ABSTRACT
Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the sixth most diagnosed cancer worldwide. Healthcare resource constraints may predispose treatment delays. We aim to review existing literature on whether delayed treatment results in worse outcomes in HCC. PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and Scopus were systematically searched from inception till December 2022. Primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Secondary outcomes included post-treatment mortality, readmission rates, and complications. Fourteen studies with a total of 135,389 patients (delayed n = 25,516, no delay n = 109,873) were included. Age, incidence of male patients, Child-Pugh B cirrhosis, and Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer Stage 0/A HCC were comparable between delayed and no delay groups. Tumor size was significantly smaller in delayed versus no delay group (mean difference, -0.70 cm; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -1.14, 0.26; p = 0.002). More patients received radiofrequency ablation in delayed versus no delay group (OR, 1.22; 95% CI: 1.16, 1.27; p < 0.0001). OS was comparable between delayed and no delay in HCC treatment (hazard ratio [HR], 1.13; 95% CI: 0.99, 1.29; p = 0.07). Comparable DFS between delayed and no delay groups (HR, 0.99; 95% CI: 0.75, 1.30; p = 0.95) was observed. Subgroup analysis of studies that defined treatment delay as > 90 days showed comparable OS in the delayed group (HR, 1.04; 95% CI: 0.93, 1.16; p = 0.51). OS and DFS for delayed treatment were non-inferior compared to no delay, but might be due to better tumor biology/smaller tumor size in the delayed group.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopy is widely adopted across nearly all surgical subspecialties in the elective setting. Initially finding indication in minor abdominal emergencies, it has gradually become the standard approach in the majority of elective general surgery procedures. Despite many technological advances and increasing acceptance, the laparoscopic approach remains underutilized in emergency general surgery and in abdominal trauma. Emergency laparotomy continues to carry a high morbidity and mortality. In recent years, there has been a growing interest from emergency and trauma surgeons in adopting minimally invasive surgery approaches in the acute surgical setting. The present position paper, supported by the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), aims to provide a review of the literature to reach a consensus on the indications and benefits of a laparoscopic-first approach in patients requiring emergency abdominal surgery for general surgery emergencies or abdominal trauma. METHODS: This position paper was developed according to the WSES methodology. A steering committee performed the literature review and drafted the position paper. An international panel of 54 experts then critically revised the manuscript and discussed it in detail, to develop a consensus on a position statement. RESULTS: A total of 323 studies (systematic review and meta-analysis, randomized clinical trial, retrospective comparative cohort studies, case series) have been selected from an initial pool of 7409 studies. Evidence demonstrates several benefits of the laparoscopic approach in stable patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery for general surgical emergencies or abdominal trauma. The selection of a stable patient seems to be of paramount importance for a safe adoption of a laparoscopic approach. In hemodynamically stable patients, the laparoscopic approach was found to be safe, feasible and effective as a therapeutic tool or helpful to identify further management steps and needs, resulting in improved outcomes, regardless of conversion. Appropriate patient selection, surgeon experience and rigorous minimally invasive surgical training, remain crucial factors to increase the adoption of laparoscopy in emergency general surgery and abdominal trauma. CONCLUSIONS: The WSES expert panel suggests laparoscopy as the first approach for stable patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery for general surgery emergencies and abdominal trauma.
Subject(s)
Abdominal Injuries , Laparoscopy , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Humans , Abdomen , Abdominal Injuries/surgery , Emergencies , Laparoscopy/methods , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
Introduction: Spleen angiosarcoma (SA) is a rare malignant neoplasm that arises from the splenic vascular endothelium, with only around 300 cases reported to date. Due to a limited number of reported cases, there is a paucity of data and a lack of understanding of its presentation, diagnosis, and management. In this study, we aim to provide a comprehensive review of SA.Areas covered: On 27 February 2021, a literature search was done in PubMed and Embase database. The search yielded 122 articles involving 205 patients. The focus was on patient demographics, risk factors, clinical presentations, investigation results, preliminary diagnoses, therapies provided, and patient outcomes. These factors were analyzed to identify possible risk factors, diagnostic modalities, and therapeutic principles that were not mentioned before.Expert opinion: The clinical presentation or investigation results of patients with SA are often nonspecific. Hence, they may not be sufficient to clinch the diagnosis of SA if used alone. The authors recommend a triple assessment of clinical examination, imaging findings, and pathology to diagnose SA with high accuracy. Splenectomy should be the mainstay of management, with chemotherapy and radiotherapy considered as adjuncts, especially in the presence of metastases.
