Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (17)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (17)
Document Type
- Journal article (16)
- Other (1)
Language
- English (17) (remove)
Keywords
- incisional hernia (2)
- COVID-19 (1)
- Cancer (1)
- Erratum (1)
- Fascia transversalis (1)
- FcγR (1)
- Fn14 (1)
- Göttingen (1)
- HUWE1 (1)
- Ileal conduit (1)
Institute
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Allgemein-, Viszeral-, Gefäß- und Kinderchirurgie (Chirurgische Klinik I) (15)
- Theodor-Boveri-Institut für Biowissenschaften (8)
- Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik II (4)
- Kinderklinik und Poliklinik (2)
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Mainfranken (1)
- Institut für Hygiene und Mikrobiologie (1)
- Institut für Medizinische Lehre und Ausbildungsforschung (1)
- Institut für Virologie und Immunbiologie (1)
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Anästhesiologie (ab 2004) (1)
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Strahlentherapie (1)
EU-Project number / Contract (GA) number
- 813871 (1)
Endoscopic management of umbilical and incisional hernias has adapted to the limitations of conventional laparoscopic instruments over the past 30 years. This includes the development of meshes for intraperitoneal placement (intraperitoneal onlay mesh, IPOM), with antiadhesive coatings; however, adhesions do occur in a significant proportion of these patients. Minimally invasive procedures result in fewer perioperative complications, but with a slightly higher recurrence rate. With the ergonomic resources of robotics, which offers angled instruments, it is now possible to implant meshes in a minimally invasively manner in different abdominal wall layers while achieving morphologic and functional reconstruction of the abdominal wall. This video article presents the treatment of ventral and incisional hernias with mesh implantation into the preperitoneal space (robot-assisted transabdominal preperitoneal ventral hernia repair, r‑ventral TAPP) as well as into the retrorectus space (r-Rives and robotic transabdominal retromuscular umbilical prosthetic repair, r‑TARUP, respectively). The results of a cohort study of 118 consecutive patients are presented and discussed with regard to the added value of the robotic technique in extraperitoneal mesh implantation and in the training of residents.
The surgical treatment of parastomal hernias is considered complex and is known to be prone to complications. Traditionally, this condition was treated using relocation techniques or local suture repairs. Since then, several mesh-based techniques have been proposed and are nowadays used in minimally invasive surgery. Since the introduction of robot-assisted surgery to the field of abdominal wall surgery, several adaptations to these techniques have been made, which may significantly improve patient outcomes. In this contribution, we provide an overview of available techniques in robot-assisted parastomal hernia repair. Technical considerations and preliminary results of robot-assisted modified Sugarbaker repair, robot-assisted Pauli technique, and minimally invasive use of a funnel-shaped mesh in the treatment of parastomal hernias are presented. Furthermore, challenges in robot-assisted ileal conduit parastomal hernia repair are discussed. These techniques are illustrated by photographic and video material. Besides providing a comprehensive overview of robot-assisted parastomal hernia repair, this article focuses on the specific advantages of robot-assisted techniques in the treatment of this condition.
Background:
Colonic cancer is the most common cancer of the gastrointestinal tract. The aim of this study was to determine mortality rates following colonic cancer resection and the effect of hospital caseload on in-hospital mortality in Germany.
Methods:
Patients admitted with a diagnosis of colonic cancer undergoing colonic resection from 2012 to 2015 were identifed from a nationwide registry using procedure codes. The outcome measure was in-hospital mortality. Hospitals were ranked according to their caseload for colonic cancer resection, and patients were categorized into five subgroups on the basis of hospital volume.
Results:
Some 129 196 colonic cancer resections were reviewed. The overall in-house mortality rate was 5⋅8 per cent, ranging from 6⋅9 per cent (1775 of 25 657 patients) in very low-volume hospitals to 4⋅8 per cent (1239 of 25 825) in very high-volume centres (P < 0⋅001). In multivariable logistic regression analysis the risk-adjusted odds ratio for in-house mortality was 0⋅75 (95 per cent c.i. 0⋅66 to 0⋅84) in very high-volume hospitals performing a mean of 85⋅0 interventions per year, compared with that in very low-volume hospitals performing a mean of only 12⋅7 interventions annually, after adjustment for sex, age, co-morbidity, emergency procedures, prolonged mechanical ventilation and transfusion.
Conclusion:
In Germany, patients undergoing colonic cancer resections in high-volume hospitals had with improved outcomes compared with patients treated in low-volume hospitals
Background
The impact of hospital volume after rectal cancer surgery is seldom investigated. This study aimed to analyse the impact of annual rectal cancer surgery cases per hospital on postoperative mortality and failure to rescue.
Methods
All patients diagnosed with rectal cancer and who had a rectal resection procedure code from 2012 to 2015 were identified from nationwide administrative hospital data. Hospitals were grouped into five quintiles according to caseload. The absolute number of patients, postoperative deaths and failure to rescue (defined as in‐hospital mortality after a documented postoperative complication) for severe postoperative complications were determined.
Results
Some 64 349 patients were identified. The overall in‐house mortality rate was 3·9 per cent. The crude in‐hospital mortality rate ranged from 5·3 per cent in very low‐volume hospitals to 2·6 per cent in very high‐volume centres, with a distinct trend between volume categories (P < 0·001). In multivariable logistic regression analysis using hospital volume as random effect, very high‐volume hospitals (53 interventions/year) had a risk‐adjusted odds ratio of 0·58 (95 per cent c.i. 0·47 to 0·73), compared with the baseline in‐house mortality rate in very low‐volume hospitals (6 interventions per year) (P < 0·001). The overall postoperative complication rate was comparable between different volume quintiles, but failure to rescue decreased significantly with increasing caseload (15·6 per cent after pulmonary embolism in the highest volume quintile versus 38 per cent in the lowest quintile; P = 0·010).
Conclusion
Patients who had rectal cancer surgery in high‐volume hospitals showed better outcomes and reduced failure to rescue rates for severe complications than those treated in low‐volume hospitals.
The principle of targeted separation or weakening of individual components of the abdominal wall to relieve tension in the median line during major abdominal reconstruction has been known for over 30 years as anterior component separation (aCS) and is an established procedure. In search of alternatives with lower complication rates, posterior component separation (pCS) was developed; transversus abdominis release (TAR) is a nerve-sparing modification of pCS. With the ergonomic resources of robotics (e.g., angled instruments), TAR can be performed in a minimally invasive manner (r-TAR): hernia gaps of up to 14 cm can be closed and a large extraperitoneal mesh implanted. In this video article, the treatment of large incisional hernias using the r‑TAR technique is presented. Exemplary results of a cohort study in 13 consecutive patients are presented. The procedure is challenging, but our own results—as well as reports from the literature—are encouraging. The r‑TAR is becoming the pinnacle procedure for abdominal wall reconstruction.
Background
The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2(SARS-CoV-2), has escalated rapidly to a global pandemic stretching healthcare systems worldwide to their limits. Surgeonshave had to immediately react to this unprecedented clinical challenge by systematically repurposing surgical wards.
Purpose
To provide a detailed set of guidelines developed in a surgical ward at University Hospital Wuerzburg to safelyaccommodate the exponentially rising cases of SARS-CoV-2 infected patients without compromising the care of emergencysurgery and oncological patients or jeopardizing the well-being of hospital staff.
Conclusions
The dynamic prioritization of SARS-CoV-2 infected and surgical patient groups is key to preserving life whilemaintaining high surgical standards. Strictly segregating patient groups in emergency rooms, non-intensive care wards andoperating areas prevents viral spread while adequately training and carefully selecting hospital staff allow them to confidentlyand successfully undertake their respective clinical duties.
(1) Background: Locoregional lymphadenectomy (LND) in adrenocortical carcinoma (ACC) may impact oncological outcome, but the findings from individual studies are conflicting. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the oncological value of LND in ACC by summarizing the available literature. (2) Methods: A systematic search on studies published until December 2020 was performed according to the PRISMA statement. The primary outcome was the impact of lymphadenectomy on overall survival (OS). Two separate meta-analyses were performed for studies including patients with localized ACC (stage I–III) and those including all tumor stages (I–IV). Secondary endpoints included postoperative mortality and length of hospital stay (LOS). (3) Results: 11 publications were identified for inclusion. All studies were retrospective studies, published between 2001–2020, and 5 were included in the meta-analysis. Three studies (N = 807 patients) reported the impact of LND on disease-specific survival in patients with stage I–III ACC and revealed a survival benefit of LND (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.42, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 0.26–0.68). Based on results of studies including patients with ACC stage I–IV (2 studies, N = 3934 patients), LND was not associated with a survival benefit (HR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.70–1.42). None of the included studies showed an association between LND and postoperative mortality or LOS. (4) Conclusion: Locoregional lymphadenectomy seems to offer an oncologic benefit in patients undergoing curative-intended surgery for localized ACC (stage I–III).
Background
Anastomotic leakage (AL) is one of the most common and serious complications following visceral surgery. In recent years, endoluminal vacuum therapy has dramatically changed therapeutic options for AL, but its use has been limited to areas easily accessible by endoscope.
Case presentation
We describe the first use of endoluminal vacuum therapy in the small intestine employing a combined surgical and endoscopic “rendezvous technique” in which the surgeon assists the endoscopic placement of an endoluminal vacuum therapy sponge in the jejunum by means of a pullback string. This technique led to a completely closed AL after 27 days and 7 changes of the endosponge.
Conclusion
The combined surgical and endoscopic rendezvous technique can be useful in cases of otherwise difficult endosponge placement.
Background
Multimodal treatment strategies – perioperative chemotherapy (CTx) and radical surgery – are currently accepted as treatment standard for locally advanced gastric cancer. However, the role of adjuvant postoperative CTx (postCTx) in addition to neoadjuvant preoperative CTx (preCTx) in this setting remains controversial.
Methods
Between 4/2006 and 12/2013, 116 patients with locally advanced gastric cancer were treated with preCTx. 72 patients (62 %), in whom complete tumor resection (R0, subtotal/total gastrectomy with D2-lymphadenectomy) was achieved, were divided into two groups, one of which receiving adjuvant therapy (n = 52) and one without (n = 20). These groups were analyzed with regard to survival and exclusion criteria for adjuvant therapy.
Results
Postoperative complications, as well as their severity grade, did not correlate with fewer postCTx cycles administered (p = n.s.). Long-term survival was shorter in patients receiving postCTx in comparison to patients without postCTx, but did not show statistical significance. In per protocol analysis by excluding two patients with perioperative death, a shorter 3-year survival rate was observed in patients receiving postCTx compared to patients without postCTx (3-year survival: 71.2 % postCTx group vs. 90.0 % non-postCTx group; p = 0.038).
Conclusion
These results appear contradicting to the anticipated outcome. While speculative, they question the value of post-CTx. Prospectively randomized studies are needed to elucidate the role of postCTx.