Splenectomy for splenomegaly and secondary hypersplenism

Splenomegaly and secondary hypersplenism may be associated with acute and chronic infections, autoimmune states, portal hypertension or splenic vein thrombosis, and a number of infiltrative and neoplastic conditions involving the spleen. Our experience and that of others with these various conditions demonstrates that the decision to perform splenectomy should be based on well-defined and often strictly limited indications. Except for idiopathic splenomegaly, the presence and severity of secondary hypersplenism or severely symptomatic splenomegaly should be well documented. In each case, the potential for palliation and known mean duration of expected response must be weighed against the increased morbidity and mortality of splenectomy (as compared to operation for “primary” hypersplenism) . La splénomégalie avec hypersplénisme secondaire relève de multiples causes: infection aigue ou chronique, états autoimmunologiques, hypertension portale, thrombose de la veine splénique, lésions tumorales spléniques. L'expérience de l'auteur qui rejoint celle de nombreux collègues lui permet d'affirmer que les indications de la splénectomie doivent être bien définies et sont strictement limitées. A l'exception de la splénomégalie idiopathique, l'existence et l'intensité de l'hypersplénisme, l'importance des symptomes provoqués par la splénomégalie doivent être aprréciées avec précision. Dans chaque cas le potentiel de la rémission de l'affection et la durée de la rémission doivent être pris en considération en fonction de l'éventuelle morbidité et de l'éventuelle mortalité de la splénectomie (par comparaison avec la splénectomie pour hypersplénisme primaire). Eplenomegalia e hiperesplenismo secundario pueden estar asociados con infecciones agudas y crónicas, estados autoinmunes (síndrome de Felty, lupus eritematoso sistémico), “esplenomegalia congestiva” por hipertensión portal o trombosis de la vena esplénica y con una variedad de entidades de tipo infiltrativo y neoplásico que afectan al bazo (sarcoidosis, enfermedad de Gaucher, varios desórdenes mieloproliferativos y linfomas). Nuestra experiencia, y aquella de otros autores, con tales condiciones demuestra que la decisión de realizar esplenectomía debe estar fundamentada en indicaciones bien definidas y estrictamente limitadas. Excepto en casos de esplenomegalia idiopática, la presencia y severidad del hiperesplenismo secundario o de esplenomegalia severamente sintomática debe ser bien documentada. En cada caso debe determinarse el potencial de paliación y la duración de la respuesta que se espera obtener frente a la incrementada morbilidad y mortalidad de la esplenectomía (en comparación con la operación que se realiza por hiperesplenismo “primario”).Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/41318/1/268_2005_Article_BF01655279.pd

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

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