Inguinal hernia repair in patients with artificial urinary sphincter after radical prostatectomy.

PURPOSE: Stress urinary incontinence (UI) often develops after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer, and in those patients with moderate-to-severe stress UI an artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) is implanted. Inguinal hernias (IHs) often occur after radical prostatectomy. As the prevalence of AUS implantation increases, it is possible to encounter patients with IHs undergoing AUS implantation (IHA). This study investigated our treatment and discussed an appropriate approach for IHAs. METHODS: We retrospectively investigated patients who underwent IH repair with AUS implantation at our hospital from January 2018 to March 2023. We classified IHAs into Types A-D based on the positions of the IHs and AUS devices (the positions of the control pump, pressure-regulating balloon, and connecting tube). The hernia and control pump were ipsilateral in Types A and B, whereas the hernia and pressure-regulating balloon were ipsilateral in Types A and C. RESULTS: This study included 12 IHs of 11 patients. The median patient age was 77 years. We conducted open repair in nine patients with all types and laparoscopic repair in two patients with Type B. The median operation times for unilateral and bilateral repairs were 96 and 182 min, respectively. There were no complications with AUS or hernia surgeries. CONCLUSION: IHA has its own characteristics, and multidisciplinary knowledge thereof will help surgeons safely perform IH surgery.

Clinical practice guidelines for pancreatic cancer 2016 from the Japan Pancreas Society: a synopsis

OBJECTIVES: Clinical Practice Guidelines for Pancreatic Cancer based on Evidence-Based Medicine 2006 were first published by the Japan Pancreas Society, and they were revised to Clinical Practice Guidelines for Pancreatic Cancer 2009 in July 2009 and were further revised to Clinical Practice Guidelines for Pancreatic Cancer 2013 in October 2013. These guidelines were established according to evidence-based medicine. In October 2016, the Clinical Practice Guidelines for Pancreatic Cancer were newly revised in Japanese. METHODS: In the revised version, we introduced the concepts of GRADE - grading recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation approach for better understanding of the current guidelines. RESULTS: The guidelines show algorithms for the diagnosis, treatment, and chemotherapy of pancreatic cancer and address 7 subjects: diagnosis, surgical therapy, adjuvant therapy, radiation therapy, chemotherapy, stent therapy, and palliative medicine. They include 51 clinical questions and 76 statements. There are statements corresponding to clinical questions, evidence levels, recommended strengths, and agreement rates. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines represent the most standard clinical and practical management at this time in Japan. This is the English synopsis of the Clinical Practice Guidelines for Pancreatic Cancer 2016 in Japanese, which aims to disseminate the Japanese guidelines worldwide for the introduction of Japanese clinical management of these diseases.

Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for cholelithiasis 2016

BACKGROUND: This clinical practice guideline addresses six questions related to liberation from mechanical ventilation in critically ill adults. It is the result of a collaborative effort between the American Thoracic Society (ATS) and the American College of Chest Physicians (CHEST). METHODS: A multidisciplinary panel posed six clinical questions in a population, intervention, comparator, outcomes (PICO) format. A comprehensive literature search and evidence synthesis was performed for each question, which included appraising the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. The Evidence-to-Decision framework was applied to each question, requiring the panel to evaluate and weigh the importance of the problem, confidence in the evidence, certainty about how much the public values the main outcomes, magnitude and balance of desirable and undesirable outcomes, resources and costs associated with the intervention, impact on health disparities, and acceptability and feasibility of the intervention. RESULTS: Evidence-based recommendations were formulated and graded initially by subcommittees and then modified following full panel discussions. The recommendations were confirmed by confidential electronic voting; approval required that at least 80% of the panel members agree with the recommendation. CONCLUSIONS: The panel provides recommendations regarding liberation from mechanical ventilation. The details regarding the evidence and rationale for each recommendation are presented in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine and CHEST