Le Journal de Chirurgie viscérale et sa version en ligne en anglais, Journal of Visceral Surgery, remplacent le Journal de Chirurgie

2009 ◽  
Vol 146 (6) ◽  
pp. 525-527 ◽  
Author(s):  
F. Lacaine
Keyword(s):  
2010 ◽  
Vol 147 (3) ◽  
pp. e129-e135 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Germain ◽  
L. Brunaud
Keyword(s):  

2017 ◽  
Vol 104 (6) ◽  
pp. 646-647 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. W. Bell ◽  
S. K. Warrier

Author(s):  
Georg Feigl ◽  
Andreas Sammer

Abstract Purpose Due to the ongoing discussion of the usefulness of dissection on human bodies in medical curricula, we investigated the influence of anatomical knowledge collected in the dissection course and requested for modules of visceral surgery. Methods Students attending the dissection course of topographic anatomy had to answer a questionnaire of 22 questions with focus on anatomical knowledge required for visceral surgical modules. Failure was defined as 13 or fewer correct answers, success categorized as high, good or moderate. The same questionnaire was handed out to 245 students prior to the module on visceral surgery. Students provided information on which regions they had dissected during the course or prior to the module. The results were compared to the result of a written Multiple Choice Question (MCQ) exam of the module visceral surgery (n = 160 students) with an unannounced primary focus on anatomy. Results Students who dissected the truncal regions of the human body succeeded in answering the questionnaire with high success. Students dissecting regions of the Head/Neck or Limbs had a high failure rate, and none of them reached the “high” success level. In the MCQ exam, students dissecting truncal regions had a high success rate, while those who had not dissected or who dissected the Head/Neck or Limbs had a high failure rate. Conclusion Dissections support and improve the required knowledge for surgical modules. For the visceral surgical module, students dissecting the region prior to the module greatly benefited. Therefore, entire human body dissection assumes to be preferable.


2016 ◽  
Vol 07 (03) ◽  
pp. 170-176 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dansou Gaspard Gbessi ◽  
Ismail Lawani ◽  
Chrystelle Tawo-Nounagnon ◽  
Francis Mo&iumlse Dossou ◽  
Yacoubou Imorou Soua&iumlbou ◽  
...  

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (9) ◽  
pp. e053851
Author(s):  
Karem Slim ◽  
Flora Badon ◽  
Charles-Hervé Vacheron ◽  
Chadli Dziri ◽  
Thomas Marquillier

IntroductionImmunonutrition (IN) is generally used before major visceral surgery with the intent to reduce postoperative complications, especially infectious ones. However, the conclusions of published meta-analyses are conflicting. The purpose of this review is to synthesise the data of published systematic reviews on the effectiveness of IN.Methods and analysisThis protocol follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Protocols guidelines. This is an umbrella review of systematic reviews comparing IN (delivered orally 5–7 days preoperatively) with normal diet or isocaloric isonitrogenous feeding before visceral surgery performed on any of several viscera (colorectum, stomach, pancreas, liver, oesophagus). We search the systematic reviews included in the main bibliographic databases. To assess the efficacy of IN, several outcomes will be considered: the main outcome is infectious complications (surgical site infections, pulmonary infections or urinary infections) and secondary outcomes are overall morbidity, hospital length of stay and mortality. Identified reviews will be screened by two independent assessors. The methodological quality of relevant included reviews will be assessed using A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) instrument. The data extracted from included reviews will be synthesised using the r-Metafor package considering separate groups according to the viscus of interest. Publication bias will be evaluated, and subgroup analyses will be performed according to the quality of studies and preoperative nutritional status.Ethics and disseminationAn umbrella review based on published data from systematic reviews needs no ethical approval. Furthermore, no patient will be involved in the review. Once terminated, the review will be submitted for publication in an open access journal to ensure wide dissemination of the findings.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021255177.


2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (6) ◽  
pp. 1218-1226 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steffen Wolk ◽  
Sebastian Linke ◽  
Andreas Bogner ◽  
Dorothée Sturm ◽  
Theresa Meißner ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Armin Schneider ◽  
Hubertus Feussner
Keyword(s):  

2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 107-116 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabio Agri ◽  
Anne-Claude Griesser ◽  
Estelle Lécureux ◽  
Pierre Allemann ◽  
Markus Schäfer ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Rosa S. Choi ◽  
Joseph P. Vacanti
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document