Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Más filtros










Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Pancreatology ; 24(2): 314-322, 2024 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38310036

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Pancreatic surgery may have a long-lasting effect on patients' health status and quality of life (QoL). We aim to evaluate patient-reported outcomes (PRO) 3 months after pancreatic surgery. METHODS: Patients scheduled for pancreatic surgery were enrolled in a prospective trial at five German centers. Patients completed PRO questionnaires (EQ-5D-5L, EORTC QLQ-PAN26, patient-reported happiness, and HADS-D), we report the first follow-up 3 months after surgery as an interim analysis. Statistical testing was performed using R software. RESULTS: From 2019 to 2022 203 patients were enrolled, a three-month follow-up questionnaire was available in 135 (65.5 %). 77 (57.9 %) underwent surgery for malignant disease. Patient-reported health status (EQ-5D-5L) was impaired in 4/5 dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain, discomfort) for patients with malignant and 3/5 dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities) for patients with benign disease 3 months after surgery (p < 0.05). Patients with malignant disease reported an increase in depressive symptoms, patients with benign disease had a decrease in anxiety symptoms (HADS-D; depression: 5.00 vs 6.51, p = 0.002; anxiety: 8.04 vs. 6.34, p = 0.030). Regarding pancreatic-disease-specific symptoms (EORTC-QLQ-PAN26), patients with malignant disease reported increased problems with taste, weight loss, weakness in arms and legs, dry mouth, body image and troubling side effects at three months. Patients with benign disease indicated more weakness in arms and legs, troubling side effects but less future worries at three months. CONCLUSION: Patient-reported outcomes of patients undergoing pancreatic surgery for benign vs. malignant disease show important differences. Patients with malignant tumors report more severely decreased quality of life 3 months postoperatively than patients with benign tumors.


Asunto(s)
Procedimientos Quirúrgicos del Sistema Digestivo , Neoplasias , Humanos , Estudios Prospectivos , Calidad de Vida , Medición de Resultados Informados por el Paciente
2.
Surg Endosc ; 38(3): 1296-1305, 2024 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38102396

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Repeat hepatectomies are technically complex procedures. The evidence of robotic or laparoscopic (= minimally invasive) repeat hepatectomies (MIRH) after previous open hepatectomy is poor. Therefore, we compared postoperative outcomes of MIRH vs open repeat hepatectomies (ORH) in patients with liver tumors after previous open liver resections. METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent repeat hepatectomies after open liver resections were identified from a prospective database between April 2018 and May 2023. Postoperative complications were graded in line with the Clavien-Dindo classification. We stratified patients by intention to treat into MIRH or ORH and compared outcomes. Logistic regression analysis was performed to define variables associated with the utilization of a minimally invasive approach. RESULTS: Among 46 patients included, 20 (43%) underwent MIRH and 26 (57%) ORH. Twenty-seven patients had advanced or expert repeat hepatectomies (59%) according to the IWATE criteria. Baseline characteristics were comparable between the study groups. The use of a minimally invasive approach was not dependent on preoperative or intraoperative variables. All patients had negative resection margins on final histology. MIRH was associated with less blood loss (450 ml, IQR (interquartile range): 200-600 vs 600 ml, IQR: 400-1500 ml, P = 0.032), and shorter length of stay (5 days, IQR: 4-7 vs 7 days, IQR: 5-9 days, P = 0.041). Postoperative complications were similar between the groups (P = 0.298). CONCLUSIONS: MIRH is feasible after previous open hepatectomy and a safe alternative approach to ORH. (German Clinical Trials Register ID: DRKS00032183).


Asunto(s)
Laparoscopía , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados , Humanos , Estudios de Cohortes , Hepatectomía/métodos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/efectos adversos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Tiempo de Internación , Neoplasias Hepáticas/patología , Laparoscopía/métodos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/cirugía , Resultado del Tratamiento
3.
JAMA Netw Open ; 6(12): e2346113, 2023 Dec 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38055279

RESUMEN

Importance: Postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH) due to postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is a life-threatening complication after pancreatoduodenectomy. However, there is no prediction tool for early identification of patients at high risk of late PPH. Objective: To develop and validate a prediction model for PPH. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective prognostic study included consecutive patients with clinically relevant POPF who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy from January 1, 2009, to May 20, 2023, at the University Hospital Mannheim (derivation cohort), and from January 1, 2012, to May 31, 2022, at the University Hospital Dresden (validation cohort). Data analysis was performed from May 30 to July 29, 2023. Exposure: Clinical and radiologic features of PPH. Main Outcomes and Measures: Accuracy of a predictive risk score of PPH. A multivariate prediction model-the hemorrhage risk score (HRS)-was established in the derivation cohort (n = 139) and validated in the validation cohort (n = 154). Results: A total of 293 patients (187 [64%] men; median age, 69 [IQR, 60-76] years) were included. The HRS comprised 4 variables with associations: sentinel bleeding (odds ratio [OR], 35.10; 95% CI, 5.58-221.00; P < .001), drain fluid culture positive for Candida species (OR, 14.40; 95% CI, 2.24-92.20; P < .001), and radiologic proof of rim enhancement of (OR, 12.00; 95% CI, 2.08-69.50; P = .006) or gas within (OR, 12.10; 95% CI, 2.22-65.50; P = .004) a peripancreatic fluid collection. Two risk categories were identified with patients at low risk (0-1 points) and high risk (≥2 points) to develop PPH. Patients with PPH were predicted accurately in the derivation cohort (C index, 0.97) and validation cohort (C index 0.83). The need for more invasive PPH management (74% vs 34%; P < .001) and severe complications (49% vs 23%; P < .001) were more frequent in high-risk patients compared with low-risk patients. Conclusions and Relevance: In this retrospective prognostic study, a robust prediction model for PPH was developed and validated. This tool may facilitate early identification of patients at high risk for PPH.


Asunto(s)
Candida , Análisis de Datos , Masculino , Humanos , Anciano , Femenino , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Hospitales Universitarios , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...