scholarly journals Robotic, laparoscopic or open hemihepatectomy for giant liver haemangiomas over 10 cm in diameter

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Minggen Hu ◽  
Kuang Chen ◽  
Xuan Zhang ◽  
Chenggang Li ◽  
Dongda Song ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Loss ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Liver Volume ◽  
Future Liver Remnant ◽  
Oral Intake ◽  
Postoperative Recovery ◽  
Postoperative Outcomes ◽  
Intraoperative Blood Loss ◽  
Liver Remnant ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Background: To evaluate the clinical efficacy of robotic, laparoscopic, and open hemihepatectomy for giant liver haemangiomas.Methods: From April 2011 to April 2017, consecutive patients who underwent hemihepatectomy for giant liver haemangiomas were included in this study. According to the type of operation, these patients were divided into the robotic hemihepatectomy (RH) group, the laparoscopic hemihepatectomy (LH) group, and the open hemihepatectomy (OH) group. The perioperative and short-term postoperative outcomes were compared among the three groups. The study was reported following the STROCSS criteria.Results: There were no significant differences in age, sex, tumour location, body surface area (BSA), future liver remnant volume (FLR), standard liver volume (SLV), liver haemangioma volume, FLR/SLV, resected normal liver volume/resected volume, hepatic disease, rates of blood transfusion, liver function after 24 hours of surgery, operative morbidity and mortality among the three groups. Compared with patients in the RH group (n=19) and the LH group (n=13), patients in the OH group (n=25) had a significantly longer postoperative hospital stay (P< 0.05), time to oral intake (P < 0.05), and time to get-out-of-bed (P < 0.05); a higher VAS score after 24 hours of surgery (P < 0.05); and a shorter operative time (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in these postoperative outcomes (P＞0.05) between the RH group and the LH group. When the setup time in the RH group was excluded, the operative time in the RH group was significantly shorter than that in the LH group (P＜0.05). There was no significant difference in the operative time between the RH group and the OH group (P＞0.05). The amount of intraoperative blood loss in the RH group was the lowest among the three groups (P＜0.05), and the amount of intraoperative blood loss in the LH group was less than that in the OH group (P＜0.05).Conclusion: Robotic and laparoscopic hemihepatectomies were associated with less intraoperative blood loss,better postoperative recovery and lower pain score. Compared with laparoscopic hemihepatectomy, robotic hemihepatectomy was associated with significantly less intraoperative blood loss and a shorter operative time.

scholarly journals Robotic, laparoscopic or open hemihepatectomy for giant liver hemangiomas of over 10 cm in diameter

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Minggen Hu ◽  
Kuang Chen ◽  
Xuan Zhang ◽  
Chenggang Li ◽  
Dongda Song ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Loss ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Liver Volume ◽  
Future Liver Remnant ◽  
Oral Intake ◽  
Postoperative Recovery ◽  
Postoperative Outcomes ◽  
Intraoperative Blood Loss ◽  
Liver Remnant ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Background To evaluate the clinical efficacy of robotic, laparoscopic, and open hemihepatectomy for giant liver hemangiomas.Methods From April 2011 to April 2017, consecutive patients who underwent hemihepatectomy for giant liver hemangiomas were included into this study. According to the type of operation, these patients were divided into the robotic hemihepatectomy (RH) group, the laparoscopic hemihepatectomy (LH) group, and the open hemihepatectomy (OH) group. The perioperative and short-term postoperative outcomes were compared among the three groups. The study was reported following the STROCSS criteria.Results There were no significant differences in age, sex, tumor location, body surface area (BSA), future liver remnant volume (FLR), standard liver volume (SLV), liver hemangioma volume, FLR/SLV, resected normal liver volume / resected volume, hepatic disease, rates of blood transfusion, liver function after 24 hours of surgery, operative morbidity and mortality among the three groups. Compared with patients in the RH group (n=19), and the LH group (n=13), patients in the OH group (n=25) had significantly longer postoperative hospital stay (P< 0.05), time to oral intake (P < 0.05), time to get-out-of-bed (P < 0.05), a higher VAS score after 24 hours of surgery (P < 0.05) and a shorter operative time (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in these postoperative outcomes (P>0.05) between the RH group and the LH group. When the setup time in the RH group was excluded, the operative time of the RH group was significantly shorter than the LH group (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the operative time between the RH group and the OH group (P>0.05). The intraoperative blood loss of the RH group was the least among the three groups (P<0.05) and the intraoperative blood loss of the LH group was less than the OH group (P<0.05).Discussion Robotic, laparoscopic, and open hemihepatectomy were safe and efficacious treatments for giant liver hemangiomas. Robotic and laparoscopic hemihepatectomy were significantly better than open hemihepatectomy in intraoperative blood loss, postoperative recovery and pain score. Compared with laparoscopic hemihepatectomy, robotic hemihepatectomy was associated with significantly less intraoperative blood loss and shorter operative time.

scholarly journals Robotic, laparoscopic or open hemihepatectomy for giant liver hemangiomas of over 10 cm in diameter

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Minggen Hu ◽  
Kuang Chen ◽  
Xuan Zhang ◽  
Chenggang Li ◽  
Dongda Song ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Loss ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Liver Volume ◽  
Future Liver Remnant ◽  
Oral Intake ◽  
Postoperative Recovery ◽  
Postoperative Outcomes ◽  
Intraoperative Blood Loss ◽  
Liver Remnant ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract [EXSCINDED] Abstract Abstract Abstract Background To evaluate the clinical efficacy of robotic, laparoscopic, and open hemihepatectomy for giant liver hemangiomas.Methods From April 2011 to April 2017, consecutive patients who underwent hemihepatectomy for giant liver hemangiomas were included into this study. According to the type of operation, these patients were divided into the robotic hemihepatectomy (RH) group, the laparoscopic hemihepatectomy (LH) group, and the open hemihepatectomy (OH) group. The perioperative and short-term postoperative outcomes were compared among the three groups. The study was reported following the STROCSS criteria.Results There were no significant differences in age, sex, tumor location, body surface area (BSA), future liver remnant volume (FLR), standard liver volume (SLV), liver hemangioma volume, FLR/SLV, resected normal liver volume / resected volume, hepatic disease, rates of blood transfusion, liver function after 24 hours of surgery, operative morbidity and mortality among the three groups. Compared with patients in the RH group (n=19), and the LH group (n=13), patients in the OH group (n=25) had significantly longer postoperative hospital stay (P< 0.05), time to oral intake (P < 0.05), time to get-out-of-bed (P < 0.05), a higher VAS score after 24 hours of surgery (P < 0.05) and a shorter operative time (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in these postoperative outcomes (P>0.05) between the RH group and the LH group. When the setup time in the RH group was excluded, the operative time of the RH group was significantly shorter than the LH group (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the operative time between the RH group and the OH group (P>0.05). The intraoperative blood loss of the RH group was the least among the three groups (P<0.05) and the intraoperative blood loss of the LH group was less than the OH group (P<0.05).Discussion Robotic, laparoscopic, and open hemihepatectomy were safe and efficacious treatments for giant liver hemangiomas. Robotic and laparoscopic hemihepatectomy were significantly better than open hemihepatectomy in intraoperative blood loss, postoperative recovery and pain score. Compared with laparoscopic hemihepatectomy, robotic hemihepatectomy resulted in significantly less intraoperative blood loss and shorter operative time.

scholarly journals Robotic, laparoscopic or open hemihepatectomy for giant liver haemangiomas over 10 cm in diameter

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Minggen Hu ◽  
Kuang Chen ◽  
Xuan Zhang ◽  
Chenggang Li ◽  
Dongda Song ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Loss ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Liver Volume ◽  
Future Liver Remnant ◽  
Oral Intake ◽  
Postoperative Recovery ◽  
Postoperative Outcomes ◽  
Intraoperative Blood Loss ◽  
Liver Remnant ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Abstract Background To evaluate the clinical efficacy of robotic, laparoscopic, and open hemihepatectomy for giant liver hemangiomas.Methods From April 2011 to April 2017, consecutive patients who underwent hemihepatectomy for giant liver haemangiomas were included into this study. According to the type of operation, these patients were divided into the robotic hemihepatectomy (RH) group, the laparoscopic hemihepatectomy (LH) group, and the open hemihepatectomy (OH) group. The perioperative and short-term postoperative outcomes were compared among the three groups. The study was reported following the STROCSS criteria.Results There were no significant differences in age, sex, tumor location, body surface area (BSA), future liver remnant volume (FLR), standard liver volume (SLV), liver hemangioma volume, FLR/SLV, resected normal liver volume / resected volume, hepatic disease, rates of blood transfusion, liver function after 24 hours of surgery, operative morbidity and mortality among the three groups. Compared with patients in the RH group (n=19), and the LH group (n=13), patients in the OH group (n=25) had significantly longer postoperative hospital stay (P< 0.05), time to oral intake (P < 0.05), time to get-out-of-bed (P < 0.05), a higher VAS score after 24 hours of surgery (P < 0.05) and a shorter operative time (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in these postoperative outcomes (P>0.05) between the RH group and the LH group. When the setup time in the RH group was excluded, the operative time of the RH group was significantly shorter than the LH group (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the operative time between the RH group and the OH group (P>0.05). The intraoperative blood loss of the RH group was the least among the three groups (P<0.05) and the intraoperative blood loss of the LH group was less than the OH group (P<0.05).Discussion Robotic, laparoscopic, and open hemihepatectomy were safe and efficacious treatments for giant liver hemangiomas. Robotic and laparoscopic hemihepatectomy were significantly better than open hemihepatectomy in intraoperative blood loss, postoperative recovery and pain score. Compared with laparoscopic hemihepatectomy, robotic hemihepatectomy was associated with significantly less intraoperative blood loss and shorter operative time.

scholarly journals Robotic, laparoscopic or open hemihepatectomy for giant liver hemangiomas of over 10 cm in diameter

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Minggen Hu ◽  
Kuang Chen ◽  
Xuan Zhang ◽  
Chenggang Li ◽  
Dongda Song ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Loss ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Liver Volume ◽  
Future Liver Remnant ◽  
Oral Intake ◽  
Postoperative Recovery ◽  
Postoperative Outcomes ◽  
Intraoperative Blood Loss ◽  
Liver Remnant ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Background To evaluate the clinical efficacy of robotic, laparoscopic, and open hemihepatectomy for giant liver hemangiomas. Methods From April 2011 to April 2017, consecutive patients who underwent hemihepatectomy for giant liver hemangiomas were included into this study. According to the type of operation, these patients were divided into the robotic hemihepatectomy (RH) group, the laparoscopic hemihepatectomy (LH) group, and the open hemihepatectomy (OH) group. The perioperative and short-term postoperative outcomes were compared among the three groups. The study was reported following the STROCSS criteria. Results There were no significant differences in age, sex, tumor location, body surface area (BSA), future liver remnant volume (FLR), standard liver volume (SLV), liver hemangioma volume, FLR/SLV, resected normal liver volume / resected volume, hepatic disease, rates of blood transfusion, liver function after 24 hours of surgery, operative morbidity and mortality among the three groups. Compared with patients in the RH group (n=19), and the LH group (n=13), patients in the OH group (n=25) had significantly longer postoperative hospital stay (P< 0.05), time to oral intake (P < 0.05), time to get-out-of-bed (P < 0.05), a higher VAS score after 24 hours of surgery (P < 0.05) and a shorter operative time (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in these postoperative outcomes (P>0.05) between the RH group and the LH group. When the setup time in the RH group was excluded, the operative time of the RH group was significantly shorter than the LH group (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the operative time between the RH group and the OH group (P>0.05). The intraoperative blood loss of the RH group was the least among the three groups (P<0.05) and the intraoperative blood loss of the LH group was less than the OH group (P<0.05). Discussion Robotic, laparoscopic, and open hemihepatectomy were safe and efficacious treatments for giant liver hemangiomas. Robotic and laparoscopic hemihepatectomy were significantly better than open hemihepatectomy in intraoperative blood loss, postoperative recovery and pain score. Compared with laparoscopic hemihepatectomy, robotic hemihepatectomy resulted in significantly less intraoperative blood loss and shorter operative time.

Effects of Preoperative Iodine Administration on Thyroidectomy for Hyperthyroidism: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 160 (6) ◽  
pp. 993-1002 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chung-Hsin Tsai ◽  
Po-Sheng Yang ◽  
Jie-Jen Lee ◽  
Tsang-Pai Liu ◽  
Chi-Yu Kuo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Postoperative Complications ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Thyroid Volume ◽  
Vocal Cord Palsy ◽  
Significant Heterogeneity ◽  
Intraoperative Blood Loss ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
And Control

Objective The current guidelines recommend that potassium iodide be given in the immediate preoperative period for patients with Graves’ disease who are undergoing thyroidectomy. Nonetheless, the evidence behind this recommendation is tenuous. The purpose of this study is to clarify the benefits of preoperative iodine administration from published comparative studies. Data Sources We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and CINAHL from 1980 to June 2018. Review Methods Studies were included that compared preoperative iodine administration and no premedication before thyroidectomy. For the meta-analysis, studies were pooled with the random-effects model. Results A total of 510 patients were divided into the iodine (n = 223) and control (n = 287) groups from 9 selected studies. Preoperative iodine administration was significantly associated with decreased thyroid vascularity and intraoperative blood loss. Significant heterogeneity was present among studies. We found no significant difference in thyroid volume or operative time. Furthermore, the meta-analysis showed no difference in the risk of postoperative complications, including vocal cord palsy, hypoparathyroidism/hypocalcemia, and hemorrhage or hematoma after thyroidectomy. Conclusion Preoperative iodine administration decreases thyroid vascularity and intraoperative blood loss. Nonetheless, it does not translate to more clinically meaningful differences in terms of operative time and postoperative complications.

scholarly journals Blood Loss from Transverse Versus Longitudinal Uterine Incision in Abdominal Myomectomy: A Randomized Controlled Trial

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alaa Elguindy ◽  
Hosam Hemeda ◽  
Mohamed Esmat Shawky ◽  
Mohamed Elsenity ◽  
Medhat Adel Elsayed ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Loss ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
P Value ◽  
Intraoperative Blood Loss ◽  
Postoperative Fever ◽  
Longitudinal Incision ◽  
Abdominal Myomectomy ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Uterine Incision ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Background: It is unclear whether transverse uterine incision is non-inferior to longitudinal incision during myomectomy with regard to bleeding. Our aim was to compare between transverse and longitudinal uterine incisions in myomectomy. Methods: A parallel randomized controlled single-blinded study in a university affiliated hospital, in the period between January 2017 and April 2018, in which 52 women candidates for abdominal myomectomy were randomized into transverse uterine incision or longitudinal uterine incision groups (26 in each group). Intraoperative blood loss (estimated directly by blood volume in suction bottle and linen towels and indirectly by difference between preoperative and postoperative hematocrit), operative time and postoperative fever were analyzed. Results: No statistically significant difference was found between transverse and longitudinal incisions regarding intraoperative blood loss (389.7 ± 98.56 ml vs 485.04 ± 230.6 ml respectively, p value=0.07), operative time (59.96 ± 16.78 min vs 66.58 ± 17.33 min respectively, p value=0.18), and postoperative fever (4% vs 8.33%, p value=0.6). Conclusion: Transverse uterine incision does not cause more blood loss than longitudinal incision and is a reasonable option during abdominal myomectomy. Trial registration: NCT03009812 at clinicaltrials.gov, registered January 2017

scholarly journals Blood loss from transverse versus longitudinal uterine incision in abdominal myomectomy: a randomized controlled trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alaa Elguindy ◽  
Hosam Hemeda ◽  
Mohamed Esmat Shawky ◽  
Mohamed Elsenity ◽  
Medhat Adel Elsayed ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Loss ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Intraoperative Blood Loss ◽  
Postoperative Fever ◽  
Longitudinal Incision ◽  
Abdominal Myomectomy ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Uterine Incision ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Background It is unclear whether transverse uterine incision is non-inferior to longitudinal incision during myomectomy with regard to bleeding. Our aim was to compare between transverse and longitudinal uterine incisions in myomectomy. Methods A parallel randomized controlled single-blinded study in a university affiliated hospital, in the period between January 2017 and April 2018, in which 52 women candidates for abdominal myomectomy were randomized into transverse uterine incision or longitudinal uterine incision groups (26 in each group). Intraoperative blood loss (estimated directly by blood volume in suction bottle and linen towels and indirectly by difference between preoperative and postoperative hematocrit), operative time and postoperative fever were analyzed. Results No statistically significant difference was found between transverse and longitudinal incisions regarding intraoperative blood loss (389.7 ± 98.56 ml vs 485.04 ± 230.6 ml respectively, p value = 0.07), operative time (59.96 ± 16.78 min vs 66.58 ± 17.33 min respectively, p value = 0.18), and postoperative fever (4% vs 8.33%, p value = 0.6). Conclusion Transverse uterine incision does not cause more blood loss than longitudinal incision and is a reasonable option during abdominal myomectomy. Trial registration: NCT03009812 at clinicaltrials.gov, registered January 2017

scholarly journals Blood Loss from Transverse Versus Longitudinal Uterine Incision in Abdominal Myomectomy: A Randomized Controlled Trial

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alaa Elguindy ◽  
Hosam Hemeda ◽  
Mohamed Esmat Shawky ◽  
Mohamed Elsenity ◽  
Medhat Adel Elsayed ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Loss ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
P Value ◽  
Intraoperative Blood Loss ◽  
Postoperative Fever ◽  
Longitudinal Incision ◽  
Abdominal Myomectomy ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Uterine Incision ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Background: It is unclear whether transverse uterine incision is non-inferior to longitudinal incision during myomectomy with regard to bleeding. Our aim was to compare between transverse and longitudinal uterine incisions in myomectomy.Methods: A parallel randomized controlled single-blinded study in a university affiliated hospital, in the period between January 2017 and April 2018, in which 52 women candidates for abdominal myomectomy were randomized into transverse uterine incision or longitudinal uterine incision groups (26 in each group). Intraoperative blood loss (estimated directly by blood volume in suction bottle and linen towels and indirectly by difference between preoperative and postoperative hematocrit), operative time and postoperative fever were analyzed.Results: No statistically significant difference was found between transverse and longitudinal incisions regarding intraoperative blood loss (389.7 ± 98.56 ml vs 485.04 ± 230.6 ml respectively, p value=0.07), operative time (59.96 ± 16.78 min vs 66.58 ± 17.33 min respectively, p value=0.18), and postoperative fever (4% vs 8.33%, p value=0.6).Conclusion: Transverse uterine incision does not cause more blood loss than longitudinal incision and is a reasonable option during abdominal myomectomy.Trial registration: NCT03009812 at clinicaltrials.gov, registered January 2017

The effect of embolization with N-butyl cyanoacrylate prior to surgical resection of cerebral arteriovenous malformations

1993 ◽  
Vol 78 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-69 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jafar J. Jafar ◽  
Adam J. Davis ◽  
Alejandro Berenstein ◽  
In Sup Choi ◽  
Mark J. Kupersmith
Keyword(s):  
Blood Loss ◽  
Surgical Resection ◽  
Surgical Complications ◽  
Neurological Outcome ◽  
Arteriovenous Malformations ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Preoperative Embolization ◽  
Intraoperative Blood Loss ◽  
Cerebral Arteriovenous Malformations ◽  
Significant Difference

✓ Endovascular therapy of cerebral arteriovenous malformations (AVM's) is an accepted adjunct to surgical therapy. However, the literature has not characterized the benefits or the liabilities of preoperative embolization. This series compares two groups of patients who underwent surgical resection of a cerebral AVM; one group (20 patients) received preoperative transfemoral selective embolization with N-butyl cyanoacrylate (NBCA) and the other group (13 patients) did not. In the group with preoperative embolization, the AVM's were larger (3.9 vs. 2.3 cm) and of a higher Spetzler-Martin grade (3.2 vs. 2.5) as compared to the nonembolized group. The NBCA embolization facilitated surgical resection. Arteries supplying the vascular malformation were readily distinguished from those supplying the normal brain parenchyma. Embolized vessels were compressible and easily cut with microscissors. No bleeding occurred from transected vessels. Operative time and intraoperative blood loss for the two groups were not statistically different, despite the significant differences in lesion size and grade. Endovascular complications included immediate and delayed hemorrhage (15%) and transient ischemia (5%); there were no embolization-related deaths. Postoperative complications for both groups included hemorrhage (15%), residual AVM (6%), and cerebrospinal fluid leak (3%); the mortality rate was 3%. There was no statistically significant difference in surgical complications between the embolized and nonembolized groups. Most patients (91%) in both groups had an excellent or good late neurological outcome, with no significant difference between the groups. This study concludes that preoperative NBCA embolization of AVM's makes lesions of larger size and higher grade the surgical equivalent of lesions of smaller size and lower grade by reducing operative time and intraoperative blood loss, with no statistically significant difference in surgical complications or long-term neurological outcome.

scholarly journals Coblation Versus Diode Laser Tonsillectomy: A Comparative Study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ameer A. Alaqeedy ◽  
Rasheed Ali Rashid ◽  
Raid M. Al-Ani
Keyword(s):  
Postoperative Pain ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Comparative Study ◽  
Diode Laser ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Postoperative Bleeding ◽  
P Value ◽  
Intraoperative Blood Loss ◽  
Laser Technique ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Introduction: The study aimed to compare the 2 procedures of tonsillectomy (coblation and diode laser) concerning the operative time, the amount of blood loss, postoperative pain, and other complications. Materials and Methods: A comparative study was conducted at many Private Hospitals, Baghdad, Iraq from February 2019- February 2020. Coblation and laser tonsillectomy were performed on the same patient (one for each side) which was blinded to the patients or their caregivers and the surgeon who did the tonsillectomy. Data concerning the age, gender, indications for tonsillectomy, operative time, the amount of the blood loss, post-tonsillectomy pain by VAS scores, and other complications were recorded for each patient. Results: Out of 62 participants, there were 34 (54.8%) females. The majority were from the age group ≤18 years (n=54, 87.1%). The operative time and amount of the intraoperative blood loss were significantly lower in the coblation than a diode laser tonsillectomy. However, the postoperative pain scores in the diode laser were a statistically significant difference less than the coblation group at the periods 3 hours, 8 hours, 24 hours, and 7 days (P-value<0.05). While there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups at 2 weeks postoperative period (P-value=0.392). No primary or secondary postoperative bleeding in all patients. Conclusion: coblation was better than diode laser because of shorter operative time and less intraoperative blood loss. However, the diode laser technique had lesser postoperative pain at the postoperative periods 3 hours, 8 hours, 24 hours, and 7 days than coblation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document