Laparoscopic repair for perforated peptic ulcers with U-CLIP®

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The literature established that, in patients without Boey's risk factors, laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcers, compared to open repair, is associated to lower wound infection rate, less analgesic use, reduction in post operative pain, shorter hospital stay. Some of the main drawbacks are length of operative time and laparoscopic surgeon's experience in intracorporeal knotting.</p> <p>We, for first, report our preliminary experience of perforated peptic ulcers' laparoscopic repair using Medtronic U-Clip^®.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>From January 2008 to June 2008 we performed laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcers using Medtronic U-Clip^®in 10 consecutive patients (6 men and 4 women, from 20 to 65 years-old of age). All the patients presented with iuxtapyloric perforated peptic ulcer, not greater than 10 mm, without signs of sepsis, free from major illnesses. The mini-invasive procedure was performed both by skilled and non-skilled laparoscopic surgeons under experts' surveillance. After it was recognized, perforation was sutured using U-Clip^®in a full-thickness manner.</p> <p>Results and Discussion</p> <p>We reported no surgical complications in the peri-operative period. The clinical outcome and time needed to perform the intervention didn't change between skilled and non-skilled surgeons. The follow-up at 30 days was good.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>In our experience, the anastomotic device U-Clip^®simplifies laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer, avoiding the need to perform knots and making the procedure safe and easier.</p

Small bowel obstruction in percutaneous fixation of traumatic pelvic fractures

The use of external fixation for the initial treatment of unstable, complex pelvic injuries with hemodynamic instability remains an effective treatment for multiply injured patients. Bowel entrapment within a pelvic fracture is a rarely reported, potentially fatal complication. Here, we report a polytrauma patient with pelvic fractures who developed an intestinal obstruction after an external fixation. At an explorative laparotomy, we found an ileum segment trapped in the sacral fracture. Reported cases of bowel entrapment in pelvic fractures, especially in sacral fractures, are exceedingly rare. The diagnosis is often delayed due to difficulty distinguishing entrapment from the more common adynamic ileus. In conclusion, clinicians and radiologists should be aware of this potentially lethal complication of pelvic fractures treatment. To exclude bowel entrapment, patients with persistent ileus or sepsis should undergo early investigations

Thyroidectomy for Painful Thyroiditis Resistant to Steroid Treatment: Three New Cases with Review of the Literature

Thyroidal pain is usually due to subacute thyroiditis (SAT). In more severe forms prednisone doses up to 40 mg daily for 2-3 weeks are recommended. Recurrences occur rarely and restoration of steroid treatment cures the disease. Rarely, patients with Hashimoto’s thyroiditis (HT) have thyroidal pain (painful HT, PHT). Differently from SAT, occasional PHT patients showed no benefit from medical treatment so that thyroidectomy was necessary. We report three patients who did not show clinical response to prolonged high dose prednisone treatment: a 50-year-old man, a 35-year-old woman, and a 33-year-old woman. Thyroidectomy was necessary, respectively, after nine-month treatment with 50 mg daily, two-month treatment with 75 mg daily, and one-month treatment with 50 mg daily. The two women were typical cases of PHT. Conversely, in the first patient, thyroid histology showed features of granulomatous thyroiditis, typical of SAT, without fibrosis or lymphocytic infiltration, typical of HT/PHT, coupled to undetectable serum anti-thyroid antibodies. Our data (1) suggest that not only PHT but also SAT may show resistance to steroid treatment and (2) confirm a previous observation in a single PHT patient that increasing prednisone doses above conventional maximal dosages may not be useful in these patients

Changes in surgicaL behaviOrs dUring the CoviD-19 pandemic. The SICE CLOUD19 Study

BACKGROUND: The spread of the SARS-CoV2 virus, which causes COVID-19 disease, profoundly impacted the surgical community. Recommendations have been published to manage patients needing surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic. This survey, under the aegis of the Italian Society of Endoscopic Surgery, aims to analyze how Italian surgeons have changed their practice during the pandemic.METHODS: The authors designed an online survey that was circulated for completion to the Italian departments of general surgery registered in the Italian Ministry of Health database in December 2020. Questions were divided into three sections: hospital organization, screening policies, and safety profile of the surgical operation. The investigation periods were divided into the Italian pandemic phases I (March-May 2020), II (June-September 2020), and III (October-December 2020).RESULTS: Of 447 invited departments, 226 answered the survey. Most hospitals were treating both COVID-19-positive and -negative patients. The reduction in effective beds dedicated to surgical activity was significant, affecting 59% of the responding units. 12.4% of the respondents in phase I, 2.6% in phase II, and 7.7% in phase III reported that their surgical unit had been closed. 51.4%, 23.5%, and 47.8% of the respondents had at least one colleague reassigned to non-surgical COVID-19 activities during the three phases. There has been a reduction in elective (>200 procedures: 2.1%, 20.6% and 9.9% in the three phases, respectively) and emergency (<20 procedures: 43.3%, 27.1%, 36.5% in the three phases, respectively) surgical activity. The use of laparoscopy also had a setback in phase I (25.8% performed less than 20% of elective procedures through laparoscopy). 60.6% of the respondents used a smoke evacuation device during laparoscopy in phase I, 61.6% in phase II, and 64.2% in phase III. Almost all responders (82.8% vs. 93.2% vs. 92.7%) in each analyzed period did not modify or reduce the use of high-energy devices.CONCLUSION: This survey offers three faithful snapshots of how the surgical community has reacted to the COVID-19 pandemic during its three phases. The significant reduction in surgical activity indicates that better health policies and more evidence-based guidelines are needed to make up for lost time and surgery not performed during the pandemic