8 research outputs found

    Postoperative complications after procedure for prolapsed hemorrhoids (PPH) and stapled transanal rectal resection (STARR) procedures

    Get PDF
    Procedure for prolapsing hemorrhoids (PPH) and stapled transanal rectal resection for obstructed defecation (STARR) carry low postoperative pain, but may be followed by unusual and severe postoperative complications. This review deals with the pathogenesis, prevention and treatment of adverse events that may occasionally be life threatening. PPH and STARR carry the expected morbidity following anorectal surgery, such as bleeding, strictures and fecal incontinence. Complications that are particular to these stapled procedures are rectovaginal fistula, chronic proctalgia, total rectal obliteration, rectal wall hematoma and perforation with pelvic sepsis often requiring a diverting stoma. A higher complication rate and worse results are expected after PPH for fourth-degree piles. Enterocele and anismus are contraindications to PPH and STARR and both operations should be used with caution in patients with weak sphincters. In conclusion, complications after PPH and STARR are not infrequent and may be difficult to manage. However, if performed in selected cases by skilled specialists aware of the risks and associated diseases, some complications may be prevented

    The effect of acute morphine on sleep in male patients suffering from sleep apnea: Is there a genetic effect? An RCT study

    No full text
    Questionnaire-based studies have suggested genetic differences in sleep symptoms in chronic opioid users. The present study aims to investigate if there is a genetic effect on sleep architecture and quantitative electroencephalogram (EEG) in response to acute morphine. Under a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover design, 68 men with obstructive sleep apnea undertook two overnight polysomnographic studies conducted at least 1 week apart. Each night they received either 40 mg of controlled-release morphine or placebo. Sleep architecture and quantitative EEG were compared between conditions. Blood was sampled before sleep and on the next morning for genotyping and pharmacokinetic analyses. We analysed three candidate genes (OPRM1 [rs1799971, 118 A > G], ABCB1[rs1045642, 3435 C > T] and HTR3B [rs7103572 C > T]). We found that morphine decreased slow wave sleep and rapid eye movement sleep and increased stage 2 sleep. Those effects were less in subjects with HTR3B CT/TT than in those with CC genotype. Similarly, sleep onset latency was shortened in the ABCB1 CC subgroup compared with the CT/TT subgroup. Total sleep time was significantly increased in ABCB1 CC but not in CT/TT subjects. Sleep apnea and plasma morphine and metabolite concentration were not confounding factors for these genetic differences in sleep. With morphine, patients had significantly more active/unstable EEG (lower delta/alpha ratio) during sleep. No genetic effects on quantitative EEG were detected. In summary, we identified two genes (HTR3B and ABCB1) with significant variation in the sleep architecture response to morphine. Morphine caused a more active/unstable EEG during sleep. Our findings may have relevance for a personalized medicine approach to targeted morphine therapy.Luke Rowsell, Justin Guang-Ao Wu, Brendon J. Yee, Keith K.H. Wong, Sheila Sivam, Andrew A. Somogyi, Ronald R. Grunstein, David Wan

    The use of Affymetrix GeneChips as a tool for studying alternative forms of RNA

    No full text
    We are developing a computational pipeline to use surveys of Affymetrix GeneChips as a discovery tool for unravelling some of the biology associated with post-transcriptional processing of RNA. This work involves the integration of a number of bioinformatics resources, from comparing annotations to processing images to determining the structure of transcripts. The rapidly growing datasets of GeneChips available to the community puts us in a strong position to discover novel biology about post-transcriptional processing, and should enable us to determine the mechanisms by which some groups of genes make co-ordinated changes in their production of isoforms.</jats:p

    Scale-Free Evolution

    No full text

    References

    No full text

    Comparative analysis of 2-year outcomes in GRIT and TRUFFLE trials.

    Get PDF
    OBJECTIVE: To explore the effect on perinatal outcome of different fetal monitoring strategies for early-onset fetal growth restriction (FGR). METHODS: This was a cohort analysis of individual participant data from two European multicenter trials of fetal monitoring methods for FGR: the Growth Restriction Intervention Study (GRIT) and the Trial of Umbilical and Fetal Flow in Europe (TRUFFLE). All women from GRIT (n = 238) and TRUFFLE (n = 503) who were randomized between 26 and 32 weeks' gestation were included. The women were grouped according to intervention and monitoring method: immediate delivery (GRIT) or delayed delivery with monitoring by conventional cardiotocography (CTG) (GRIT), computerized CTG (cCTG) only (GRIT and TRUFFLE) or cCTG and ductus venosus (DV) Doppler (TRUFFLE). The primary outcome was survival without neurodevelopmental impairment at 2 years of age. RESULTS: Gestational age at delivery and birth weight were similar in both studies. Fetal death rate was similar between the GRIT and TRUFFLE groups, but neonatal and late death were more frequent in GRIT (18% vs 6%; P < 0.01). The rate of survival without impairment at 2 years was lowest in pregnancies that underwent immediate delivery (70% (95% CI, 61-78%)) or delayed delivery with monitoring by CTG (69% (95% CI, 57-82%)), increased in those monitored using cCTG only in both GRIT (80% (95% CI, 68-91%)) and TRUFFLE (77% (95% CI, 70-84%)), and was highest in pregnancies monitored using cCTG and DV Doppler (84% (95% CI, 80-89%)) (P < 0.01 for trend). CONCLUSIONS: This analysis supports the hypothesis that the optimal method for fetal monitoring in pregnancies complicated by early-onset FGR is a combination of cCTG and DV Doppler assessment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: GRIT ISRCTN41358726 and TRUFFLE ISRCTN56204499. © 2019 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology
    corecore