Laparoscopic-assisted Open Pyloroduodenostomy Repair of Pyloric Atresia in an Infant

2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos Theodore Huerta ◽  
Andrew Sundin ◽  
Gareth P. Gilna ◽  
Rebecca A. Saberi ◽  
Walter A. Ramsey ◽  
...  
2004 ◽  
Vol 171 (4S) ◽  
pp. 147-147 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Kellogg Parsons ◽  
Ranjiv Matthews ◽  
Li-Ming Su ◽  
Mohamad E. Allaf ◽  
John P. Gearhart

2020 ◽  
Vol 73 (4) ◽  
pp. 148-152
Author(s):  
Kornél Vajda ◽  
László Sikorszki

Összefoglaló. Bevezetés: A laparoszkópia térhódítása a jobb oldali colon műtéteknél is nyilvánvaló. Ma legtöbb helyen a laparoszkóposan asszisztált jobb oldali hemikolektómia extrakorporális anasztomózissal a gold standard. A morbiditás randomizált vizsgálatok alapján még 30% körüli. A technikai fejlődés lehetővé tette az intrakorporális anasztomózist. Célkitűzés: Retrospektív módon elemezni rosszindulatú jobb oldali vastagbéldaganat miatt végzett laparoszkópos hemikolektómiák rövid távú eredményeit a két módszer összehasonlításával. Eredmények: 2018. 01. 01. – 2019. 12. 31. között 184 jobb oldali hemikolektómiát végeztünk, ezek közül 122 történt malignus betegség miatt. 51 esetben nyitott és 71 esetben laparoszkópos műtét történt. 37 férfi (átlagéletkor: 70,59 év) és 34 nő (átlagéletkor: 72,14 év) volt. 50 esetben extrakorporális (EA) és 21 esetben pedig intrakorporális anasztomózist (IA) végeztünk. Az EA csoportban 18, míg az IA csoportban 3 szövődmény alakult ki 30 napon belül (p = 0,067). Az EA csoportból 3, az IA csoportból 1 beteget veszítettünk el 30 napon belül (p = 0,66). Az átlagos ápolási idő az EA csoportban 9,48 (5–32) nap, míg az IA csoportban 6,52 (4–19) nap volt (p = 0,001) a szövődményes esetekkel együtt. A szövődményes esetek nélkül az EA csoportban 6,35 (5–10) nap, az IA csoportban pedig 5,55 (4–8) napnak bizonyult (p = 0,09). A műtéti idő pedig az EA csoportban 147 (90–240) perc, az IA csoportban pedig 146,47 (90–265) perc volt (p = 0,11). Konklúzió: Az irodalommal összhangban azt találtuk, hogy IA esetén kevesebb a szövődmény, ezzel is összefüggésben rövidebb az átlagos ápolási idő, és a műtéti időt tekintve nincs szignifikáns különbség. Ezeket figyelembe véve az intrakorporális anasztomózis javasolható jobb oldali laparoszkópos hemikolektómia esetén. Summary. Introduction: Laparoscopy became evident for right-sided colon surgery too. Today the laparoscopic-assisted right-hemicolectomy is the gold standard with extracorporeal anastomosis. Morbidity according to randomized trials is still approximately 30%. The development of the surgical technique resulted in the creation of intracorporeal anastomosis. Our aim was to compare the short-term results of the two methods. Aim: To analyse the short-term results of right-sided hemicolectomy that were performed due to malignant tumours with the comparison of the two methods. Results: A cohort of 184 right-sided hemicolectomy were performed from 01.01.2018 to 31.12.2019 from which 122 were operated on because of a malignant disease. 51 open and 71 laparoscopic operations were performed. The average age of 37 men and 34 women were 70.59 and 72.14 years, respectively. 50 patients underwent extracorporeal (EA) anastomosis and 21 intracorporeal (IA) anastomosis. Within 30 days the number of complications were 18 in the EA group and 3 in the IA group (p = 0.067). 3 from the EA group and 1 from IA group died within 30 days (p = 0.66). The average length of stay were 9.48 days in the EA group and 6.52 days in the IA group together with the complicated cases (p = 0.001) while 6.35 days and 5.55 days without the complicated cases (p = 0.09). The average duration of operation was 147 minutes in the EA and 146.47 minutes in the IA group (p = 0.11). Conclusion: We found concordance with the literature that there are fewer complications in case of IA which might be related to shorter length of stay. There is no significant difference between the surgical times. Bearing these facts in mind, IA might be suggested for right- sided laparoscopic hemicolectomy.


1999 ◽  
Vol 161 (1) ◽  
pp. 267-270 ◽  
Author(s):  
SEAN P. HEDICAN ◽  
PETER G. SCHULAM ◽  
STEVEN G. DOCIMO

Author(s):  
Mike Thomson ◽  
Jonathan Goring ◽  
Richard Lindley ◽  
Sean Marven

2021 ◽  
pp. 153857442110225
Author(s):  
Haidong Wang ◽  
Zhenhua Liu ◽  
Xiaofei Zhu ◽  
Jianlong Liu ◽  
Libo Man

Background: Inferior vena cava (IVC) filters are commonly used in China to prevent pulmonary embolisms in patients with deep vein thrombosis. However, IVC filter removal is complicated when the filter has penetrated the IVC wall and endovascular techniques usually fail. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of retroperitoneal laparoscopic-assisted retrieval of wall-penetrating IVC filters after endovascular techniques have failed. Patients and Methods: We retrospectively evaluated a series of 8 patients who underwent retroperitoneal laparoscopic-assisted retrieval of a wall-penetrating IVC filter between December 2017 and November 2019. All patients had experienced at least 1 failure with endovascular retrieval before the study. The filters were slanted and the proximal retrieval hooks penetrated the posterior lateral IVC wall in all patients on computed tomography. Demographic information, operation parameters, and complications were recorded and analyzed. All patients were followed up for at least 12 months. Results: The procedure was successful in all patients. The median surgery time was 53.6 ± 12.7 min and the average blood loss was 45.0 ± 13.5 ml. No serious complication occurred during the patients’ hospitalization, which was an average of 6.4 days. The median follow-up time was 15.1 months, and no patient had deep vein thrombosis recurrence. Conclusions: Retroperitoneal laparoscopic-assisted retrieval is a feasible and effective technique, particularly when proximal retrieval hooks penetrate the posterior lateral wall of the IVC after endovascular techniques have failed. To some extent, the development of this technique at our institution has increased the success rate of filter removal and improved patient satisfaction.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document