[Efficacy and budget impact of the Focus harmonic scalpel compared to the ACS-14C device in total thyroidectomy due to multinodular goitre. A prospective randomised study]. / Eficacia e impacto económico del bisturí armónico Focus frente al dispositivo ACS-14C en la tiroidectomía total por bocio multinodular. Estudio prospectivo aleatorizado.

OBJECTIVE: To analyse the potential advantages and outcomes of the new Harmonic Focus™ (Focus) device compared to the Harmonic Scalpel™ ACS-14C in benign thyroid surgery. METHODS: A controlled randomised study was conducted in which the Focus was compared to former ACS-14C device in patients undergoing total thyroidectomy for multinodular goitre. The primary endpoint was time of surgery. The secondary endpoints were time of use of the device, number of ligatures, blood loss, hypocalcaemia, laryngeal nerve impairment, postoperative pain and quality of life. RESULTS: Two groups of patients were included, 26 patients in group i (ACS-14C) and 28 in group ii (Focus). There was a 16% reduction in surgical time (78.7 ± 22.01 vs. 66 ± 17.0 min; P<.05) between group i and ii respectively. The Focus was used longer than ACE-14S, both in absolute time (26.0 ± 7.7 vs. 10.0 ± 3.5 minutes; P<.05), as well as in relative time (40.7 ± 11.8% vs. 13.1 ± 4.1%; P<.05), respectively. A significant reduction in number of ligatures in Focus patients was also observed (0,3 ± 0,8 vs. 2.9 ± 3.6; P<.05). Budget impact analysis showed an additional average savings per procedure of 179.74 €. CONCLUSIONS: Focus ergonomics significantly improved the operation time in thyroidectomy causing a positive impact on the budget. Focus also adds further benefits to those previously achieved by Harmonic technology, and it is by itself more cost-effective in total thyroidectomy than ACS-14C.

[Factors associated with morbidity and mortality after gastric bypass. Alternatives for risk reduction: sleeve gastrectomy]. / Factores asociados a morbimortalidad tras el bypass gástrico. Alternativas para disminuir riesgos: gastroplastia tubular.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to analyze factors related to morbidity and mortality after gastric bypass and to evaluate lower-risk alternatives in selected patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective cohort of 761 patients who underwent gastric bypass was included. Prognostic factors were studied using a logistic regression model with SPSS 11.0. Independent variables were age, sex, body mass index (BMI), comorbidities, and the laparoscopic approach. Dependent variables consisted of medical complications, surgical complications, and mortality. We performed a preliminary descriptive study of morbidity and weight loss at 3 months after sleeve gastrectomy. RESULTS: In the postoperative period, 2.8% of patients presented medical complications and 5.4% presented surgical complications. Mortality was 0.52%. Surgical complications were significantly associated with age > 45 years (P = .04; OR = 2.00 [1.03-3.8]) and male sex (P = .041; OR = 2.40 [1.12-5.14]). Medical complications were significantly associated with a BMI of > 50 kg/m2 (P = .012; OR = 3.32 [1.23-8.98]), and mortality was significantly associated with a BMI of > 50 kg/m2 (P = .006) and male sex (P = .006). Sleeve gastrectomy was performed in eight patients with a BMI of > 60 kg/m2, in three patients with a BMI of > 50 kg/m2, cardiopulmonary disease and android fat distribution, and in four patients with a BMI of between 35 and 40 kg/m2 and major comorbidity. Morbidity consisted of self-limited febrile syndrome in one patient. There was no mortality. Weight loss at 3 months was 39.8 +/- 5.36% of excess BMI in superobese patients (n = 4) and was 50.2 +/- 11.05% of excess BMI in morbidly obese patients (n = 4). CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative morbidity and mortality was significantly higher in male patients, in patients aged more than 45 years, and in those with a BMI of > 50 kg/m2. Sleeve gastrectomy in selected patients could be a lower-risk alternative.