A systematic review of risks and benefits with nipple-areola-reconstruction

2016 ◽  
Vol 51 (5) ◽  
pp. 287-295 ◽  
Author(s):  
Camilla Morken Kristoffersen ◽  
Håvard Seland ◽  
Emma Hansson
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Miguel Cantalejo-Díaz ◽  
José Manuel Ramia-Ángel ◽  
Ana Palomares-Cano ◽  
Mario Serradilla-Martín

<b><i>Background:</i></b> The management of the pancreas in patients with duodenal trauma or duodenal tumors remains a controversial issue. Pancreas-preserving total duodenectomy (PPTD) requires a meticulous surgical technique. The most common indication is familial duodenal adenomatous polyposis (FAP). The aims of this study are to carry out a systematic review of the literature on the indications for PPTD and to highlight the risks and benefits compared with other more aggressive procedures. <b><i>Summary:</i></b> A systematic literature review was performed following PRISMA recommendations of studies published in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library until May 2019. Thirty articles describing 211 patients were chosen. The mean age was 48 years. The surgical indication in 75% of patients was FAP. The mean operating time was 329 min and mean intraoperative bleeding 412 mL. Postoperative morbidity rate was 49.7% (76% Clavien-Dindo &#x3c;IIIa), and mortality rate was 1.4%. The mean hospital stay was 22 days. Overall survival at 1–3–5 years was &#x3e;97.8%. <b><i>Key Messages:</i></b> PPTD is indicated for patients with benign and premalignant duodenal lesions without involvement of the pancreatic head. It is a feasible procedure offering an alternative to other more aggressive procedures in selected patients. Mortality is below 1.5%.


2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 98-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma J.M. Grigor ◽  
Dean Fergusson ◽  
Natasha Kekre ◽  
Joshua Montroy ◽  
Harold Atkins ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 39 (7) ◽  
pp. 709-722 ◽  
Author(s):  
KRYSTINA B. LEWIS ◽  
DAWN STACEY ◽  
SANDRA L. CARROLL ◽  
LAURA BOLAND ◽  
LINDSEY SIKORA ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 40-40 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fakher Rahim ◽  
Babak Arjmand ◽  
Kiarash Shirbandi ◽  
Moloud Payab ◽  
Bagher Larijani

2006 ◽  
Vol 188 (5) ◽  
pp. 410-415 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jaap Wijkstra ◽  
Jeroen Lijmer ◽  
Ferdi J. Balk ◽  
John R. Geddes ◽  
Willem A. Nolen

BackgroundThe optimal pharmacological treatment of unipolar psychotic depression is uncertain.AimsTo compare the clinical effectiveness of pharmacological treatments for patients with unipolar psychotic depression.MethodSystematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.ResultsTen trials were included in the review. We found no evidence that the combination of an antidepressant with an antipsychotic is more effective than an antidepressant alone. This combination was statistically more effective than an antipsychotic alone.ConclusionsAntidepressant mono-therapy and adding an antipsychotic if the patient does not respond, or starting with the combination of an antidepressant and an antipsychotic, both appear to be appropriate options for patients with unipolar psychotic depression. However, clinically the balance between risks and benefits may suggest the first option should be preferred for many patients. Starting with an antipsychotic alone appears to be inadequate.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document