9 research outputs found

    Controlateral Symmetrisation in SRM for Breast Cancer: Now or Then? Immediate versus Delayed Symmetrisation in a Two-Stage Breast Reconstruction

    Get PDF
    Introduction: The timing of contralateral symmetrisation in patients with large and ptotic breasts undergoing a unilateral skin-reducing mastectomy (SRM) is one of the most debated topics in the reconstructive field. There is no evidence to support the advantage of immediate or delayed symmetrisation to help surgeons with this decision. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical and aesthetic outcomes of immediate symmetrisation. Methods: A randomised observational study was conducted on patients who underwent an SRM for unilateral breast cancer. Based on a simple randomisation list, patients were divided into two groups: a delayed symmetrisation group versus an immediate symmetrisation group. The postoperative complications, BREAST-Q outcomes and reoperations were compared. Results: Out of a total of 84 patients undergoing an SRM between January 2018 and January 2021, 42 patients underwent immediate symmetrisation and 42 patients had delayed symmetrisation. Three implant losses (7.2%) were observed and we reported three wound dehiscences; one of these was in a contralateral breast reconstruction in the immediate symmetrisation group. The BREAST-Q patient-reported outcome measures recorded better aesthetic outcomes and a high patient satisfaction for the immediate symmetrisation group. Conclusions: Simultaneous controlateral symmetrisation is a good alternative to achieve better satisfaction and quality of life for patients; from a surgical point of view, it does not excessively impact on the second time of reconstruction

    The Emergency Surgery Frailty Index (EmSFI) in Elderly Patients with Acute Appendicitis: An External Validation of Prognostic Score

    Get PDF
    Background: Identification of reliable risk-stratification tools is critical for surgical decision making, particularly in frail and elderly. The aim of the study is to validate the Emergency Surgery Frailty Index (EmSFI), in over 65 years old patients operated on for acute appendicitis. Methods: An observational study was conducted enrolling elderly patients with diagnosis of acute appendicitis who underwent emergency appendicectomy or right colectomy, between 2016 and 2021. All patients were treated according to the last SIFIPAC/WSES/SICG/SIMEU guidelines. Results: Overall, 61 patients were analyzed. Complication rate was higher for patients in the second EmSFI risk Class. Moreover, ROC analyses identified 3 as the best cutoff value in predicting risk of adverse postoperative events. Complication rate was higher in oldest elderly patients—over 80 years—(42.9 vs 22.5%; p 0.05) and was mainly related to medical complications (42.9 vs 12.5%, p 0.007). However, intestinal obstruction, peri-appendicular abscess on preoperative CT, peritonitis and a longer duration of surgery are related with increased risk of complications in the group of patients under 80 years. Conclusion: The EmSFI score results a valid prognostic marker for frailty status, and it may support the surgeon in emergency setting for acute appendicitis. Patients aged 80 years or older have a higher risk of complications, independent from those factors which relate to increased morbidity in younger elderly patients. Age alone is not a reliable indicator of the real surgical risk, but it must encourage the adoption of multidisciplinary collaborative models of care for this group of patients. © 2023, The Author(s)

    Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

    Get PDF
    Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries

    Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

    Get PDF
    Abstract Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries

    Robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: an umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses

    Get PDF
    An umbrella review was performed to summarize literature data and to investigate benefits and harm of robotic gastrectomy (RG) compared to laparoscopic (LG) approach. To overcome the intrinsic limitations of laparoscopy, the robotic approach is claimed to facilitate lymph-node dissection and complex reconstruction after gastrectomy, to assure oncologic safety also in advanced gastric cancer. A literature search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane and Embase databases for all meta-analyses published up to December 2019. The search strategy was previously published in a protocol. We selected fourteen meta-analyses comparing outcomes between LG and RG with curative intent in patients with diagnosis of resectable gastric cancer. We highlight that RG has a longer operation time, inferior blood loss, reduction in hospital stay and a more rapid recovery of bowel function. In meta-analyses with statistical significance the number of nodes removed in RG is higher than LG and the distal margin of resection is higher. There is no difference in terms of total complication rate, mortality, morbidity, anastomotic leakage, anastomotic stenosis, intestinal obstruction and in conversion rate to open technique. The safety and efficacy of robotic gastrectomy are not clearly supported by strong evidence, suggesting that the outcomes reported for each surgical technique need to be interpreted with caution, in particular for the meta-analyses in which the heterogeneity is large. Certainly, robotic gastrectomy is associated with shorter time to oral intake, lesser intraoperative bleeding and longer operation time with an acceptable level of evidence. On the other hand, the data regarding other outcomes are insufficient as well as non-significant, from an evidence point of view, to draw any robust conclusion

    Clinical evaluation of the Mannheim Prognostic Index in post-operative peritonitis: a prospective cohort study

    No full text
    Postoperative peritonitis (PoP), despite their relatively low incidence, are associated with high mortality. Such poor outcomes are also related to the high proportion of aged patients, whose intra-abdominal infections are difficult to manage. The study included 84 consecutive patients with PoP. The aim was the validation of the Mannheim Prognostic Index (MPI) in the context of PoP and the assessment of the prognostic impact of age and other clinical factors in a large series from a tertiary center. PoP had an incidence of 3.9% in all the abdominal surgeries in the study period. Surgical control of POP focus was achieved in 90.5% of cases and a complete abdominal clearance in 58.3%. Complication rate was 75% with a mortality of 26.2%. For MPI score, the ROC curve indicated a cut-off value of 29 with a sensitivity of 72.7% and specificity of 67.7% in predicting death. At univariate analysis, factors significantly related to poorer prognosis included advanced age (p 0.001), site of primary surgery (p 0.05), lack of abdominal clearance (p 0.003), generalized peritonitis (p 0.04) and high MPI score (p < 0.001). Age, MPI score and absence of abdominal clearance resulted in independent prognostic factors at multivariate analysis. MPI showed good efficacy in identifying POP patients at high risk of death. The increased risk of mortality related to advanced age should be considered with MPI score in planning the treatment. An aggressive and early diagnostic-therapeutic approach is required to reduce the MPI score and improve the prognosis

    The patient’s pathway for breast cancer in the COVID-19 era: An Italian single-center experience

    No full text
    COVID-19 has been declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization. As of April 1, 2020, Italy was the country with the second highest number of cases in the world. The spread of COVID-19 has required a rapid reorganization of health service delivery in face of the pandemic. Breast cancer units have reprioritized their workload to guarantee the health of oncologic patients at the highest risk and regular screening activities. However, at the end of the pandemic emergency, many benign and reconstructive cases will return to our attention and their surgical treatment will be necessary as soon as possible

    Minimally invasive vs. open segmental resection of the splenic flexure for cancer: a nationwide study of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology-Colorectal Cancer Network (SICO-CNN)

    Get PDF
    Background Evidence on the efficacy of minimally invasive (MI) segmental resection of splenic flexure cancer (SFC) is not available, mostly due to the rarity of this tumor. This study aimed to determine the survival outcomes of MI and open treatment, and to investigate whether MI is noninferior to open procedure regarding short-term outcomes. Methods This nationwide retrospective cohort study included all consecutive SFC segmental resections performed in 30 referral centers between 2006 and 2016. The primary endpoint assessing efficacy was the overall survival (OS). The secondary endpoints included cancer-specific mortality (CSM), recurrence rate (RR), short-term clinical outcomes (a composite of Clavien-Dindo > 2 complications and 30-day mortality), and pathological outcomes (a composite of lymph nodes removed >= 12, and proximal and distal free resection margins length >= 5 cm). For these composites, a 6% noninferiority margin was chosen based on clinical relevance estimate. Results A total of 606 patients underwent either an open (208, 34.3%) or a MI (398, 65.7%) SFC segmental resection. At univariable analysis, OS and CSM were improved in the MI group (log-rank test p = 0.004 and Gray's tests p = 0.004, respectively), while recurrences were comparable (Gray's tests p = 0.434). Cox multivariable analysis did not support that OS and CSM were better in the MI group (p = 0.109 and p = 0.163, respectively). Successful pathological outcome, observed in 53.2% of open and 58.3% of MI resections, supported noninferiority (difference 5.1%; 1-sided 95%CI - 4.7% to infinity). Successful short-term clinical outcome was documented in 93.3% of Open and 93.0% of MI procedures, and supported noninferiority as well (difference - 0.3%; 1-sided 95%CI - 5.0% to infinity). Conclusions Among patients with SFC, the minimally invasive approach met the criterion for noninferiority for postoperative complications and pathological outcomes, and was found to provide results of OS, CSM, and RR comparable to those of open resection

    Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

    No full text
    Background: Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods: This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was coprioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low-middle-income countries. Results: In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of 'single-use' consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low-middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion: This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high- and low-middle-income countries
    corecore