Laterality, Perception, and Action during the Size-weight Illusion

In the classic size-weight illusion (SWI), a small object will feel heavier than an larger object of equal weight (Charpentier, 1891). Individuals continue to perceive this illusory difference in weight long after their gripping and lifting forces have scaled to the actual, identical, mass of the illusion-inducing stimuli (Flanagan & Beltzner, 2000). The independence of our weight perception and fingertip force application has only been quantified in the right hand of right-handers. The immunity to this perceptual illusion may be affected by manual asymmetries (e.g., Gonzalez, Ganel & Goodale, 2006). We examined perception of heaviness and fingertip force scaling in right- and left-handers during repeated lifts of SWI-inducing cubes with their dominant and non-dominant hands. We also examined the optimal direction for intermanual transfer of the scaled fingertip forces.

The Role of Vision in Detecting and Correcting Fingertip Force Errors during Object Lifting

Vision provides many reliable cues about the likely weight of an object, allowing individuals to predict how heavy it will be. The forces used to lift an object for the first time reflect these predictions. This, however, leads to inevitable errors during lifts of objects that weigh unexpected amounts. Fortunately, these errors are rarely made twice in a row-lifters have the impressive ability to detect and correct large or small misapplications of fingertip forces, even while experiencing weight illusions. Although it has been assumed that we detect and correct these errors exclusively with our sense of touch, recent evidence has demonstrated a role for vision in this fingertip force scaling. Here, we demonstrate that even when stimulus set size, delay, and modality are controlled for, individuals are unable to skillfully scale their grip and load force rates over repeated lifts without vision. However, eliminating only the task-relevant visual information, while maintaining the rest of the visual world, shifts participants back into the normal, skilled mode of control. These findings clarify the role of visual information in the ostensibly haptic task of lifting objects, suggesting individuals use priors under conditions where uncertainty is high

The Material-weight Illusion Induced by Expectations Alone

In the material-weight illusion (MWI), equally weighted objects that appear to be made from different materials are incorrectly perceived as having different weights when they are lifted one after the other. Here, we show that continuous visual experience of the lift is not a prerequisite for this compelling misperception of weight; merely priming the lifters\u27 expectations of heaviness is sufficient for them to experience a robust MWI. Furthermore, these expectations continued to influence the load force used to lift MWI-inducing stimuli trial after trial, supporting the notion that vision plays an important role in the skillful lifting of objects

Stoma-free survival after anastomotic leak following rectal cancer resection: worldwide cohort of 2470 patients

Background: The optimal treatment of anastomotic leak after rectal cancer resection is unclear. This worldwide cohort study aimed to provide an overview of four treatment strategies applied. Methods: Patients from 216 centres and 45 countries with anastomotic leak after rectal cancer resection between 2014 and 2018 were included. Treatment was categorized as salvage surgery, faecal diversion with passive or active (vacuum) drainage, and no primary/secondary faecal diversion. The primary outcome was 1-year stoma-free survival. In addition, passive and active drainage were compared using propensity score matching (2: 1). Results: Of 2470 evaluable patients, 388 (16.0 per cent) underwent salvage surgery, 1524 (62.0 per cent) passive drainage, 278 (11.0 per cent) active drainage, and 280 (11.0 per cent) had no faecal diversion. One-year stoma-free survival rates were 13.7, 48.3, 48.2, and 65.4 per cent respectively. Propensity score matching resulted in 556 patients with passive and 278 with active drainage. There was no statistically significant difference between these groups in 1-year stoma-free survival (OR 0.95, 95 per cent c.i. 0.66 to 1.33), with a risk difference of -1.1 (95 per cent c.i. -9.0 to 7.0) per cent. After active drainage, more patients required secondary salvage surgery (OR 2.32, 1.49 to 3.59), prolonged hospital admission (an additional 6 (95 per cent c.i. 2 to 10) days), and ICU admission (OR 1.41, 1.02 to 1.94). Mean duration of leak healing did not differ significantly (an additional 12 (-28 to 52) days). Conclusion: Primary salvage surgery or omission of faecal diversion likely correspond to the most severe and least severe leaks respectively. In patients with diverted leaks, stoma-free survival did not differ statistically between passive and active drainage, although the increased risk of secondary salvage surgery and ICU admission suggests residual confounding

Stoma-free Survival After Rectal Cancer Resection With Anastomotic Leakage: Development and Validation of a Prediction Model in a Large International Cohort.

Objective:To develop and validate a prediction model (STOMA score) for 1-year stoma-free survival in patients with rectal cancer (RC) with anastomotic leakage (AL).Background:AL after RC resection often results in a permanent stoma.Methods:This international retrospective cohort study (TENTACLE-Rectum) encompassed 216 participating centres and included patients who developed AL after RC surgery between 2014 and 2018. Clinically relevant predictors for 1-year stoma-free survival were included in uni and multivariable logistic regression models. The STOMA score was developed and internally validated in a cohort of patients operated between 2014 and 2017, with subsequent temporal validation in a 2018 cohort. The discriminative power and calibration of the models' performance were evaluated.Results:This study included 2499 patients with AL, 1954 in the development cohort and 545 in the validation cohort. Baseline characteristics were comparable. One-year stoma-free survival was 45.0% in the development cohort and 43.7% in the validation cohort. The following predictors were included in the STOMA score: sex, age, American Society of Anestesiologist classification, body mass index, clinical M-disease, neoadjuvant therapy, abdominal and transanal approach, primary defunctioning stoma, multivisceral resection, clinical setting in which AL was diagnosed, postoperative day of AL diagnosis, abdominal contamination, anastomotic defect circumference, bowel wall ischemia, anastomotic fistula, retraction, and reactivation leakage. The STOMA score showed good discrimination and calibration (c-index: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.66-0.76).Conclusions:The STOMA score consists of 18 clinically relevant factors and estimates the individual risk for 1-year stoma-free survival in patients with AL after RC surgery, which may improve patient counseling and give guidance when analyzing the efficacy of different treatment strategies in future studies