Cirurgia Online

Torne-se Membro Premium
Início

toggle shelf

patrocinio05.jpg
  patrocinio03.jpg
sanofiok.jpg
divulgueaqui.jpg

Autenticação

Disseminação Científica
Annals of Surgery - Most Popular Articles


Annals of Surgery - Most Popular Articles
  • The Global Incidence of Appendicitis: A Systematic Review of Population-based Studies
    imageObjective: We compared the incidence of appendicitis or appendectomy across the world and evaluated temporal trends. Summary Background Data: Population-based studies reported the incidence of appendicitis. Methods: We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE databases for population-based studies reporting the incidence of appendicitis or appendectomy. Time trends were explored using Poisson regression and reported as annual percent change (APC) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). APC were stratified by time periods and pooled using random effects models. Incidence since 2000 was pooled for regions in the Western world. Results: The search retrieved 10,247 citations with 120 studies reporting on the incidence of appendicitis or appendectomy. During the 21st century the pooled incidence of appendicitis or appendectomy (in per 100,000 person-years) was 100 (95% CI: 91, 110) in Northern America, and the estimated number of cases in 2015 was 378,614. The pooled incidence ranged from 105 in Eastern Europe to 151 in Western Europe. In Western countries, the incidence of appendectomy steadily decreased since 1990 (APC after 1989=?1.54; 95% CI: ?2.22, ?0.86), whereas the incidence of appendicitis stabilized (APC=?0.36; 95% CI: ?0.97, 0.26) for both perforated (APC=0.95; 95% CI: ?0.25, 2.17) and nonperforated appendicitis (APC=0.44; 95% CI: ?0.84, 1.73). In the 21st century, the incidence of appendicitis or appendectomy is high in newly industrialized countries in Asia (South Korea pooled: 206), the Middle East (Turkey pooled: 160), and Southern America (Chile: 202). Conclusions: Appendicitis is a global disease. The incidence of appendicitis is stable in most Western countries. Data from newly industrialized countries is sparse, but suggests that appendicitis is rising rapidly.

  • Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Versus Roux-Y-Gastric Bypass for Morbid Obesity?3-Year Outcomes of the Prospective Randomized Swiss Multicenter Bypass Or Sleeve Study (SM-BOSS)
    imageObjective: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is performed almost as often in Europe as laparoscopic Roux-Y-Gastric Bypass (LRYGB). We present the 3-year interim results of the 5-year prospective, randomized trial comparing the 2 procedures (Swiss Multicentre Bypass Or Sleeve Study; SM-BOSS). Methods: Initially, 217 patients (LSG, n = 107; LRYGB, n = 110) were randomized to receive either LSG or LRYGB at 4 bariatric centers in Switzerland. Mean body mass index of all patients was 44?±?11?kg/m2, mean age was 43?±?5.3 years, and 72% of patients were female. Minimal follow-up was 3 years with a rate of 97%. Both groups were compared for weight loss, comorbidities, quality of life, and complications. Results: Excessive body mass index loss was similar between LSG and LRYGB at each time point (1 year: 72.3?±?21.9% vs. 76.6?±?20.9%, P = 0.139; 2 years: 74.7?±?29.8% vs. 77.7?±?30%, P = 0.513; 3 years: 70.9?±?23.8% vs. 73.8?±?23.3%, P = 0.316). At this interim 3-year time point, comorbidities were significantly reduced and comparable after both procedures except for gastro-esophageal reflux disease and dyslipidemia, which were more successfully treated by LRYGB. Quality of life increased significantly in both groups after 1, 2, and 3 years postsurgery. There was no statistically significant difference in number of complications treated by reoperation (LSG, n = 9; LRYGB, n = 16, P = 0.15) or number of complications treated conservatively. Conclusions: In this trial, LSG and LRYGB are equally efficient regarding weight loss, quality of life, and complications up to 3 years postsurgery. Improvement of comorbidities is similar except for gastro-esophageal reflux disease and dyslipidemia that appear to be more successfully treated by LRYGB.

  • Effect of the World Health Organization Checklist on Patient Outcomes: A Stepped Wedge Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial
    imageObjectives: We hypothesized reduction of 30 days' in-hospital morbidity, mortality, and length of stay postimplementation of the World Health Organization's Surgical Safety Checklist (SSC). Background: Reductions of morbidity and mortality have been reported after SSC implementation in pre-/postdesigned studies without controls. Here, we report a randomized controlled trial of the SSC. Methods: A stepped wedge cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted in 2 hospitals. We examined effects on in-hospital complications registered by International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision codes, length of stay, and mortality. The SSC intervention was sequentially rolled out in a random order until all 5 clusters?cardiothoracic, neurosurgery, orthopedic, general, and urologic surgery had received the Checklist. Data were prospectively recorded in control and intervention stages during a 10-month period in 2009?2010. Results: A total of 2212 control procedures were compared with 2263 SCC procedures. The complication rates decreased from 19.9% to 11.5% (P < 0.001), with absolute risk reduction 8.4 (95% confidence interval, 6.3?10.5) from the control to the SSC stages. Adjusted for possible confounding factors, the SSC effect on complications remained significant with odds ratio 1.95 (95% confidence interval, 1.59?2.40). Mean length of stay decreased by 0.8 days with SCC utilization (95% confidence interval, 0.11?1.43). In-hospital mortality decreased significantly from 1.9% to 0.2% in 1 of the 2 hospitals post-SSC implementation, but the overall reduction (1.6%?1.0%) across hospitals was not significant. Conclusions: Implementation of the WHO SSC was associated with robust reduction in morbidity and length of in-hospital stay and some reduction in mortality.

  • Mesorectal Excision With or Without Lateral Lymph Node Dissection for Clinical Stage II/III Lower Rectal Cancer (JCOG0212): A Multicenter, Randomized Controlled, Noninferiority Trial
    imageObjective: The aim of the study was to confirm the noninferiority of mesorectal excision (ME) alone to ME with lateral lymph node dissection (LLND) in terms of efficacy. Background: Lateral pelvic lymph node metastasis is occasionally found in clinical stage II or III lower rectal cancer, and ME with LLND is the standard procedure in Japan. ME alone, however, is the international standard surgical procedure for rectal cancer. Methods: Eligibility criteria included histologically proven rectal cancer at clinical stage II/III; main lesion located in the rectum, with the lower margin below the peritoneal reflection; no lateral pelvic lymph node enlargement; Peformance Status of 0 or 1; and age 20 to 75 years. Patients were intraoperatively allocated to undergo ME with LLND or ME alone in a randomized manner. The primary endpoint was relapse-free survival, with a noninferiority margin for the hazard ratio of 1.34. Secondary endpoints included overall survival and local-recurrence-free survival. Analysis was by intention to treat. Results: In total, 701 patients were randomized to the ME with LLND (n = 351) and ME alone (n = 350) groups. The 5-year relapse-free survival in the ME with LLND and ME alone groups were 73.4% and 73.3%, respectively (hazard ratio: 1.07, 90.9% confidence interval 0.84?1.36), with a 1-sided P value for noninferiority of 0.0547. The 5-year overall survival, and 5-year local-recurrence-free survival in the ME with LLND and ME alone groups were 92.6% and 90.2%, and 87.7% and 82.4%, respectively. The numbers of patients with local recurrence were 26 (7.4%) and 44 (12.6%) in the ME with LLND and ME alone groups, respectively (P = 0.024). Conclusions: The noninferiority of ME alone to ME with LLND was not confirmed in the intent-to-treat analysis. ME with LLND had a lower local recurrence, especially in the lateral pelvis, compared to ME alone.

  • Prevalence of Musculoskeletal Disorders Among Surgeons Performing Minimally Invasive Surgery: A Systematic Review
    imageObjective: The aim of this study was to review musculoskeletal disorder (MSD) prevalence among surgeons performing minimally invasive surgery. Background: Advancements in laparoscopic surgery have primarily focused on enhancing patient benefits. However, compared with open surgery, laparoscopic surgery imposes greater ergonomic constraints on surgeons. Recent reports indicate a 73% to 88% prevalence of physical complaints among laparoscopic surgeons, which is greater than in the general working population, supporting the need to address the surgeons? physical health. Methods: To summarize the prevalence of MSDs among surgeons performing laparoscopic surgery, we performed a systematic review of studies addressing physical ergonomics as a determinant, and reporting MSD prevalence. On April 15 2016, we searched Pubmed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CINAHL, and PsychINFO. Meta-analyses were performed using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman method. Results: We identified 35 articles, including 7112 respondents. The weighted average prevalence of complaints was 74% [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 65?83]. We found high inconsistency across study results (I2 = 98.3%) and the overall response rate was low. If all nonresponders were without complaints, the prevalence would be 22% (95% CI 16?30). Conclusions: From the available literature, we found a 74% prevalence of physical complaints among laparoscopic surgeons. However, the low response rates and the high inconsistency across studies leave some uncertainty, suggesting an actual prevalence of between 22% and 74%. Fatigue and MSDs impact psychomotor performance; therefore, these results warrant further investigation. Continuous changes are enacted to increase patient safety and surgical care quality, and should also include efforts to improve surgeons? well-being.


toggle shelf