Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Más filtros










Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
BJS Open ; 7(4)2023 07 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37504969

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Incisional hernia is a common short- and long-term complication of laparotomy and can lead to significant morbidity. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to provide an up-to-date overview of the laparotomy closure method in elective and emergency settings with the prophylactic mesh augmentation technique. METHODS: The Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science databases were screened without time restrictions up to 21 June 2022 using the keywords 'laparotomy closure', 'mesh', 'mesh positioning', and 'prophylactic mesh', and including medical subject headings terms. Only RCTs reporting the incidence of incisional hernia and other wound complications after elective or emergency midline laparotomy, where patients were treated with prophylactic mesh augmentation or without mesh positioning, were included. The primary endpoint was to explore the risk of incisional hernia at different follow-up time points. The secondary endpoint was the risk of wound complications. The risk of bias for individual studies was assessed according to the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tools for randomized trials. RESULTS: Eighteen RCTs, including 2659 patients, were retrieved. A reduction in the risk of incisional hernia at every time point was highlighted in the prophylactic mesh augmentation group (1 year, risk ratio 0.31, P = 0.0011; 2 years, risk ratio 0.44, P < 0.0001; 3 years, risk ratio 0.38, P = 0.0026; 4 years, risk ratio 0.38, P = 0.0257). An increased risk of wound complications was highlighted for patients undergoing mesh augmentation, although this was not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Midline laparotomy closure with prophylactic mesh augmentation can be considered safe and effective in reducing the incidence of incisional hernia. Further trials are needed to identify the ideal type of mesh and technique for mesh positioning, but surgeons should consider prophylactic mesh augmentation to decrease incisional hernia rate, especially in high-risk patients for fascial dehiscence and even in emergency settings. PROSPERO REGISTRATION ID: CRD42022336242 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/record_email.php).


Asunto(s)
Técnicas de Cierre de Herida Abdominal , Hernia Incisional , Humanos , Hernia Incisional/prevención & control , Hernia Incisional/etiología , Laparotomía/efectos adversos , Laparotomía/métodos , Mallas Quirúrgicas/efectos adversos , Incidencia , Técnicas de Cierre de Herida Abdominal/efectos adversos
2.
World J Surg ; 47(10): 2378-2385, 2023 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37210423

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Non-operative management (NOM) of uncomplicated acute appendicitis is a well-established alternative to upfront surgery. The administration of intravenous broad-spectrum antibiotics is usually performed in hospital, and only one study described outpatient NOM. The aim of this multicentre retrospective non-inferiority study was to evaluate both safety and non-inferiority of outpatient compared to inpatient NOM in uncomplicated acute appendicitis. METHODS: The study included 668 consecutive patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Patients were treated according to the surgeon's preference: 364 upfront appendectomy, 157 inpatient NOM (inNOM), and 147 outpatient NOM (outNOM). The primary endpoint was the 30-day appendectomy rate, with a non-inferiority limit of 5%. Secondary endpoints were negative appendectomy rate, 30-day unplanned emergency department (ED) visits, and length of stay. RESULTS: 30-day appendectomies were 16 (10.9%) in the outNOM group and 23 (14.6%) in the inNOM group (p = 0.327). OutNOM was non-inferior to inNOM with a risk difference of-3.80% 97.5% CI (- 12.57; 4.97). No difference was found between inNOM and outNOM groups for the number of complicated appendicitis (3 vs. 5) and negative appendectomy (1 vs. 0). Twenty-six (17.7%) outNOM patients required an unplanned ED visit after a median of 1 (1-4) days. In the outNOM group, the mean cumulative in-hospital stay was 0.89 (1.94) days compared with 3.94 (2.17) days in the inNOM group (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Outpatient NOM was non-inferior to inpatient NOM with regard to the 30-day appendectomy rate, while a shorter hospital stay was found in the outNOM group. Further, studies are required to confirm these findings.


Asunto(s)
Apendicitis , Humanos , Apendicitis/cirugía , Apendicitis/tratamiento farmacológico , Pacientes Ambulatorios , Estudios Retrospectivos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Enfermedad Aguda
3.
Entropy (Basel) ; 24(1)2022 Jan 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35052101

RESUMEN

This paper begins the study of the relation between causality and quantum mechanics, taking advantage of the groupoidal description of quantum mechanical systems inspired by Schwinger's picture of quantum mechanics. After identifying causal structures on groupoids with a particular class of subcategories, called causal categories accordingly, it will be shown that causal structures can be recovered from a particular class of non-selfadjoint class of algebras, known as triangular operator algebras, contained in the von Neumann algebra of the groupoid of the quantum system. As a consequence of this, Sorkin's incidence theorem will be proved and some illustrative examples will be discussed.

4.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 1015, 2021 01 13.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33441909

RESUMEN

Since the start of the novel coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, corticosteroid use has been the subject of debate. The available evidence is uncertain, and knowledge on the subject is evolving. The aim of our cohort study was to evaluate the association between corticosteroid therapy and hospital mortality, in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 after balancing for possible confounders. One thousand four hundred forty four patients were admitted to our hospital with a positive RT-PCR test for SARS-CoV-2, 559 patients (39%) were exposed to corticosteroids during hospital stay, 844 (61%) were not exposed to corticosteroids. In the cohort of patients exposed to corticosteroids, 171 (30.6%) died. In the cohort of patients not exposed to corticosteroids, 183 (21.7%) died (unadjusted p < 0.001). Nonetheless, exposure to corticosteroids was not associated with in-hospital mortality after balancing with overlap weight propensity score (adjusted p = 0.25). Patients in the corticosteroids cohort had a reduced risk of ICU admission (adjusted p < 0.001). Treatment with corticosteroids did not affect hospital mortality in patients with COVID-19 after balancing for confounders. A possible advantage of corticosteroid therapy was to reduce Intensive Care Unit admission, which could be useful in reducing pressure on Intensive Care Units in times of limited resources, as during the COVID-19 pandemic.


Asunto(s)
Corticoesteroides/farmacología , Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , COVID-19/mortalidad , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Corticoesteroides/uso terapéutico , Anciano , Estudios de Cohortes , Femenino , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos/estadística & datos numéricos , Masculino , Resultado del Tratamiento
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA