Women's Reasons to Seek Bariatric Surgery and Their Expectations on the Surgery Outcome - a Multicenter Study from Five European Countries.

PURPOSE: Understanding patients' reasons for having bariatric surgery and their expectation on surgery outcomes is important to provide the best clinical practice and reduce unrealistic expectations. It is unknown if reasons and expectations differ between countries. We aimed to investigate the reasons for seeking bariatric surgery and expectations of surgical outcomes among patients in five European countries. METHODS: In total, 250 women accepted for bariatric surgery were recruited: 50 women each from Finland, Germany, Norway, Sweden, and the Netherlands. Participants ranked 14 reasons for seeking surgery, and reported the three primary reasons. They also reported expectations on weight loss and impact of surgery vs. lifestyle on weight loss outcomes. RESULTS: Mean age and body mass index were 42.9 ± 11.5 years and 45.1 ± 6.2 kg/m2, respectively. Weight loss and improved co-morbidity were ranked as the most important reasons. Participants expected to lose between 70.8 and 94.3% of their excessive weight. The expected impact of surgery as a driver of weight loss was higher in Germany and the Netherlands compared to in Finland, Norway, and Sweden where participants expected lifestyle changes to also have an impact. CONCLUSION: Weight loss and improved co-morbidities were the main reasons for undergoing bariatric surgery. Expectations on weight loss were generally very high, but expectations of surgery vs. lifestyle as the main driver of weight loss differed between countries. While some patients understand the importance of lifestyle change and maintenance of a healthy lifestyle after surgery in order to obtain a successful weight loss, other may need additional counselling.

Radiofrequency endovenous obliteration versus stripping of the long saphenous vein in the management of primary varicose veins: 3-year outcome of a randomized study.

We evaluated the 3-year outcome of a series of patients with primary varicose veins who were randomized to radiofrequency endovenous obliteration vs. stripping of the long saphenous vein (LSV). Twenty-eight patients were included in the study: 15 were randomized to the radiofrequency endovenous obliteration procedure and 13 to LSV stripping. At 3-year follow-up, five patients (33.3%) of the endovenous group had recurrent or residual varices and in three of them a reflux in the thigh veins was detected. None of the primarily occluded LSV segments was recanalized. In the stripping group, three patients (23.1%, p = 0.68) showed varicosities at clinical and duplex examinations. In one patient, a patent duplicate LSV trunk was detected. In the remaining two patients, no reflux in the thigh region was detected. According to the present results, radiofrequency endovenous obliteration of the LSV is associated with somewhat poorer short-term results compared with the stripping operation.

Early results of a single-blinded, randomized, controlled, Internet-based multicenter trial comparing Prolene and Vypro II mesh in Lichtenstein hernioplasty.

BACKGROUND: The standard polypropylene mesh used in Lichtenstein's operation induces a strong foreign-tissue reaction with potentially harmful effects. A mesh with less polypropylene could possibly be beneficial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Six hundred men with inguinal hernias were randomized to Lichtenstein's operation with Prolene or Vypro II in a single-blinded multicenter trial. The randomization was performed by a computer algorithm in a database through the Internet. All data were entered and directly validated in the database through the Internet. RESULTS: The meshes had comparable results in return to work, return to daily activities, complications, postoperative pain, and quality of life during the first 8 weeks of rehabilitation. CONCLUSIONS: Lichtenstein's operation with either Prolene or Vypro II is safe and well tolerated with an acceptable postoperative rehabilitation time and a high quality of life 2 months after surgery. The study was facilitated by the use of a database through the Internet.

Tension-free inguinal hernia repair: TEP versus mesh-plug versus Lichtenstein: a prospective randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare laparoscopic hernioplasty with two open tension-free hernia repairs. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Laparoscopic hernioplasty is associated with a short rehabilitation, but it is a technically difficult procedure. It is unclear if it has advantages over the technically easier open tension-free herniorrhaphy. METHODS: Two hundred ninety-nine men 30 to 75 years old were randomized to undergo laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal hernioplasty (TEP), open operation with mesh-plug and patch, or Lichtenstein's operation. RESULTS: Two hundred ninety-four (98%) patients were followed for 19.8 +/- 8.6 months. Over 90% of the patients in all groups were operated in day surgery; the rest of the patients were all discharged within 24 hours. Postoperative pain (visual analog score) was lower in the patients undergoing TEP than in those undergoing Lichtenstein and mesh-plug procedures. The median sick-leave period was 5 days in the TEP group, 7 days in the mesh-plug group, and 7 days in the Lichtenstein group. The median time to full recovery was significantly shorter in the TEP group compared to the other two groups. There were no major complications. Two recurrences were found in the TEP group and two in the mesh-plug group. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic hernioplasty is superior to tension-free open herniorrhaphy in terms of postoperative pain and rehabilitation.

Endovenous obliteration versus conventional stripping operation in the treatment of primary varicose veins: a randomized controlled trial with comparison of the costs.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this randomized study was to compare a new method of endovenous saphenous vein obliteration (Closure System, VNUS Medical Technologies, Inc, Sunnyvale, Calif) with the conventional stripping operation in terms of short-term recovery and costs. METHODS: Twenty-eight selected patients for operative treatment of primary greater saphenous vein tributary varicose veins were randomly assigned to endovenous obliteration (n = 15) or stripping operation (n = 13). Postoperative pain was daily assessed during the 1st week and on the 14th postoperative day. The length of sick leave was determined. The RAND-36 health survey was used to assess the patient health-related quality of life. The patient conditions were controlled 7 to 8 weeks after surgery, and patients underwent examination with duplex ultrasonography. The comparison of costs included both direct medical costs and costs resulting from lost of productivity of the patients. Costs that were similar in the study groups were not considered in the analysis. RESULTS: All operations were successful, and the complication rates were similar in the two groups. Postoperative average pain was significantly less severe in the endovenous obliteration group as compared with the stripping group (at rest: 0.7, standard deviation [SD] 0.5, versus 1.7, SD 1.3, P =.017; on standing: 1.3, SD 0.7, versus 2.6, SD 1.9, P =.026; on walking: 1.8, SD 0.8, versus 3.0, SD 1.8, P =.036; with t test). The sick leaves were significantly shorter in the endovenous obliteration group (6.5 days, SD 3.3 days, versus 15.6 days, SD 6.0 days; 95% CI, 5.4 to 12.9; P <.001, with t test). Physical function was also restored faster in the endovenous obliteration group. The estimated annual investment costs of the closure operation were US $3360. The other direct medical costs of the Closure operation were about $850, and those of the conventional treatment were $360. With inclusion of the value of the lost working days, the Closure treatment was cost-saving for society, and when 40% of the patients are retired (or 60% of the productivity loss was included), the Closure procedure became cost-saving at a level of 43 operations per year. CONCLUSION: Endovenous obliteration may offer advantages over the conventional stripping operation in terms of reduced postoperative pain, shorter sick leaves, and faster return to normal activities, and it appears to be cost-saving for society, especially among employed patients. Because the procedure is also associated with shorter convalescence, this new method may potentially replace conventional varicose vein surgery.