RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Surgery is currently the only effective treatment for retroperitoneal tumors that do not involve any specific organ. The use of robots for removing both benign and malignant retroperitoneal tumors is considered safe and feasible. However, there is insufficient evidence to determine whether robotic retroperitoneal tumor resection (RMBRs) is superior to open retroperitoneal malignant resection (OMBRs). This study compares the short-term outcomes of robotic excision of benign and malignant retroperitoneal tumors with open excision of the same-sized tumors. METHODS: The study compared demographics and outcomes of patients who underwent robotic resection (n = 54) vs open resection (n = 54) of retroperitoneal tumors between March 2018 and December 2022. A 1:1 matching analysis was conducted to ensure a fair comparison. RESULTS: The study found that RBMRs resulted in reduced operative time (OT), estimated blood loss (EBM), and postoperative hospital stay (PSH) when compared to OBMRs. Additionally, RBMRs reduced EBL, PHS, and OT for patients with malignant tumor involvement in major vessels. No significant differences were found in tumor size, blood transfusion rate, and morbidity rate between the RBMRs and OBMRs groups. CONCLUSION: When comparing RMBRs to OMBRs, it was observed that RMBR was associated with lower (EBL), shorter postoperative hospital stays (PHS), and reduced operative time (OT) in a specific group of patients with both benign and malignant tumors.
Assuntos
Aorta Abdominal , Tempo de Internação , Duração da Cirurgia , Neoplasias Retroperitoneais , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos , Veia Cava Inferior , Humanos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos/métodos , Veia Cava Inferior/cirurgia , Veia Cava Inferior/patologia , Masculino , Feminino , Neoplasias Retroperitoneais/cirurgia , Neoplasias Retroperitoneais/patologia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Aorta Abdominal/cirurgia , Tempo de Internação/estatística & dados numéricos , Idoso , Estudos Retrospectivos , Perda Sanguínea Cirúrgica/estatística & dados numéricos , Adulto , Resultado do Tratamento , Rim/cirurgia , Rim/patologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: It is known that difficulty sleeping after a fracture can have negative effects on both mental and physical health and may prolong the recovery process. The objective of this study is to explore how sleep quality and psychological health are linked in patients with pelvic and acetabulum fractures. METHODS: A study was conducted on 265 patients between 2018 and 2022 who had suffered pelvic and acetabulum fractures. The study examined various factors, including age, gender, cause of injury, post-operative complications, and injury severity. The study employed ordinal logistic regression to examine the relationship between various pelvic fractures and seven subscales of the Majeed Pelvic Score (MPS), as well as the Sleep Disorder Questionnaire (SDQ) and Beck Depression Inventory (BDI). The study focused on the postoperative outcome one year after surgery, and each patient was assessed at the one-year mark after surgical intervention. Additionally, the study evaluated the functional outcome, sleep quality, and psychological disorders of the patients. RESULTS: From 2018 to 2022, a total of 216 patients suffered from pelvic and acetabulum fractures. Among them, 6.6% experienced borderline clinical depression, and 45.2% reported mild mood disturbances. Anxiety was found to be mild to moderate in 46% of Tile C and posterior acetabulum wall fracture patients. About 24.8% of patients reported insomnia, while 23.1% reported sleep movement disorders. However, no significant correlation was found between fracture types and sleep disorders. The mean Majeed pelvic score (MPS) was 89.68. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with pelvic and acetabular fractures typically experience functional improvement, but may also be at increased risk for insomnia and sleep movement disorders, particularly for certain types of fractures. Psychological well-being varies between fracture groups, with signs of borderline clinical depression observed in some cases. However, anxiety levels do not appear to be significantly correlated with pelvic and acetabular fractures.
Assuntos
Fraturas Ósseas , Fraturas do Quadril , Transtornos dos Movimentos , Ossos Pélvicos , Distúrbios do Início e da Manutenção do Sono , Fraturas da Coluna Vertebral , Humanos , Acetábulo/lesões , Estudos Transversais , Qualidade do Sono , Fraturas Ósseas/complicações , Fraturas Ósseas/epidemiologia , Fraturas Ósseas/cirurgia , Ossos Pélvicos/cirurgia , Ossos Pélvicos/lesões , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
The posterolateral tibial plateau fracture is an uncommon intra-articular injury and mostly needed surgery. However, its surgical approach remains controversial. This manuscript describes an anterolateral approach to treat posterolateral tibial plateau fractures and evaluates the patient's functional outcomes. From June 2018 to July 2021 seventeen patients with posterolateral tibial plateau fractures were surgically treated through an anterolateral approach. The intraoperative and postoperative follow-up indicators were recorded. The reduction quality of fractures was assessed using Rasmussen radiological score, and postsurgical functional recovery was estimated using Rasmussen clinical score and Lysholm score. The mean follow-up interval was 28.71 ± 9.61 months (range 18-44). The surgery time and blood loss were 111.06 ± 15.62 min (range 85-140) and 118.12 ± 38.45 mL (range 80-250) separately. Postoperatively, the Rasmussen radiological score was 16.24 ± 2.33 (range 12-18). The average time of bone union was 14.29 ± 1.53 weeks (range 12-18). At the final follow-up, the average PTS and MPTA were 9.71 ± 2.76° (range 5-14°) and 86.82 ± 2.04° (range 84-90°) separately. A satisfactory articular reduction was achieved in 16 patients (94.1%). The final ROM was 123.29 ± 19.70° (range 60-142°). The Rasmussen clinical score and Lysholm score were 25.71 ± 5.74 (range 10-30) and 91.47 ± 6.50 (range 75-98) separately. Anterolateral approach has minimal risk of intraoperative neurovascular injuries in the popliteal fossa with satisfactory results. The hardware removal was also facilitated. This approach is feasible, safe and efficient.
Assuntos
Fraturas da Tíbia , Fraturas do Planalto Tibial , Humanos , Resultado do Tratamento , Fixação Interna de Fraturas/métodos , Consolidação da Fratura , Fraturas da Tíbia/diagnóstico por imagem , Fraturas da Tíbia/cirurgia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Placas ÓsseasRESUMO
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Local anesthetics (LAs) are widely used to infiltrate into surgical wounds for postoperative analgesia. Different adjuvants like dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine, when added to LA agents, could improve and prolong analgesia. The aim of this trial was to evaluate the analgesic efficacy and opioid-sparing properties of dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine when added to ropivacaine for wound infiltration in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). METHODS: We conducted a controlled study among 68 adult patients undergoing TLIF, which was prospective, randomized and double-blind in nature. The participants were divided into four equal groups at random. Group R was given 150 mg of 1% ropivacaine (15 mL) and 15 mL of normal saline. Group R + DXM received 150 mg of 1% ropivacaine (15 mL) and 10 mg of dexamethasone (15 mL). Group R + DEX received 150 mg of 1% ropivacaine (15 mL) and 1 µg/kg of dexmedetomidine (15 mL). Lastly, group R + DXM + DEX was given 150 mg of 1% ropivacaine (15 mL), 10 mg of dexamethasone and 1 µg/kg of dexmedetomidine (15 mL). The primary focus was on the length of pain relief provided. Additionally, secondary evaluations included the amount of hydromorphone taken after surgery, the numerical rating scale and safety assessments within 48 h after the operation. RESULTS: Based on the p value (P > 0.05), there was no significant variance in the duration of pain relief or the total usage of hydromorphone after surgery across the four groups. Similarly, the numerical rating scale scores at rest and during activity at 6-, 12-, 24- and 48-h post-surgery for all four groups showed no difference (P > 0.05). However, the incidence of delayed anesthesia recovery was slightly higher in group R + DEX and group R + DXM + DEX when compared to group R or group R + DXM. Furthermore, there were no significant differences between the four groups in terms of vomiting, nausea, dizziness or delayed anesthesia recovery. CONCLUSION: For wound infiltration in TLIF, the addition of dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine to ropivacaine did not result in any clinically significant reduction in pain or opioid consumption and could prompt some side effects.