Patient-reported outcomes of laparoscopic versus robotic primary ventral and incisional hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROM's) are increasingly used to assess surgical outcomes in low-risk surgeries such as minimally invasive primary ventral and incisional hernia repair. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to systematically summarize the available evidence for the effect of laparoscopic versus robotic primary ventral and incisional hernia repair on PROM's. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Randomised control trials, retrospective and prospective studies were included. Medline, Embase, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and Cochrane CENTRAL, and two trial registers were searched. Pooled effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals were calculated using the Mantel-Haenszel method. The overall quality of evidence was assessed using GRADE. RESULTS: Of the 2728 titles screened, eight studies involving 41,205 participants were included. Return to activities of daily living, return to work day and recurrence rate were statistically better in the robotic group. Length of stay, readmission, postoperative pain, quality of life, body image, and patient satisfaction were similar in both groups. The GRADE rating of the quality of evidence was moderate for postoperative pain and low to very low for the quality of life, length of stay, recurrence and readmission. CONCLUSION: The available data of PROM's of laparoscopic and robotic primary ventral and incisional hernia repair is scarce and highly heterogeneous, thus making it difficult to assess the superiority of the laparoscopic technique over the robotic technique. Further studies with uniform reporting of PROM's in laparoscopic and robotic primary ventral and incisional hernia repair are needed.

What does it take to achieve microelimination of hepatitis C among incarcerated individuals in Haryana, India?

Content available: Audio Recording.

Correction to: Update of Guidelines for laparoscopic treatment of ventral and incisional abdominal wall hernias (International Endohernia Society (IEHS))-Part A.

This article was updated to include the middle initial of author L. N. Jorgensen's name.

Update of Guidelines for laparoscopic treatment of ventral and incisional abdominal wall hernias (International Endohernia Society (IEHS)): Part B.

In 2014 the International Endohernia Society (IEHS) published the first international "Guidelines for laparoscopic treatment of ventral and incisional abdominal wall hernias". Guidelines reflect the currently best available evidence in diagnostics and therapy and give recommendations to help surgeons to standardize their techniques and to improve their results. However, science is a dynamic field which is continuously developing. Therefore, guidelines require regular updates to keep pace with the evolving literature. METHODS: For the development of the original guidelines all relevant literature published up to year 2012 was analyzed using the ranking of the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based-Medicine. For the present update all of the previous authors were asked to evaluate the literature published during the recent years from 2012 to 2017 and revise their statements and recommendations given in the initial guidelines accordingly. In two Consensus Conferences (October 2017 Beijing, March 2018 Cologne) the updates were presented, discussed, and confirmed. To avoid redundancy, only new statements or recommendations are included in this paper. Therefore, for full understanding both of the guidelines, the original and the current, must be read. In addition, the new developments in repair of abdominal wall hernias like surgical techniques within the abdominal wall, release operations (transversus muscle release, component separation), Botox application, and robot-assisted repair methods were included. RESULTS: Due to an increase of the number of patients and further development of surgical techniques, repair of primary and secondary abdominal wall hernias attracts increasing interests of many surgeons. Whereas up to three decades ago hernia-related publications did not exceed 20 per year, currently this number is about 10-fold higher. Recent years are characterized by the advent of new techniques-minimal invasive techniques using robotics and laparoscopy, totally extraperitoneal repairs, novel myofascial release techniques for optimal closure of large defects, and Botox for relaxing the abdominal wall. Furthermore, a concomitant rectus diastasis was recognized as a significant risk factor for recurrence. Despite still insufficient evidence with respect to these new techniques it seemed to us necessary to include them in the update to stimulate surgeons to do research in these fields. CONCLUSION: Guidelines are recommendations based on best available evidence intended to help the surgeon to improve the quality of his daily work. However, science is a continuously evolving process, and as such guidelines should be updated about every 3 years. For a comprehensive reference, however, it is suggested to read both the initially guidelines published in 2014 together with the update. Moreover, the presented update includes also techniques which were not known 3 years before.

Update of Guidelines for laparoscopic treatment of ventral and incisional abdominal wall hernias (International Endohernia Society (IEHS))-Part A.

In 2014, the International Endohernia Society (IEHS) published the first international "Guidelines for laparoscopic treatment of ventral and incisional abdominal wall hernias." Guidelines reflect the currently best available evidence in diagnostics and therapy and give recommendations to help surgeons to standardize their techniques and to improve their results. However, science is a dynamic field which is continuously developing. Therefore, guidelines require regular updates to keep pace with the evolving literature. METHODS: For the development of the original guidelines, all relevant literature published up to year 2012 was analyzed using the ranking of the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. For the present update, all of the previous authors were asked to evaluate the literature published during the recent years from 2012 to 2017 and revise their statements and recommendations given in the initial guidelines accordingly. In two Consensus Conferences (October 2017 Beijing, March 2018 Cologne), the updates were presented, discussed, and confirmed. To avoid redundancy, only new statements or recommendations are included in this paper. Therefore, for full understanding both of the guidelines, the original and the current, must be read. In addition, the new developments in repair of abdominal wall hernias like surgical techniques within the abdominal wall, release operations (transversus muscle release, component separation), Botox application, and robot-assisted repair methods were included. RESULTS: Due to an increase of the number of patients and further development of surgical techniques, repair of primary and secondary abdominal wall hernias attracts increasing interests of many surgeons. Whereas up to three decades ago hernia-related publications did not exceed 20 per year, currently this number is about 10-fold higher. Recent years are characterized by the advent of new techniques-minimal invasive techniques using robotics and laparoscopy, totally extraperitoneal repairs, novel myofascial release techniques for optimal closure of large defects, and Botox for relaxing the abdominal wall. Furthermore, a concomitant rectus diastasis was recognized as a significant risk factor for recurrence. Despite insufficient evidence with respect to these new techniques, it seemed to us necessary to include them in the update to stimulate surgeons to do research in these fields. CONCLUSION: Guidelines are recommendations based on best available evidence intended to help the surgeon to improve the quality of his daily work. However, science is a continuously evolving process, and as such guidelines should be updated about every 3 years. For a comprehensive reference, however, it is suggested to read both the initial guidelines published in 2014 together with the update. Moreover, the presented update includes also techniques which were not known 3 years before.

Abortions in an organized dairy farm from North India reveal the possibility of breed susceptibility to Bovine Brucellosis.

The present study was undertaken over a three year period (2012-2014) in an organized dairy farm located in North India to ascertain Brucella abortus as the putative cause of abortion. The dairy farm maintained cattle of Frieswal, Crossbred and Sahiwal breeds and followed calf-hood vaccination with Brucella abortus Strain 19 live vaccine in all the heifers. Even with the recommended vaccination schedule and good managemental practices in place, 88 cases of abortions clinically suspected of bovine brucellosis (40 from Frieswal breed, 17 from Crossbred cattle and 31 from Sahiwal breed) were reported from this farm. From these abortion cases, bacteriological isolation was possible in only four dams while 16 dams were found to be serologically positive in Serum Tube Agglutination Test (STAT). Molecular screening by PCR assay (specific for the bcsp31 gene of B. abortus) revealed that 24 dams were positive, out of which 20 were from Frieswal breed and rest four were from Crossbred herd. Prominently, all Sahiwal dams were found to be negative in bacteriological isolation and also in PCR assay. These results thus indicate towards the possibility of breed predisposition to abortions due to B. abortus infection. Statistical analysis by Fischer exact test (p < 0.01) too substantiated that breed susceptibility exists among these PCR positive cases. This study is novel as breed variation in abortions due to B. abortus in cattle is being documented for the first time. Seven representative PCR amplicons generated during the study were also sequenced and submitted to NCBI GenBank. Moreover, this study also accentuates the importance of PCR screening especially in vaccinated herd and raises concerns on over-dependence of serological assays when intensive vaccination is practised without any concomitant DIVA strategy. Thus, besides assisting in planning pragmatic control strategies against bovine brucellosis these findings are also imperative from 'One Health' context, also.

The Prevalence of New Onset Diabetes Mellitus after Renal Transplantation in Patients with Immediate Posttransplant Hyperglycemia in a Tertiary Care Centre.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine the prevalence of immediate posttransplant hyperglycemia and new onset diabetes after renal transplantation (NODAT). It also aims at answering whether posttransplant hyperglycemia per se is a risk factor for future development of NODAT. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted among patients undergoing kidney transplantation under a single surgical unit in a tertiary care hospital in the past 5 years. All known patients with diabetes were excluded from the study. Immediate postoperative hyperglycemia was defined as random blood sugar (RBS) ≥200 mg/dl or requirement of insulin. NODAT was defined as fasting plasma glucose ≥126 mg/dl or RBS ≥200 mg/dl or if the patient is receiving therapy for glycemic control at 6 weeks or 3 months posttransplantation. RESULTS: The study population included 191 patients. The overall prevalence of posttransplant hyperglycemia and NODAT was 31.4% and 26.7%, respectively. NODAT developed in 28 patients (46.7%) of those who had posttransplant hyperglycemia. Thus, posttransplant hyperglycemia was associated with a fourfold increased risk of NODAT (P = 0.000). Posttransplant hyperglycemia was associated with increased infections (P = 0.04) and prolonged hospital stay (P = 0.0001). Increased age was a significant risk factor for NODAT (P = 0.000), whereas gender, acute rejection episodes, cadaveric transplant, hepatitis C virus status, human leukocyte antigen mismatch, and high calcineurin levels were not significantly associated with the future development of NODAT. CONCLUSION: The significant risk of NODAT posed by posttransplant hyperglycemia makes it prudent to follow up these patients more diligently in a resource-limited setting wherein routine monitoring in all patients is cumbersome.

Retrospective Evaluation of Magnitude, Severity and Outcome of Traumatic Hepatobiliary Injury at a Level-I Trauma Center in India.

Liver injury is the major cause of morbidity and mortality in polytrauma patients. This study was conducted to know the burden of hepatobiliary injury and its outcome in our setup. It is a retrospective study of all patients with traumatic hepatobiliary injuries from January 2008 through April 2012 at JPNATC, New Delhi. All patients were resuscitated as per ATLS guidelines. Management of patients was based on hemodynamic status and associated injuries. Liver injury occurred in 7.52 % of all trauma admissions and 20.34 % of total abdominal trauma patients. Most common mechanism of injury was blunt trauma due to road traffic injury among all age groups (n = 234, 67.83 %). Seventy-five percent of the patients with liver injury were hemodynamically stable at presentation (n = 262, 75 %). Isolated liver injury was seen in 27 % of the patients. Grade II (n = 138, 40 %) liver injury was the most common. Of the patients, 68.70 % were managed nonoperatively. Among operatively managed patients (n = 100, 29 %), 38 % patient underwent immediate laparotomy due to hemodynamic instability. The failure of nonoperative management was in eight (2.32 %) patients with success rate of 96.73 %, i.e., 237 patients out of 245 were successfully managed nonoperatively. Packing was done in 27 % of the patients of high-grade liver injury and was associated with high morbidity and mortality (51 %). The morbidity and mortality of liver trauma were 28.99 % and 12.17 %, respectively. Liver injury is common in abdominal trauma patients. Most of the patients with liver injury are hemodynamically stable and should be managed nonoperatively with careful monitoring.

Guidelines for laparoscopic treatment of ventral and incisional abdominal wall hernias (International Endohernia Society (IEHS)-part 1.

Guidelines are increasingly determining the decision process in day-to-day clinical work. Guidelines describe the current best possible standard in diagnostics and therapy. They should be developed by an international panel of experts, whereby alongside individual experience, above all, the results of comparative studies are decisive. According to the results of high-ranking scientific studies published in peer-reviewed journals, statements and recommendations are formulated, and these are graded strictly according to the criteria of evidence-based medicine. Guidelines can therefore be valuable in helping particularly the young surgeon in his or her day-to-day work to find the best decision for the patient when confronted with a wide and confusing range of options. However, even experienced surgeons benefit because by virtue of a heavy workload and commitment, they often find it difficult to keep up with the ever-increasing published literature. All guidelines require regular updating, usually every 3 years, in line with progress in the field. The current Guidelines focus on technique and perioperative management of laparoscopic ventral hernia repair and constitute the first comprehensive guidelines on this topic. In this issue of Surgical Endoscopy, the first part of the Guidelines is published including sections on basics, indication for surgery, perioperative management, and key points of technique. The next part (Part 2) of the Guidelines will address complications and comparisons between open and laparoscopic techniques. Part 3 will cover mesh technology, hernia prophylaxis, technique-related issues, new technologic developments, lumbar and other unusual hernias, and training/education.

Total extra-peritoneal repair of groin hernia: prospective evaluation at a tertiary care center.

BACKGROUND: The laparoscopic repair of groin hernia is increasingly being used. However, the relative merits and demerits of laparoscopic repair are debatable. The present study was undertaken to evaluate the total extra-peritoneal (TEP) repair of groin hernia. METHODS: This prospective study was undertaken at a single surgical unit between January 2004 and June 2006. Consecutive patients with elective groin hernias were offered laparoscopic TEP repair. Indigenous balloon or telescopic dissection was used to create extra-peritoneal space. Polypropylene mesh was used in all of the patients and mesh fixation was performed with tackers. RESULTS: A total of 185 patients with age range 18-92 years were included; 180 were males. TEP repair was attempted in 298 groin hernias in 185 patients with a success rate of 89.5%. Indigenous balloon or telescopic dissection was used to create extra-peritoneal space. Thirty-one (31, 10.5%) TEP repairs were converted to transabdominal pre-peritoneal or open repair. Two patients developed recurrence during follow-up. CONCLUSION: TEP is an excellent technique for laparoscopic groin hernia repair, with acceptable rates of complication.

Comparison of laparoscopic and open repair of incisional and primary ventral hernia: results of a prospective randomized study.

BACKGROUND: Incisional hernia is an important complication of abdominal surgery. Its repair has progressed from a primary suture repair to various mesh repairs and laparoscopic repair. Laparoscopic mesh repair is a promising alternative, and in the absence of consensus, needs prospective randomized controlled trials. METHODS: Between April 2003 and April 2005, 66 patients with incisional, primary ventral and recurrent hernias were randomized to receive either open retro-rectus mesh repair or laparoscopic mesh repair. These patients were followed up at 1-, 3-, and 6-month intervals thereafter for a mean of 12.17 months (open repair group) and 13.73 months (laparoscopic repair group). RESULTS: Lower abdominal hernias after gynecologic operations constituted the majority of the hernias (approximately 50%) in both groups. There was no significant injury to viscera or vessel in either group and no conversions. The defect size was 42.12 cm in the open (group 1) and 65.66 cm2 in the laparoscopic group (group 2), and the prosthesis sizes were, respectively, 152.67 cm2 and 203.83 cm2. The hospital stay was 3.43 days in open group and 1.47 days in laparoscopic group (p = 0.007). There was no significant difference in the pain scores between the two groups. More wound-related infectious complications occurred in the open group (33%) than in the laparoscopic group (6%) (p = 0.013). There was one recurrence in the open repair group (3%) and two recurrences in laparoscopic group (6%) (p = 0.55). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic repair of incisional and ventral hernias is superior to open mesh repair in terms of significantly less blood loss, fewer complications, shorter hospital stay, and excellent cosmetic outcome.

The first successful simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplant in India.

Insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus is associated with renal failure, diabetic retinopathy, neuropathy and vasculopathy. We report the first successful simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplant in India in a young diabetic with renal failure. The dual transplant has cured his diabetes and renal failure and has had a beneficial effect on his neuropathy, retinopathy and quality of life. Obstacles to dual transplant in India include a lack of suitable recipients and a cadaver donor programme that is still in its infancy.

The effect of blood draw methodology on selected nutritional parameters in chronic renal failure.

The reliability and validity of any clinical laboratory test is directly affected by the integrity of the blood specimen obtained for analysis. Renal failure patients undergo a high number of laboratory tests, primarily to monitor the quality of care. Subsequent tests to confirm laboratory abnormalities are costly and place the patient at unnecessary risk for additional blood loss. Three of the four Health Care Financing Administration core clinical outcome indicators have nutritional implications and use laboratory values as part of review criteria: adequacy of dialysis, albumin, and anemia. National Kidney Foundation-Dialysis Outcomes Quality Initiative (DOQI) Clinical Practice Guidelines have recommended standardized predialysis and postdialysis blood draw procedures to increase accuracy for adequacy of dialysis. The National Committee on Clinical Laboratory Standards publishes peer-reviewed guidelines for venipuncture. Together, the adoption of these standards would minimize preanalytical variation and improve the data used to monitor the quality of care in renal patients.

Hemodialysis prognostic nutrition index as a predictor for morbidity and mortality in hemodialysis patients and its correlation to adequacy of dialysis. Council on Renal Nutrition National Research Question Collaborative Study Group.

OBJECTIVE: Prospectively examine the use of a hemodialysis prognostic nutrition index (HD-PNI) as a predictor for morbidity and mortality in hemodialysis patients and its correlation to adequacy of dialysis. DESIGN: Prospective randomized collaborative study group. SETTING: There were 211 chronic hemodialysis centers; 202 from 43 United States, 9 from Canada. PATIENTS: There were 1527 hemodialysis patients undergoing treatment a minimum of 3 months and at least 18 years of age. Sample mirrored United States Renal Data System data for age, sex, race, and etiology of renal failure. INTERVENTIONS: None; routinely collected demographic, biochemical, and clinical data for 8-month baseline and 3-month predictive phases. METHODS: HD-PNI calculated from baseline data as linear mathematical equation using level of serum albumin, level of serum creatinine, and number of days and times hospitalized; HD-PNI risk defined as >/=0.8. Adequacy of dialysis calculated as urea reduction ratio (URR) from baseline data; adequacy risk defined as URR of /=65% did not significantly improve prediction. CONCLUSIONS: Use of HD-PNI is an effective screening tool to identify hemodialysis patients at risk for morbidity and mortality. No correlation was found between URR and HD-PNI.

Using the hemodialysis prognostic nutrition index and urea reduction ratio to predict morbidity and mortality: a pilot study of the 1995 council on renal nutrition national research question.

OBJECTIVE: To validate the use of the hemodialysis prognostic nutrition index (HPNI) in an alternate hemodialysis population and to determine if use of urea reduction ratio would improve use in outcome prediction for morbidity and mortality. DESIGN: Prospective random cohort. SETTING: Hospital based non-for-profit outpatient dialysis unit. PATIENTS: Forty chronic hemodialysis patients, 50% men, 50% black, 16% diabetic, 67.2 mean months on hemodialysis, mean age 54.5 years. INTERVENTIONS: None; observational; tracking of routinely collected demographic, biochemical, and clinical data. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Number of times and days hospitalized, mortality RESULTS: Plotting of HPNI against urea reduction ratio produced risk quadrants for hospitalization that were more predictive than HPNI alone. CONCLUSION: Application continues as a multicenter collaborative Council on Renal Nutrition National Research Question.

Variation in blood sample collection for determination of hemodialysis adequacy. Council on Renal Nutrition National Research Question Collaborative Study Group.

Inadequate dialysis has been associated with high morbidity and mortality in end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis. The accurate estimation of dialysis adequacy, measured either as a calculated urea kinetics (Kt/V) or a simple urea reduction ratio (URR) is dependent on the proper collection of blood samples for predialysis and postdialysis blood urea nitrogen (BUN) determination. Because no established protocol exists for blood sampling, we surveyed the study cohort of dialysis centers participating in the National Kidney Foundation Council on Renal Nutrition National Research Question Collaborative Study to determine the comparability of BUN data that were collected to calculate URR to determine adequacy of dialysis. Surveys were completed by 100% of the 202 units participating: 195 in the United States (from 43 states) and seven from Canada, treating approximately 15,000 hemodialysis patients in total. The distribution of the sample by the type of facility mirrored that of 1996 United States Renal Data System (USRDS) Annual Report facilities data. Results showed a 5.0% error in predialysis blood draw and an 8.4% to 41.6% error in the postdialysis counterpart. There was a large variability in the observed postdialysis methods in general. Dilution of predialysis sample with either heparin or saline will falsely underestimate Kt/V and URR. The presence of access-derived, recirculated blood in the postdialysis sample will falsely overestimate Kt/V and URR. Excessive delay in drawing postdialysis sample will reduce Kt/V and URR because of urea rebound. Adoption by all dialysis providers of a uniform blood sample draw procedure will result in a consistency necessary to allow reliable and valid comparison of adequacy of dialysis parameters within and between ESRD patients, units, and clinical trials.