Transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization (THD) for hemorrhoidal disease: An Italian single-institution 5-year experience analysis and updated literature review

Background: Hemorrhoidal disease is a highly prevalent, chronic disorder that usually compromise patients' quality of life. Despite recent advances in pharmacologic and surgical therapeutic options, a clear treatment "gold standard" is lacking. Our aim is to analyze the outcomes following Transanal Hemorrhoidal Dearterialization (THD) procedure. MethodsPatients who failed conservative treatment and underwent THD Doppler between 2017 and 2021 were enrolled. Follow-up interviews (consisting of clinical examination, Visual Analog Scale for pain-VAS, Vaizey incontinence score, Hemorrhoid Severity Score) were administered 1 week, 2 weeks, 1 month and 6 months after surgery. ResultsForty-seven out of 75 patients were male, and the mean age was 50 (+/- 17.9) years. Hemorrhoids were classified as Goligher's degree II in 25 cases, III in 40 and IV, simple irreducible without ischemic changes, in 10. The mean operative time was 35 (28-60) minutes, and most procedures were performed with epidural anesthesia (80%). No intraoperative complications occurred, and 73 patients (97.3%) were discharged within post-operative day 1. Early post-operative pain and bleeding occurred in 37.3% and 8% of patients, respectively. No patients experienced anal incontinence and severe symptoms at 6 months after surgery. The overall success rate was 97.3%. ConclusionsTHD is safe and effective in hemorrhoidal disease at degree II if bleeding, III, and IV without ischemic changes, both as a first intervention and on recurrence. Physician and patient need to understand each other's expectations, weight the risks and benefits, and customize the treatment

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

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: protocol for umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses

Laparoscopic surgery has been adopted in some parts of the world as an innovative approach to the resection of gastric cancers. However, in the modern era of surgical oncology, to overcome intrinsic limitations of the traditional laparoscopy, the robotic approach is advocated as able to facilitate the lymph node dissection and complex reconstruction after gastrectomy, to assure oncologic safety also in advanced gastric cancer patients. Previous meta-analyses highlighted a lower complication rate as well as bleeding in the robotic approach group when compared with the laparoscopic one. This potential benefit must be balanced against an increased time of intervention. The aim of this umbrella review is to provide a comprehensive overview of the literature for surgeons and policymakers in order to evaluate the potential benefits and harms of robotic gastrectomy (RG) compared with the laparoscopic approach for gastric cancer