Surgical intervention may provides better outcomes for hip fracture in nonagenarian patients: A retrospective observational study.

Background: Hip fracture is a common disease in the elderly. Among these patients, surgical intervention for hip fracture should be carefully considered because of old age and multiple comorbidities. There are still insufficient comparisons between nonagenarian patients treated with surgery and those treated non-surgically. We studied hip fracture nonagenarian patients to compare the different outcomes between surgical and non-surgical treatments. Materials and methods: Nonagenarian patients visiting the emergency department with hip fractures between March 2010 and December 2020 were identified. Overall survival was estimated using multivariate Cox proportional hazards models. The mortality rates, the length of hospital stay, complication and readmission rates were also recorded. Results: A total of 173 patients who underwent surgery and 32 who received conservative treatments were included. The median survival time was 58.47 months in the OP group, which was significantly higher than the 24.28 months in the non-OP group. After adjusting for covariates, including age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), injury severity score, and fracture type, the risk of death was reduced by surgery (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.427; 95 % confidence interval [CI]: 0.207-0.882; p = 0.021). CCI was also an independent risk factor for poor survival rate (HR = 1.3; 95 % CI: 1.115-1.515; p = 0.001). After adjusting for several factors, surgery within 48 h improved overall survival (HR: 2.518; 95 % CI: 1.299-4.879; p = 0.006) in operative group. Conclusion: Our study suggests that surgical treatment may provide better survival for nonagenarian patients with hip fractures than non-operation, especially patients with less concurrent comorbidities.

Should we change the treatment plan in early hepatocellular carcinoma with chronic kidney disease?

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) has been considered to be a poor prognostic factor for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, few studies have focused on early HCC and the impact of CKD on survival, which should be considered in curative treatment for early HCC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with BCLC stage 0/A were enrolled from 2009 to 2019. A total of 383 patients were divided into Control group and CKD group, based on estimated glomerular filtration rate. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of different treatments were determined using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: The Control group had a significantly better OS than the CKD group (72.6 months vs. 56.7 months; p = 0.003). DFS was similar between the groups (62.2 months vs. 63.8 months, p = 0.717). In the Control group, the surgically treated (OP) group had significantly superior OS (65.0 months vs. 80.0 months, p = 0.014) and DFS (50.9 months vs. 70.2 months, p = 0.020) than the radiofrequency ablation-treated group. In the CKD group, the OP group showed a survival advantage in OS (70.6 months vs. 49.2 months, p = 0.004), while DFS was similar between treatment groups (56.0 months vs. 62.2 months, p = 0.097). CONCLUSION: CKD should not be considered to be a poor prognostic factor in early HCC patients. Moreover, hepatectomy should be carried out in CKD patient with early HCC for better prognosis if feasible.

Laparoscopic vs. open feeding jejunostomy: a systemic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Feeding jejunostomy is a solid way for patients to maintain enteral nutrition. However, debate over the superiority of the laparoscopic vs. laparotomic method has raised concerns in recent years. This systemic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the postoperative outcomes between these two approaches. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, and Scopus from the date of inception to April 2022 for studies comparing laparoscopic and open feeding jejunostomy. Study characteristics and outcomes were extracted from the included articles. The primary outcome was the relative risk (RR) of postoperative complications in each group. We also analyzed the major/minor complication rates and operations, excluding major concomitant procedures. The risk of bias of included studies were assessed using the ROBINS-I tool. The certainty of evidence was rated by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). RESULTS: A total of seven retrospective studies with 1195 patients in total were included in this systemic review and meta-analysis. Laparoscopic feeding jejunostomy carried a significantly lower postoperative complication rate (RR: 0.62; 95% CI, 0.42-0.91, p = 0.02, low certainty of evidence) compared with laparotomy, and the heterogeneity was moderate (I2 = 34%, p = 0.18). After excluding major concomitant procedures, the RR between the laparoscopic and open group was 0.48 (95% CI, 0.33-0.70, p < 0.001, low certainty of evidence), suggesting that the laparoscopic approach was superior in terms of postoperative complications. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that laparoscopic feeding jejunostomy might reduce the postoperative overall complication rate compared with open feeding jejunostomy.

Sac transection versus sac reduction during laparoscopic herniorrhaphy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Hernia repair techniques have evolved recently; however sac handling remains a critical step. Transection of the herniated sac as opposed to total sac reduction may simplify the procedure. However, residual sac tissue may increase the risk for seroma formation. We performed a systemic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and feasibility of transecting the hernia sac during laparoscopic herniorrhaphy. Relevant literature search was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, SCORPUS, and the Cochrane Library databases. Relevant studies that compared total reduction with transection of the herniated sac during laparoscopic herniorrhaphy were included. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of seromas. We also analyzed secondary outcomes including operative duration, postoperative pain scores, complications, and hernia recurrence rate. Of the 330 studies identified, four studies published between 2002 and 2020, with sample sizes ranging from 70 to 520 patients, met the inclusion criteria. Overall, 848 hernias were evaluated. We observed a high incidence of seroma formation in the sac transection group compared to that in the sac reduction group (OR 2.41; 95% CI 1.39 to 4.17, P = 0.002), but the groups did not differ significantly with respect to factor such as operative duration, postoperative complications, and pain score. Herniated sac transection during laparoscopic herniorrhaphy might be associated with a higher risk of seroma formation than that observed with sac reduction. The former approach did not show any significant benefits compared to the latter approach with respect to operative duration and postoperative complications.

Partial Versus Total Omentectomy in Patients with Gastric Cancer: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background: Surgical treatment is the key to cure localized gastric cancer. There is no strong evidence that supports the value of omentectomy. Thus, a meta-analysis was conducted to compare the safety and efficiency of partial and total omentectomy in patients with gastric cancer. Methods: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched. All studies that compared total and partial omentectomy as treatments for gastric cancer were included. The primary outcomes were patients' overall survival and disease-free survival, while the secondary outcomes were perioperative outcome and postoperative complications. Results: A total of nine studies were examined, wherein 1043 patients were included in the partial omentectomy group, and 1995 in the total omentectomy group. The partial omentectomy group was associated with better overall survival (hazard ratio: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.66 to 0.98, p = 0.04, I2 = 0%), shorter operative time, and lesser blood loss than the total omentectomy group. In addition, no statistically significant difference was observed in the number of dissected lymph nodes, length of hospital stays, complication rate, and disease-free survival. Conclusions: Our results show that, compared with total omentectomy in gastric cancer surgery, partial omentectomy had non-inferior oncological outcomes and comparable safety outcomes.