Cost-comparison of robotic versus laparoscopic colorectal resections: a mapped systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies.

Background: Robotic colorectal resections (RCR) have been gaining popularity recently due to several advantages in addition to oncological safety. The objective of this review is to evaluate the cost comparison of RCR versus laparoscopic colorectal resections (LCR). Methods: All types of comparative studies reporting the cost of RCR versus LCR were retrieved from the search of standard medical electronic databases and analysis was conducted by using the principles of meta-analysis on the statistical software RevMan version 5. Results: The search of medical databases yielded 13 studies (one randomised trial and 12 comparative studies) on 16,082 patients undergoing oncological and non-oncological colorectal resections. Eleven studies reported total cost whereas seven studies reported only operative cost. In the random effects model analysis, LCR was associated with the reduced total cost [standardised mean difference -62.34, 95% confidence interval (CI): -75.14 to -49.54, Z=9.55, P<0.001] as well as reduced operative cost (standardised mean difference -4.60, 95% CI: -5.90 to -3.31, Z=6.96, P<0.001) compared to RCR. However, there was significant heterogeneity [Tau2=346.74, Chi2=29,559.11, df =11 (P<0.001; I2=100%); Tau2=2.73, Chi2=832.21, df =6 (P<0.001; I2=99%)] among included studies. Conclusions: The LCR seems to be more economical as compared to the RCR in terms of operative cost as well as total cost (operative plus in-patient stay). However, due to statistically significant heterogeneity among included studies and paucity of the randomised trials, these findings should be taken cautiously.

Limberg flap for the management of pilonidal sinus reduces disease recurrence compared to Karydakis and Bascom procedure: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study is to compare the effectiveness of Limberg flap (LF) versus Karydakis and Bascom procedure to reduce the recurrence of pilonidal sinus disease. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: The data retrieved from the published randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing the effectiveness of LF versus Karydakis and Bascom procedure was analyzed using the principles of meta-analysis. The summated outcome of the dichotomous data was presented in risk ratio (RR). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Eighteen RCTs on 2073 patients comparing the effectiveness of LF versus Karydakis and or Bascom procedure for the surgical excision of pilonidal sinus disease were analyzed. In the random effects model analysis using the statistical software Review Manager 5.3, the LF was associated with the reduced risk (RR, 0.52; 95% CI: 0.29, 0.93; z=2.19; P=0.03) of disease recurrence after pilonidal sinus excision compared to Karydakis and Bascom procedure. On subgroup analysis the LF was still superior to Karidakys procedure (RR, 0.52; 95% CI: 0.23, 1.17; z=1.57; P=0.12) and Bascom procedure (RR, 0.49; 95% CI: 0.19, 1.29; z=1.44; P=0.15) but statistically it was not significant. CONCLUSIONS: LF seems to have clinical advantage over Karydakis and Bascom procedure in terms of reduced recurrence rate following surgical excision of pilonidal sinus. Although, this advantage was clinically persisted on subgroup analysis but failed to achieve statistical significance.

South Coast appendicular mass management (SCAM) survey.

BACKGROUND: Management of appendicular mass and interval appendicectomy remains a controversial issue. Recent publication of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) reported the incidence of around 20% neoplastic lesions in the age group of more than forty years among the interval appendicectomy group against magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) surveillance only which led to trial termination. The objective of this study is to evaluate the current practice of the management of appendicular mass in five major hospitals of South Coast of the England. METHODS: A proforma was designed and emailed to the general surgical department of five hospitals in the South Coast of England. The proforma completion rate and compliance were improved by direct telephone call to the on-call registrars and consultants to collect data. RESULTS: Fifty-three surgeons (22 consultants, 27 ST3-ST8 grade surgical trainees and 4 SAS grades) completed the proforma. The clinical, hematological and computerized tomography (CT) based diagnostic criteria, and in-patient intravenous antibiotics (IV ABTXs) in addition to the radiological drainage in amenable cases for appendicular mass/abscess were mostly agreed initial management plan among surgeons. Normalization of inflammatory markers and radiological resolution were agreed discharge indicators. Agreed follow up investigations were CT scan (by 23%), Colonoscopy (by 13%), and both CT and colonoscopy (by 57%) after discharging patients. Only 17% surgeons offered planned interval appendicectomy and 62% surgeons offered interval appendectomy in selective cases of appendicular mass within 6 weeks to 6 months after discharge. CONCLUSIONS: South Coast appendicular mass management (SCAM) survey confirms diverse practice to manage appendicular mass/abscess among surgeons working in South Coast hospitals. A substantial percentage of surgeons do not offer interval appendectomy to patients potentially leaving neoplastic lesions in situ.

Robotic total meso-rectal excision for rectal cancer: A systematic review following the publication of the ROLARR trial.

AIM: To compare outcomes in patients undergoing rectal resection by robotic total meso-rectal excision (RTME) vs laparoscopic total meso-rectal excision (LTME). METHODS: Standard medical electronic databases such as PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Scopus were searched to find relevant articles. The data retrieved from all types of included published comparative trials in patients undergoing RTME vs LTME was analysed using the principles of meta-analysis. The operative, post-operative and oncological outcomes were evaluated to assess the effectiveness of both techniques of TME. The summated outcome of continuous variables was expressed as standardized mean difference (SMD) and dichotomous data was presented in odds ratio (OR). RESULTS: One RCT (ROLARR trial) and 27 other comparative studies reporting the non-oncological and oncological outcomes following RTME vs LTME were included in this review. In the random effects model analysis using the statistical software Review Manager 5.3, the RTME was associated with longer operation time (SMD, 0.46; 95%CI: 0.25, 0.67; z = 4.33; P = 0.0001), early passage of first flatus (P = 0.002), lower risk of conversion (P = 0.00001) and shorter hospitalization (P = 0.01). The statistical equivalence was seen between RTME and LTME for non-oncological variables like blood loss, morbidity, mortality and re-operation risk. The oncological variables such as recurrence (P = 0.96), number of harvested nodes (P = 0.49) and positive circumferential resection margin risk (P = 0.53) were also comparable in both groups. The length of distal resection margins was similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: RTME is feasible and oncologically safe but failed to demonstrate any superiority over LTME for many surgical outcomes except early passage of flatus, lower risk of conversion and shorter hospitalization.

A systematic review comparing laparoscopic vs open adhesiolysis in patients with adhesional small bowel obstruction.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether surgical outcomes differ between laparoscopic vs open approach for adhesiolysis in patients presenting with adhesional small bowel obstruction (ASBO). DATA SOURCE: A systematic review of literature on published studies reporting the surgical outcomes after laparoscopic vs open adhesiolysis for ASBO was undertaken using the principles of meta-analysis. RESULTS: Fourteen comparative studies on 38,057 patients, evaluating the surgical outcomes in patients undergoing laparoscopic vs open adhesiolysis for ASBO were analyzed. Laparoscopic adhesiolysis resulted in the reduced risk of morbidity (P < .00001), mortality (P < .0001), and surgical infections (P = .003). In addition, the risk of respiratory complications, cardiac complications, bowel resection, and venous thromboembolism was lower with shorter hospitalization in laparoscopic adhesiolysis group. However, statistical equivalence was seen in variables of duration of operation and iatrogenic enterotomies. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic adhesiolysis for ASBO seems to have clinically proven advantage over open approach.

Use of Prucalopride for Chronic Constipation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Published Randomized, Controlled Trials.

This article highlights the role of prucalopride in the management of chronic constipation based upon the principles of meta-analysis using data reported in the published randomized, controlled trials. Sixteen randomized, controlled trials on 3943 patients reported the effectiveness of prucalopride in patients with chronic constipation. Prucalopride successfully increased the frequency of spontaneous bowel movements per week in all variable doses of 1 mg (standardized mean difference [SMD], 0.42 [95% CI, 0.18-0.66; P = 0.006]), 2 mg (SMD, 0.34 [95% CI, 0.11-0.56; P = 0.003]), and 4 mg (SMD, 0.33 [95% CI, 0.22-0.44; P = 0.00001]). The risks of adverse events or side effects such as headache, abdominal cramps, excessive flatulence, dizziness, diarrhea, and rash were higher (odds ratio, 1.70 [95% CI, 1.27 to -2.27; P = 0.0004]) in prucalopride group. Prucalopride is clinically a beneficial pharmacotherapy for chronic constipation and its routine use may be considered in patients with chronic simple laxative-resistant constipation.

Milligan-Morgan (Open) Versus Ferguson Haemorrhoidectomy (Closed): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Published Randomized, Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to systematically analyse the randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) comparing Ferguson or closed haemorrhoidectomy (CH) versus open haemorrhoidectomy (OH) or Milligan-Morgan haemorrhoidectomy in the management of haemorrhoidal disease (HD). METHODS: RCTs on the effectiveness of CH and OH in the management of HD were analysed systematically using RevMan(®), and combined outcome was expressed as odds ratio (OR) and standardized mean difference. RESULTS: Eleven CRTs encompassing 1326 patients were analysed systematically. There was significant heterogeneity among included trials. Therefore, in the random effects model, CH was associated with a reduced post-operative pain (SMD, -0.36; 95 % CI, -0.64, -0.07; z = 2.45; p = 0.01), faster wound healing (OR, 0.08; 95 % CI, 0.02, 0.24; z = 4.33; p < 0.0001), lesser risk of post-operative bleeding (OR, 0.50; 95 % CI, 0.27, 0.91; z = 2.27; p < 0.02) and prolonged duration of operation (SMD, 6.10; 95 % CI, 3.21, 8.98; z = 4.13; p < 0.0001). But the variables such as pain on defecation (SMD, -0.33; 95 % CI, -0.68, 0.03; z = 1.82; p = 0.07), length of hospital stay, post-operative complications, HD recurrence and risk of surgical site infection were similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: CH has clinically measurable advantages over OH in terms of reduced post-operative pain, lower risk of post-operative bleeding and faster wound healing.

Improving the view during flexible sigmoidoscopy: a systematic review of published randomized, controlled trials comparing the use of oral bowel preparation versus enema bowel preparation.

To systematically analyse the published randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the use of oral bowel preparation (OBP) versus enema bowel preparation (EBP) for diagnostic or screening flexible sigmoidoscopy. Published RCTs, comparing the use of OBP versus EBP, were analysed using RevMan(®), and the combined outcomes were expressed as odds ratios (OR). Eight RCTs evaluating 2457 patients were retrieved from the standard electronic databases. There was significant heterogeneity among included trials. The compliance of the patients (p = 0.32) and the acceptability of both bowel preparation regimens (OR, 1.42; 95% CI, 0.67, 2.99; z = 0.92; p = 0.36) were similar in both groups. In addition, the incidence of adverse reactions (OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.54, 1.41; z = 0.57; p = 0.57), the risk of incomplete procedure due to poor bowel preparation (p = 0.18) and the incidence of poor bowel preparation (OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.63, 2.33; z = 0.59; p = 0.56) were also similar in both groups. EBP and OBP were equally effective for bowel preparation in patients undergoing flexible sigmoidoscopy. Although this study failed to demonstrate the superiority of EBP, at least equivalent efficacy for bowel cleansing may be extrapolated.

Limited segmental rectal resection in the treatment of deeply infiltrating rectal endometriosis: 10 years' experience from a tertiary referral unit.

BACKGROUND: The management of symptomatic rectal endometriosis is a challenging condition that may necessitate limited stripping or limited segmental anterior rectal resection (LSARR) depending upon the extent and severity of the disease. OBJECTIVE: To report the efficacy of LSARR in terms of pain, quality of life and short- and long-term complications-in particular, those pertaining to bowel function. METHODS: The case notes of all patients undergoing LSARR were reviewed. The analysed variables included surgical complications, overall symptomatic improvement rate, dysmenorrhoea, dyspareunia, and dyschezia. Chronic pain was measured using a visual analogue scale. Quality of life was measured using the EQ-5D questionnaire. Bowel symptoms were assessed using the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Centre (MSKCC) questionnaire. RESULTS: Seventy-four women who underwent LSARR by both open and laparoscopic approaches were included in this study. Sixty-nine (93.2%) women reported improvement in pain and the same percentage would recommend the similar procedure to a friend with the same problem. Approximately 42% of women who wished to conceive had at least one baby. The higher frequency of defecation was a problem in the early post-operative period but this settled in later stages without influencing the quality of life score. Post-operative complications were recorded in 14.9% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: LSARR for rectal endometriosis is associated with a high degree of symptomatic relief. Pain relief achieved following LSARR does not appear to degrade with time. As anticipated, some rectal symptoms persist in few patients after long-term follow-up but LSARR is nonetheless still associated with a very high degree of patient satisfaction.

Specimen retrieval approaches in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal resections: a literature-based review of published studies.

OBJECTIVE: To review the published studies reporting various specimen retrieval incisions being used by colorectal surgeons in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal resections (LCR). METHODS: Standard medical electronic databases were searched to find relevant articles and a summary conclusion was generated. RESULTS: There were 43 studies reporting various approaches used for the purpose of specimen retrieval in 2388 patients undergoing LCR. The most common approaches were periumbilical midline incision (1260 reported case in the literature), transverse incision (583 reported cases in the literature) in the right- or left iliac fossa, depending on the side of colonic resection, and Pfannensteil incision (293 reported cases in the literature). Periumbilical midline incision was associated with the higher risk of developing incisional hernia (odds ratio 53.72; 95% confidence interval 7.48-386.04; Z = 3.96; P = 0.0001). In terms of surgical site infection (SSI), there was no difference between the three common approaches to specimen retrieval. Transanal and transvaginal approaches were associated with higher risk of SSI. CONCLUSIONS: Midline, transverse and Pfannensteil incisions were the most commonly used approaches for specimen retrieval following LCR. Midline incision was associated with higher risk of incisional hernia. Risk of SSI was similar in all three common approaches. The transanal and transvaginal approaches pose a higher risk of SSI. These conclusions are based on the combined outcome of published case series, case reports and comparative studies. Randomized, controlled trials with longer follow-up are required before recommending the routine use of any approach for specimen retrieval in patients undergoing LCR.

Diagnostic laparoscopy through deep inguinal ring: a literature-based review on the forgotten approach to visualize the abdominal cavity during emergency and elective groin hernia repair.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the published literature on the role of diagnostic laparoscopy through deep inguinal ring (DL-DR) during groin hernia repair. METHODS: Standard electronic databases were searched reporting article in any language on the role of DL-DR during groin hernia repair regardless of the age and sex of patients. RESULTS: Thirty-one articles on 5745 patients undergoing DL-DR during groin hernia repair were retrieved from the electronic databases. There was 1 randomized, controlled trial, 7 case reports and 2 case series on 58 adult patients mainly targeting assessment of bowel viability following spontaneous reduction of the strangulated groin hernia. Twenty-one articles, either retrospective or prospective case series on 5687 were reported on pediatric patients aiming to detect a contralateral patent processus vaginalis or synchronous groin hernia. Overall, the laparoscopy group had a reduced operative time, reduced length of hospital stay, lower complication rate, and earlier return to normal activity. DL-DR success rates were reported in >95% of patients. Contralateral patent processus vaginalis indicative of inguinal hernia was found in >48% of children. There was no major morbidity reported in any group. CONCLUSIONS: DL-DR during groin hernia repair may be performed safely when indicated. The routine use of DL-DR is an established practice in pediatric surgery. There is still insufficient evidence to recommend the routine use of DL-DR in adults.

Naturalistic outcomes of community treatment orders: antipsychotic long-acting injections versus oral medication.

BACKGROUND: Community treatment orders (CTOs) are initiated to compel the patient in the community to take part in a management plan, of which medication is often a part. CTOs were introduced in 2008, in England and Wales. We evaluated naturalistic outcomes of CTOs, according to the antipsychotic formulation prescribed at CTO initiation. METHODS: A cohort study with prospective consecutive sampling and 1-year follow-up was conducted in a large mental health trust in South London. Measures included: demographics, psychotropics and CTO outcomes. Comparison groups were long-acting injection (LAI) versus oral formulations only, for the primary outcomes of time to CTO cessation in days and time to first hospital admission in days, whilst the CTO remained active. RESULTS: For the 188 included patients, the CTO ceased within 1 year, either due to revocation (22.3%), discharge (28.1%) or lapse (19.7%). The CTO was renewed at 6 months for 92 (48.9%) patients, and then 56 (29.8%) were renewed again at 12 months. The antipsychotic formulation at CTO initiation was more likely to be LAI (60.6%) than oral (39.4%). Time to CTO cessation was longer for LAI than oral (median 251 versus 182 days, p = 0.030). A total of 54 patients experienced at least one admission; there was no difference between groups by drug formulation (oral 28.4% versus LAI 28.9%, p = 0.933). The mean time to first admission was 147.1 days and did not differ by formulation. CONCLUSIONS: CTO duration was longer for those prescribed an antipsychotic LAI at CTO initiation, although the time to first admission and number of admissions did not differ between groups. CTOs not only compel treatment, but bind services to the patient, resulting in more intensive follow up. Whether enhanced treatment, via oral or LAI and enabled by the CTO, translates into improved clinical outcomes is yet to be determined.

A systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the effectiveness of lightweight mesh against heavyweight mesh in influencing the incidence of chronic groin pain following laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair.

BACKGROUND: A systematic analysis was conducted of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing lightweight mesh (LWM) with heavyweight mesh in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. METHODS: Data extracted from the included RCTs were analyzed according to the principles of meta-analysis. RESULTS: Eleven RCTs encompassing 2,189 patients were analyzed. In a fixed-effects model, operating time, postoperative pain, and recurrence rate were statistically similar between LWM and heavyweight mesh. LWM was associated with fewer perioperative complications and a reduced risk for developing chronic groin pain. There was also a reduced risk for developing other groin symptoms, such as foreign body sensations, but it was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: The use of LWM for laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair is not associated with an increased risk for hernia recurrence. LWM reduces the incidence of chronic groin pain, groin stiffness, and foreign body sensations. Therefore, LWM may routinely be used in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. However, high-quality RCTs with longer follow-up periods are required to validate these findings.

A meta-analysis examining the use of tacker mesh fixation versus glue mesh fixation in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to systematically analyze the randomized trials comparing tacker mesh fixation with glue mesh fixation (GMF) in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair (LIHR). METHODS: Standard electronic database were searched to retrieve relevant randomized trials comparing tacker mesh fixation with GMF in LIHR, which were analyzed systematically using RevMan. RESULTS: Five randomized controlled trials encompassing 1,001 patients were retrieved from the electronic databases. In a random-effects model, operating time, postoperative pain, postoperative complications, length of hospital stay and risk for hernia recurrence were statistically comparable between the 2 techniques of mesh fixation in LIHR. However, GMF was associated with a reduced risk for developing chronic groin pain. CONCLUSIONS: GMF in LIHR does not increase the risk for hernia recurrence and reduces the risk for developing chronic groin pain. It is comparable with tacker mesh fixation in terms of operation time, postoperative pain, postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, and risk for hernia recurrence.

Intra-abdominal collections following laparoscopic versus open appendicectomy: an experience of 516 consecutive cases at a district general hospital.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study is to evaluate the incidence of intra-abdominal collections (IACs) in all patients undergoing laparoscopic (LA) and open appendicectomy (OA) from April 2009 to October 2011 in a district general hospital with expertise in minimally invasive surgery (MIS). METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients undergoing appendicectomy in the specified time period was carried out. IACs were identified from various in-hospital data resources. Severity of appendicitis was assessed from histology reports. RESULTS: 516 patients were identified, of whom 242 (47 %) underwent OA and 274 (53 %) LA. Twenty-six (5 %) patients were found to have IACs postoperatively. Fifteen (5.5 %) IACs were identified in the laparoscopic group and 11 (4.5 %) in the open group. There was no statistically significant difference in the risk of developing IACs in open versus laparoscopic groups [odds ratio (OR) 1.22, confidence interval (CI) 0.55-2.70, P = 0.63]. Patients were twelve times more likely to develop IACs with an appendix identified as being necrotic or perforated on histology (OR 12.24, CI 5.29-28.32, P < 0.0001). There was a trend towards shorter total hospital stay in the LA (3.58 days, CI 3.0-4.1 days) compared with OA (4.31 days, CI 3.7-4.9 days, P = 0.082) group, although this was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Increased rates of IAC following LA have been identified in some studies. Our series shows that, in a centre with adequate MIS experience, the IAC rate following LA is comparable to that of the open approach and should not deter surgeons with adequate support and resources.

Single layer versus double layer suture anastomosis of the gastrointestinal tract.

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal anastomosis (GIA) is an essential step to maintain the continuity of gastrointestinal tract following intestinal resection. GIA is still a source of significant controversy among surgeons due to the use of variety of approaches. Adequate apposition by single layer or double layer anastomosis may affect outcome after GIA OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review is to compare the effectiveness of single layer GIA (SGIA) versus double layer GIA (DGIA) being used in general surgery. The particular question we would attempt to answer will be; is single layer hand made GIA in surgical patients is as effective as double layer? SEARCH METHODS: The CCCG (Colorectal Cancer Cochrane Group) Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) on The Cochrane Library (Issue 1, 2011), MEDLINE (until April 2011) , EMBASE ( The Intelligent Gateway to Biomedical & Pharmacological Information until April 2011), LILACS (The Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Library until April 2011 ) and Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-E until April 2011) using the medical subject headings (MeSH) terms were searched without date, language or age restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised, controlled trials comparing the effectiveness of SGIA versus DGIA DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors independently scrutinised search results, selected eligible studies and extracted data. MAIN RESULTS: Seven randomised, controlled trials encompassing 842 patients undergoing SGIA versus DGIA were retrieved from the electronic databases. There were 408 patients in the SGIA group and 432 patients in the DGIA group. All included studies were small, with sample sizes ranging from 60 to 172. There was no heterogeneity among the included trials. Therefore, in the fixed effects model, incidence of anastomotic dehiscence, peri-operative complications and mortality was statistically equivalent between two techniques of GIA. Average hospital stay following SGIA and DGIA was also comparable. However, SGIA was superior in terms of shorter operative time. Sensitivity analysis of relatively good quality and poor quality trials supported same conclusion. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: SGIA can be performed quicker as compared to double layer GIA. SGIA is comparable to DGIA in terms of anastomotic leak, peri-operative complications, mortality and hospital stay. SGIA may routinely be used for GIA following bowel resection. However, since this conclusion is derived from smaller number of patients recruited in relatively moderate quality trials, further trials should be aimed to reduce the limitations of this review.

Laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication with or without short gastric vessel division: a meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this work is to systematically analyse the prospective randomised controlled trials on laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication (LNF) with and without short gastric vessel division (SGVD) for management of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD). METHODS: After an extensive literature search, all previous trials on laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication with and without SGVD for management of GORD were assessed. Those meeting study quality criteria were analysed to generate summative data expressed by standardised mean difference (SMD) and risk ratio (RR). RESULTS: Five randomised controlled trials on 388 patients qualified for the meta-analysis. There were 194 patients in the no-SGVD group and 194 patients in the SGVD group. No-SGVD was associated with shorter operative time and length of stay. In both fixed- and random-effects models, there were no statistically significant differences in laparoscopic to open conversion rate or complications between the two groups. Three trials presented data on 1-year follow-up, with 118 patients in the no-SGVD group and 112 patients in the SGVD group. There was no statistically significant difference in heartburn, dysphagia, regurgitation or gas bloat syndrome between these two groups. Two trials presented data on 10-year follow-up, with 84 patients in the no-SGVD group and 86 patients in the SGVD group. There was no significant difference in heartburn, dysphagia, regurgitation or gas bloat syndrome between these two groups either. There was no heterogeneity between trials. CONCLUSIONS: Based on this review, SGVD in LNF is associated with longer operative time and hospital stay. However, there is no difference in terms of functional outcomes for 1- and 10-year follow-up. Routine use of SGVD may therefore not be necessary in LNF.

Pseudoaneurysm of the left ventricle following apical approach TAVI.

Symptomatic severe aortic stenosis carries a two year survival of only 50%. However many patients are unsuitable for conventional aortic valve replacement as they are considered too high risk due to significant co-morbidities. Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI) offers a viable alternative for this high risk patient group, either by the femoral or apical route. This article reports a case of a pseudoaneurysm of the left ventricle following an apical approach TAVI in an elderly lady with severe aortic stenosis. To our knowledge pseduoaneuryms of the left ventricle have been reported infrequently in the literature and has yet to be established as a recognised complication of TAVI.

Information on the Internet about colorectal cancer: patient attitude and potential toward Web browsing. A prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with colorectal cancer who seek to improve their knowledge of health and treatment options can now access in a few seconds data that would previously have required hours of research. Our aim was to evaluate the attitudes of patients toward Web browsing for information on colorectal cancer. METHODS: We surveyed all patients attending a colorectal cancer follow-up clinic between January and August 2007 on their use of the Internet to obtain information on colorectal cancer. RESULTS: In all, 439 patients with mean age of 68.6 years participated in the study. Of these, 24% reported using the Internet to obtain colorectal cancer information. Most participants used the Google search engine. Only 13% of participants confirmed that colorectal cancer information on the Internet was helpful in decision-making. Patients under the age of 65 years were more likely to have Internet access (p < 0.001), more likely to use the Internet to find colorectal cancer information (p = 0.005) and more likely to access a site recommended by a colorectal specialist (p = 0.002). Among Internet users, men were slightly more likely than women to use the Internet, although the difference was not significant (p = 0.20). CONCLUSION: The Internet is a useful tool for disseminating information about colorectal cancer. The best sites are still difficult for patients to distinguish from the thousands of sites returned by search engines. This study demonstrates that the level of potential interest is sufficient to justify the development of a departmental or regional colorectal cancer network of websites and indicates areas of interest for patients.

A meta-analysis on the clinical effectiveness of transversus abdominis plane block.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To study the efficacy of the transversus abdominal plane (TAP) block. DESIGN: Meta-analysis. SETTING: District general hospital. PATIENTS: 86 patients in the TAP block group and 88 in the non-TAP block group. MEASUREMENTS: Statistical analyses were performed using Microsoft Excel 2007 for Windows XP. Hedges g statistic was used for the calculation of standardized mean differences (SMD). Binary data (nausea) were summarized as risk ratios (RR). MAIN RESULTS: Patients with TAP block required less morphine after 24 hours than those who did not have the block (random effects model: SMD -4.81, 95% CI [-7.45, -2.17], z = -3.57, P < 0.001). There was less time to first request of morphine in the non-TAP block group (random effects model: SMD 4.80, 95% CI [2.16, 7.43], z = 3.57, P < 0.001). Patients in the TAP block group had less pain up to 24 hours postoperatively. No statistical differences were found with respect to nausea. CONCLUSIONS: TAP block reduces the need for postoperative opioid use, it increases the time first request for further analgesia, it provides more effective pain relief, and it reduces opioid-associated side effects.