Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Surg Endosc ; 2024 Aug 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39110219

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Surgical treatments of refractory gastroparesis include pyloromyotomy and gastric electrical stimulator (GES). It is unclear if patients may benefit from a combined approach with concomitant GES and pyloromyotomy. METHODS: Retrospective cohort analysis of all patients with refractory gastroparesis treated with GES implantation with and without concomitant pyloromyotomy at Cleveland Clinic Florida from January 2003 to January 2023. Primary endpoint was efficacy (clinical response duration and success rate) and secondary endpoints included safety (postoperative morbidity) and length of stay. Success rate was defined as the absence of one of the following reinterventions during follow-up: Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), pyloromyotomy, GES removal. RESULTS: During a period of 20 years, 134 patients were treated with GES implantation. Three patients with history of previous surgical pyloromyotomy or RYGB were excluded from the analysis. Median follow-up was 31 months (IQR 10, 72). Forty patients (30.5%) had GES with pyloromyotomy, whereas 91 (69.5%) did not have pyloromyotomy. Most of the patients had idiopathic (n = 68, 51.9%) or diabetic (n = 58, 43.3%) gastroparesis. Except for preoperative use of opioids (47.5 vs 14.3%; p < 0.001), patient's characteristics were similar in both groups. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of overall postoperative complications (17.5% vs 14.3%; p = 0.610), major postoperative complications (0% vs 2.2%; p = 1), and length of stay (2(IQR 1, 2) vs 2(IQR 1, 3) days; p = 0.068). At 5 years, success rate was higher in patients with than without pyloromyotomy however not statistically significant (82% versus 62%, p = 0.066). Especially patients with diabetic gastroparesis seemed to benefit from pyloromyotomy during GES (100% versus 67%, p = 0.053). In an adjusted Cox regression, GES implantation without pyloromyotomy was associated with a 2.66 times higher risk of treatment failure compared to GES implantation with pyloromyotomy (HR 2.66, 95% CI 1.03-6.94, p = 0.044). CONCLUSION: Pyloromyotomy during GES implantation for gastroparesis seems to be associated with a longer clinical response with similar postoperative morbidity and length of hospital stay than GES without pyloromyotomy. Patient with diabetic gastroparesis might benefit from a combination of GES implantation and pyloromyotomy.

2.
J Robot Surg ; 15(6): 841-848, 2021 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33598830

RESUMO

Simultaneous resections of primary colorectal cancer (CRC) and synchronous colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) have emerged as safe and efficient procedures for selected patients. Besides the traditional open approach for simultaneous resections, similar outcomes have been reported for minimally invasive approaches. Over the past years, a number of studies have sought to evaluate the safety and efficacy of simultaneous robotic-assisted resections (SRAR) for patients with synchronous CRC and CRLM. The objective of this systematic review is to evaluate the safety, technical feasibility and outcomes of SRAR of the primary CRC and CRLM. A comprehensive review of the literature was undertaken. Nine studies comprising a total of 29 patients (16 males) who underwent SRAR were considered eligible for inclusion. The primary tumor site was the rectum in 22 (76%) patients and the colon in 7 (24%) patients. A minor liver resection was performed in the majority of the cases (n = 24; 82%). The median operative time and estimated blood loss were 399.5 min (range 300-682) and 274 ml (range 10-780 ml), respectively. No cases of conversion to open were reported. The median LOS was 7 days (range 2-28 days). All patients reportedly underwent R0 resection. Overall and major morbidity rates were 38% and 7%, respectively, while no perioperative deaths were reported. Despite the limited number of studies, SRAR seems to be a safe and efficient minimally invasive approach for highly selected patients always implemented in the context of multidisciplinary patient management.


Assuntos
Neoplasias Colorretais , Laparoscopia , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos , Colectomia , Neoplasias Colorretais/cirurgia , Hepatectomia , Humanos , Neoplasias Hepáticas/cirurgia , Masculino , Estudos Retrospectivos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos/métodos , Resultado do Tratamento
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA