor which guide the therapeutic plan (44.4%). The first treatment of choice for acute AF is ointment application for both groups (59.6%). For the treatment of chronic AF, this data is confirmed by colorectal surgeons (57%), but not by the general surgeons who prefer the lateral internal sphincterotomy (LIS) (31.8%) (p = 0.0001). Botulin toxin injection is most performed by colorectal surgeons (58.7%) in comparison to general surgeons (20.9%) (p = 0.0001). Anal flap is mostly performed by colorectal surgeons (37.4%) in comparison to general surgeons (28.3%) (p = 0.0001). Fissurectomy alone is statistically significantly most performed by general surgeons in comparison to colorectal surgeons (57.9% and 43.6%, respectively) (p = 0.0020). This analysis provides useful information about the clinical practice for the management of a debated topic such as AF treatment. Shared guidelines and consensus especially focused on operative management are required to standardize the treatment and to improve postoperative results

Surgeons’ practice and preferences for the anal fissure treatment: results from an international survey

The best nonoperative or operative anal fissure (AF) treatment is not yet established, and several options have been proposed. Aim is to report the surgeons' practice for the AF treatment. Thirty-four multiple-choice questions were developed. Seven questions were about to participants' demographics and, 27 questions about their clinical practice. Based on the specialty (general surgeon and colorectal surgeon), obtained data were divided and compared between two groups. Five-hundred surgeons were included (321 general and 179 colorectal surgeons). For both groups, duration of symptoms for at least 6 weeks is the most important factor for AF diagnosis (30.6%). Type of AF (acute vs chronic) is the most important factor which guide the therapeutic plan (44.4%). The first treatment of choice for acute AF is ointment application for both groups (59.6%). For the treatment of chronic AF, this data is confirmed by colorectal surgeons (57%), but not by the general surgeons who prefer the lateral internal sphincterotomy (LIS) (31.8%) (p = 0.0001). Botulin toxin injection is most performed by colorectal surgeons (58.7%) in comparison to general surgeons (20.9%) (p = 0.0001). Anal flap is mostly performed by colorectal surgeons (37.4%) in comparison to general surgeons (28.3%) (p = 0.0001). Fissurectomy alone is statistically significantly most performed by general surgeons in comparison to colorectal surgeons (57.9% and 43.6%, respectively) (p = 0.0020). This analysis provides useful information about the clinical practice for the management of a debated topic such as AF treatment. Shared guidelines and consensus especially focused on operative management are required to standardize the treatment and to improve postoperative results

Protective ileostomy creation after anterior resection of the rectum (PICARR): a decision-making exploring international survey

: In our previous survey of experts, surgeon's decision-making process (DMP) about protective ileostomy (PI) creation after anterior resection was investigated. Based on our previous data, a multiple choice questionnaire has been developed. The aim is to perform a quantitative analysis of the results obtained from an international survey and to describe the clinical practice worldwide. Ten questions were related to participants' demographics and, 20 questions (of which 17 Likert scale questions) investigated the DMP regarding PI creation. To evaluate the tendency of the answers in the Likert-type questions, the mean of the answers obtained was compared with the mean point of the Likert scale. The survey was completed by 1019 physicians. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and distance of the anastomosis from the anal verge ≤ 10 cm were each considered alone sufficient to justify creation of a PI, with statistically significant differences in comparison to the mean point of the scales in (p = < 0.0001 in both cases). Total Mesorectal Excision alone was not considered a factor sufficient to create a PI (p = 0.416). Most of the participants agree to define their approach to create a PI "tailored" to patients' risk factors (p = < 0.0001) and "influenced by my experience" in case of patients with low/moderate risk of anastomotic leakage (p = < 0.0001). This study provides useful insights on the worldwide clinical practice regarding creation of PI following anterior resection. Given the lack of standardization and evidence-based guidelines, this analysis may be helpful to assist surgeons' practice