scholarly journals Health economic implications of postoperative complications following liver resection surgery: a systematic review

2019 ◽  
Vol 89 (12) ◽  
pp. 1561-1566
Author(s):  
Luka Cosic ◽  
Ronald Ma ◽  
Leonid Churilov ◽  
Mehrdad Nikfarjam ◽  
Christopher Christophi ◽  
...  
Critical Care ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Messina ◽  
Chiara Robba ◽  
Lorenzo Calabrò ◽  
Daniel Zambelli ◽  
Francesca Iannuzzi ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Postoperative complications impact on early and long-term patients’ outcome. Appropriate perioperative fluid management is pivotal in this context; however, the most effective perioperative fluid management is still unclear. The enhanced recovery after surgery pathways recommend a perioperative zero-balance, whereas recent findings suggest a more liberal approach could be beneficial. We conducted this trial to address the impact of restrictive vs. liberal fluid approaches on overall postoperative complications and mortality. Methods Systematic review and meta-analysis, including randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We performed a systematic literature search using MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE (via Ovid) and the Cochrane Controlled Clinical trials register databases, published from 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2019. We included RCTs enrolling adult patients undergoing elective abdominal surgery and comparing the use of restrictive/liberal approaches enrolling at least 15 patients in each subgroup. Studies involving cardiac, non-elective surgery, paediatric or obstetric surgeries were excluded. Results After full-text examination, the metanalysis finally included 18 studies and 5567 patients randomised to restrictive (2786 patients; 50.0%) or liberal approaches (2780 patients; 50.0%). We found no difference in the occurrence of severe postoperative complications between restrictive and liberal subgroups [risk difference (95% CI) = 0.009 (− 0.02; 0.04); p value = 0.62; I2 (95% CI) = 38.6% (0–66.9%)]. This result was confirmed also in the subgroup of five studies having a low overall risk of bias. The liberal approach was associated with lower overall renal major events, as compared to the restrictive [risk difference (95% CI) = 0.06 (0.02–0.09); p value  = 0.001]. We found no difference in either early (p value  = 0.33) or late (p value  = 0.22) postoperative mortality between restrictive and liberal subgroups Conclusions In major abdominal elective surgery perioperative, the choice between liberal or restrictive approach did not affect overall major postoperative complications or mortality. In a subgroup analysis, a liberal as compared to a restrictive perioperative fluid policy was associated with lower overall complication renal major events, as compared to the restrictive. Trial Registration CRD42020218059; Registration: February 2020, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=218059.


HPB ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 23 ◽  
pp. S164-S165
Author(s):  
S. Mak ◽  
M. Kawka ◽  
S. Froghi ◽  
T.M.H. Gall ◽  
L.R. Jiao

Vaccine ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (17) ◽  
pp. 2298-2310 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrícia Coelho de Soárez ◽  
Aline Blumer Silva ◽  
Bruno Azevedo Randi ◽  
Laura Marques Azevedo ◽  
Hillegonda Maria Dutilh Novaes ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Constantin Tuleasca ◽  
Henri-Arthur Leroy ◽  
Iulia Peciu-Florianu ◽  
Ondine Strachowski ◽  
Benoit Derre ◽  
...  

AbstractMicrosurgical resection of primary brain tumors located within or near eloquent areas is challenging. Primary aim is to preserve neurological function, while maximizing the extent of resection (EOR), to optimize long-term neurooncological outcomes and quality of life. Here, we review the combined integration of awake craniotomy and intraoperative MRI (IoMRI) for primary brain tumors, due to their multiple challenges. A systematic review of the literature was performed, in accordance with the Prisma guidelines. Were included 13 series and a total number of 527 patients, who underwent 541 surgeries. We paid particular attention to operative time, rate of intraoperative seizures, rate of initial complete resection at the time of first IoMRI, the final complete gross total resection (GTR, complete radiological resection rates), and the immediate and definitive postoperative neurological complications. The mean duration of surgery was 6.3 h (median 7.05, range 3.8–7.9). The intraoperative seizure rate was 3.7% (range 1.4–6; I^2 = 0%, P heterogeneity = 0.569, standard error = 0.012, p = 0.002). The intraoperative complete resection rate at the time of first IoMRI was 35.2% (range 25.7–44.7; I^2 = 66.73%, P heterogeneity = 0.004, standard error = 0.048, p < 0.001). The rate of patients who underwent supplementary resection after one or several IoMRI was 46% (range 39.8–52.2; I^2 = 8.49%, P heterogeneity = 0.364, standard error = 0.032, p < 0.001). The GTR rate at discharge was 56.3% (range 47.5–65.1; I^2 = 60.19%, P heterogeneity = 0.01, standard error = 0.045, p < 0.001). The rate of immediate postoperative complications was 27.4% (range 15.2–39.6; I^2 = 92.62%, P heterogeneity < 0.001, standard error = 0.062, p < 0.001). The rate of permanent postoperative complications was 4.1% (range 1.3–6.9; I^2 = 38.52%, P heterogeneity = 0.123, standard error = 0.014, p = 0.004). Combined use of awake craniotomy and IoMRI can help in maximizing brain tumor resection in selected patients. The technical obstacles to doing so are not severe and can be managed by experienced neurosurgery and anesthesiology teams. The benefits of bringing these technologies to bear on patients with brain tumors in or near language areas are obvious. The lack of equipoise on this topic by experienced practitioners will make it difficult to do a prospective, randomized, clinical trial. In the opinion of the authors, such a trial would be unnecessary and would deprive some patients of the benefits of the best available methods for their tumor resections.


Author(s):  
Aadya Sharma ◽  
Dibyashree Ghosh ◽  
Neha Divekar ◽  
Manisha Gore ◽  
Saikat Gochhait ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anh Le Tuan Nguyen ◽  
Hoa Thi Thu Nguyen ◽  
Kwang Chien Yee ◽  
Andrew J. Palmer ◽  
Christopher Leigh Blizzard ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Maria Chicco ◽  
Ali R Ahmadi ◽  
Hsu-Tang Cheng

Abstract Background There is limited evidence available in literature with regard to the complication profile of mastectomy and immediate prosthetic reconstruction in augmented patients. Objectives The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare postoperative complications between women with versus without prior augmentation undergoing skin- or nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate prosthetic reconstruction. Methods A systematic search was conducted in February 2020 for studies comparing women with versus without prior augmentation undergoing skin- or nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate prosthetic reconstruction with documentation of postoperative complications. Outcomes analyzed included early, late and overall complications. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were obtained through meta-analysis. Results Our meta-analysis, which included six studies comparing 241 breasts with prior augmentation and 1441 without, demonstrated no significant difference between the two groups in rates of early (36.7% vs. 24.8%; OR=1.57, 95% CI 0.94 to 2.64; P=0.09), late (10.1% vs. 19.9%; OR=0.53, 95% CI 0.06 to 4.89; P=0.57) and overall complications (36.5% vs. 31.2%; OR=1.23, 95% CI 0.76 to 2.00; P=0.40). Subgroup analysis showed a significantly higher rate of hematoma formation in the augmented group (3.39% versus 2.15%; OR=2.68, 95% CI 1.00 to 7.16; P=0.05), but no difference in rates of seroma, infection, mastectomy skin flap necrosis and prosthesis loss. Conclusions Our meta-analysis suggests that prior augmentation does not significantly increase overall postoperative complications in women undergoing skin- or nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate prosthetic reconstruction. However, the significantly higher rate of hematoma formation in augmented patients warrants further investigation and preoperative discussion.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document