@article{BrandReimerReibetanzetal.2021,
  author    = {Brand, Markus and Reimer, Stanislaus and Reibetanz, Joachim and Flemming, Sven and Kornmann, Marko and Meining, Alexander},
  title     = {Endoscopic full thickness resection vs. transanal endoscopic microsurgery for local treatment of rectal neuroendocrine tumors - a retrospective analysis},
  series = {International Journal of Colorectal Disease},
  volume    = {36},
  journal   = {International Journal of Colorectal Disease},
  issn      = {0179-1958},
  doi       = {10.1007/s00384-020-03800-x},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-234833},
  pages     = {971-976},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {Purpose Local treatment of small well-differentiated rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) is recommended by current guidelines. However, although several endoscopic methods have been established, the highest R0 rate is achieved by transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM). Since a recently published study about endoscopic full thickness resection (eFTR) showed a R0 resection rate of 100\%, the aim of this study was to evaluate both methods (eFTR vs. TEM). Methods We retrospectively analyzed all patients with rectal NET treated either by TEM (1999-2018) or eFTR (2016-2019) in two tertiary centers (University Hospital Wuerzburg and Ulm). We analyzed clinical, procedural, and histopathological outcomes in both groups. Results Twenty-eight patients with rectal NET received local treatment (TEM: 13; eFTR: 15). Most tumors were at stage T1a and grade G1 or G2 (in the TEM group two G3 NETs were staged T2 after neoadjuvant chemotherapy). In both groups, similar outcomes for en bloc resection rate, R0 resection rate, tumor size, or specimen size were found. No procedural adverse events were noted. Mean procedure time in the TEM group was 48.9 min and 19.2 min in the eFTR group. Conclusion eFTR is a convincing method for local treatment of small rectal NETs combining high safety and efficacy with short interventional time.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{WagnerEikenHaubitzetal.2019,
  author    = {Wagner, Johanna and Eiken, Barbara and Haubitz, Imme and Lichthardt, Sven and Matthes, Niels and L{\"o}b, Stefan and Klein, Ingo and Germer, Christoph-Thomas and Wiegering, Armin},
  title     = {Suprapubic bladder drainage and epidural catheters following abdominal surgery—a risk for urinary tract infections?},
  series = {PLoS ONE},
  volume    = {14},
  journal   = {PLoS ONE},
  number    = {1},
  doi       = {10.1371/journal.pone.0209825},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-177731},
  pages     = {e0209825},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {Background Epidural catheters are state of the art for postoperative analgesic in abdominal surgery. Due to neurolysis it can lead to postoperative urinary tract retention (POUR), which leads to prolonged bladder catheterization, which has an increased risk for urinary tract infections (UTI). Our aim was to identify the current perioperative management of urinary catheters and, second, to identify the optimal time of suprapubic bladder catheter removal in regard to the removal of the epidural catheter. Methods We sent a questionnaire to 102 German hospitals and analyzed the 83 received answers to evaluate the current handling of bladder drainage and epidural catheters. Then, we conducted a retrospective study including 501 patients, who received an epidural and suprapubic catheter after abdominal surgery at the University Hospital W{\"u}rzburg. We divided the patients into three groups according to the point in time of suprapubic bladder drainage removal in regard to the removal of the epidural catheter and analyzed the onset of a UTI. Results Our survey showed that in almost all hospitals (98.8\%), patients received an epidural catheter and a bladder drainage after abdominal surgery. The point in time of urinary catheter removal was equally distributed between before, simultaneously and after the removal of the epidural catheter (respectively: ~28-29\%). The retrospective study showed a catheter-associated UTI in 6.7\%. Women were affected significantly more often than men (10,7\% versus 2,5\%, p<0.001). There was a non-significant trend to more UTIs when the suprapubic catheter was removed after the epidural catheter (before: 5.7\%, after: 8.4\%). Conclusion The point in time of suprapubic bladder drainage removal in relation to the removal of the epidural catheter does not seem to correlate with the rate of UTIs. The current handling in Germany is inhomogeneous, so further studies to standardize treatment are recommended.},
  language  = {en}
}