Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 91
Filtrar
2.
Updates Surg ; 75(6): 1439-1456, 2023 Sep.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37470915

RESUMEN

This retrospective analysis of the prospective IGOMIPS registry reports on 1191 minimally invasive pancreatic resections (MIPR) performed in Italy between 2019 and 2022, including 668 distal pancreatectomies (DP) (55.7%), 435 pancreatoduodenectomies (PD) (36.3%), 44 total pancreatectomies (3.7%), 36 tumor enucleations (3.0%), and 8 central pancreatectomies (0.7%). Spleen-preserving DP was performed in 109 patients (16.3%). Overall incidence of severe complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3) was 17.6% with a 90-day mortality of 1.9%. This registry analysis provided some important information. First, robotic assistance was preferred for all MIPR but DP with splenectomy. Second, robotic assistance reduced conversion to open surgery and blood loss in comparison to laparoscopy. Robotic PD was also associated with lower incidence of severe postoperative complications and a trend toward lower mortality. Fourth, the annual cut-off of ≥ 20 MIPR and ≥ 20 MIPD improved selected outcome measures. Fifth, most MIPR were performed by a single surgeon. Sixth, only two-thirds of the centers performed spleen-preserving DP. Seventh, DP with splenectomy was associated with higher conversion rate when compared to spleen-preserving DP. Eighth, the use of pancreatojejunostomy was the prevalent reconstruction in PD. Ninth, final histology was similar for MIPR performed at high- and low-volume centers, but neoadjuvant chemotherapy was used more frequently at high-volume centers. Finally, this registry analysis raises important concerns about the reliability of R1 assessment underscoring the importance of standardized pathology of pancreatic specimens. In conclusion, MIPR can be safely implemented on a national scale. Further analyses are required to understand nuances of implementation of MIPR in Italy.


Asunto(s)
Laparoscopía , Neoplasias Pancreáticas , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados , Humanos , Pancreatectomía , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estudios Prospectivos , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/efectos adversos , Laparoscopía/efectos adversos , Italia/epidemiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Sistema de Registros , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirugía , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/complicaciones , Resultado del Tratamiento
3.
Cancers (Basel) ; 15(6)2023 Mar 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36980586

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Associated liver partition with portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) represents a recent strategy to improve resectability of extensive hepatic malignancies. Recent surgical advances, such as the application of technical variants and use of a mini-invasive approach (MI-ALPPS), have been proposed to improve clinical outcomes in terms of morbidity and mortality. METHODS: A total of 119 MI-ALPPS cases from 6 series were identified and discussed to evaluate the feasibility of the procedure and short-term clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Hepatocellular carcinoma were widely the most common indication for MI-ALPPS. The median estimated blood loss was 260 mL during Stage 1 and 1625 mL in Stage 2. The median length of the procedures was 230 min in Stage 1 and 184 in Stage 2. The median increase ratio of future liver remnant volume was 87.8%. The median major morbidity was 8.14% in Stage 1 and 23.39 in Stage 2. The mortality rate was 0.6%. CONCLUSIONS: MI-ALPPS appears to be a feasible and safe procedure, with potentially better short-term outcomes in terms of blood loss, morbidity, and mortality rate if compared with those of open series.

5.
Surg Endosc ; 37(5): 3580-3592, 2023 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36624213

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Several registries focus on patients undergoing minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS). This study compared transatlantic registries focusing on the variables collected and differences in baseline characteristics, indications, and treatment in patients undergoing MILS. Furthermore, key variables were identified. METHODS: The five registries for liver surgery from North America (ACS-NSQIP), Italy, Norway, the Netherlands, and Europe were compared. A set of key variables were established by consensus expert opinion and compared between the registries. Anonymized data of all MILS procedures were collected (January 2014-December 2019). To summarize differences for all patient characteristics, treatment, and outcome, the relative and absolute largest differences (RLD, ALD) between the smallest and largest outcome per variable among the registries are presented. RESULTS: In total, 13,571 patients after MILS were included. Both 30- and 90-day mortality after MILS were below 1.1% in all registries. The largest differences in baseline characteristics were seen in ASA grade 3-4 (RLD 3.0, ALD 46.1%) and the presence of liver cirrhosis (RLD 6.4, ALD 21.2%). The largest difference in treatment was the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (RLD 4.3, ALD 20.6%). The number of variables collected per registry varied from 28 to 303. From the 46 key variables, 34 were missing in at least one of the registries. CONCLUSION: Despite considerable variation in baseline characteristics, indications, and treatment of patients undergoing MILS in the five transatlantic registries, overall mortality after MILS was consistently below 1.1%. The registries should be harmonized to facilitate future collaborative research on MILS for which the identified 46 key variables will be instrumental.


Asunto(s)
Laparoscopía , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Humanos , Neoplasias Hepáticas/cirugía , Hepatectomía/métodos , Laparoscopía/métodos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Mínimamente Invasivos/métodos , Sistema de Registros
6.
Cancers (Basel) ; 14(11)2022 May 24.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35681578

RESUMEN

Whether albumin and bilirubin levels, platelet counts, ALBI, and ALPlat scores could be useful for the assessment of permanent liver functional deterioration after repeat liver resection was examined, and the deterioration after laparoscopic procedure was evaluated. For 657 patients with liver resection of segment or less in whom results of plasma albumin and bilirubin levels and platelet counts before and 3 months after surgery could be retrieved, liver functional indicators were compared before and after surgery. There were 268 patients who underwent open repeat after previous open liver resection, and 224 patients who underwent laparoscopic repeat after laparoscopic liver resection. The background factors, liver functional indicators before and after surgery and their changes were compared between both groups. Plasma levels of albumin (p = 0.006) and total bilirubin (p = 0.01) were decreased, and ALBI score (p = 0.001) indicated worse liver function after surgery. Laparoscopic group had poorer preoperative performance status and liver function. Changes of liver functional values before and after surgery and overall survivals were similar between laparoscopic and open groups. Plasma levels of albumin and bilirubin and ALBI score could be the indicators for permanent liver functional deterioration after liver resection. Laparoscopic group with poorer conditions showed the similar deterioration of liver function and overall survivals to open group.

7.
Surg Endosc ; 36(5): 3374-3381, 2022 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34462867

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic redo resections for colorectal metastases are poorly investigated. This study aims to explore long-term results after second, third, and fourth resections. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Prospectively updated databases of primary and redo laparoscopic liver resections in six European HPB centers were analyzed. Procedure-related overall survival after first, second, third, and fourth resections were evaluated. Furthermore, patients without liver recurrence after first liver resection were compared to those with one redo, two or three redo, and patients with palliative treatment for liver recurrence after first laparoscopic liver surgery. Survival was calculated both from the date of the first liver resection and from the date of the actual liver resection. In total, 837 laparoscopic primary and redo liver resections performed in 762 patients were included (630 primary, 172 first redo, 29 second redo, and 6 third redo). Patients were bunched into four groups: Group 1-without hepatic recurrence after primary liver resection (n = 441); Group 2-with liver recurrence who underwent only one laparoscopic redo resection (n = 154); Group 3-with liver recurrence who underwent two laparoscopic redo resections (n = 29); Group 4-with liver recurrence who have not been found suitable for redo resections (n = 138). RESULTS: No significant difference has been found between the groups in terms of baseline characteristics and surgical outcomes. Rate of positive resection margin was higher in the group with palliative recurrence (group 4). Five-year survival calculated from the first liver resection was 67%, 62%, 84%, and 7% for group 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. Procedure-specific 5-year overall survival was 50% after primary laparoscopic liver resection, 52% after the 1st reoperation, 52% after the 2nd, and 40% after the 3rd reoperation made laparoscopic. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple redo recurrences can be performed laparoscopically with good long-term results. Liver recurrence does not aggravate prognosis as long as the patient is suitable for reoperation.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias del Colon , Neoplasias Colorrectales , Laparoscopía , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Neoplasias del Recto , Neoplasias del Colon/cirugía , Neoplasias Colorrectales/patología , Hepatectomía/métodos , Humanos , Laparoscopía/métodos , Neoplasias Hepáticas/secundario , Márgenes de Escisión , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/cirugía , Neoplasias del Recto/cirugía , Estudios Retrospectivos , Resultado del Tratamiento
8.
Cancers (Basel) ; 13(13)2021 Jun 25.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34202373

RESUMEN

Less morbidity is considered among the advantages of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for HCC patients. However, our previous international, multi-institutional, propensity score-based study of emerging laparoscopic repeat liver resection (LRLR) failed to prove this advantage. We hypothesize that these results may be since the study included complex LRLR cases performed during the procedure's developing stage. To examine it, subgroup analysis based on propensity score were performed, defining the proximity of the tumors to major vessels as the indicator of complex cases. Among 1582 LRLR cases from 42 international high-volume liver surgery centers, 620 cases without the proximity to major vessels (more than 1 cm far from both first-second branches of Glissonian pedicles and major hepatic veins) were selected for this subgroup analysis. A propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed based on their patient characteristics, preoperative liver function, tumor characteristics and surgical procedures. One hundred and fifteen of each patient groups of LRLR and open repeat liver resection (ORLR) were earned, and the outcomes were compared. Backgrounds were well-balanced between LRLR and ORLR groups after matching. With comparable operation time and long-term outcome, less blood loss (283.3±823.0 vs. 603.5±664.9 mL, p = 0.001) and less morbidity (8.7 vs. 18.3 %, p = 0.034) were shown in LRLR group than ORLR. Even in its worldwide developing stage, LRLR for HCC patients could be beneficial in blood loss and morbidity for the patients with less complexity in surgery.

9.
Updates Surg ; 73(4): 1247-1265, 2021 Aug.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34089501

RESUMEN

At the time of diagnosis synchronous colorectal cancer, liver metastases (SCRLM) account for 15-25% of patients. If primary tumour and synchronous liver metastases are resectable, good results may be achieved performing surgical treatment incorporated into the chemotherapy regimen. So far, the possibility of simultaneous minimally invasive (MI) surgery for SCRLM has not been extensively investigated. The Italian surgical community has captured the need and undertaken the effort to establish a National Consensus on this topic. Four main areas of interest have been analysed: patients' selection, procedures, techniques, and implementations. To establish consensus, an adapted Delphi method was used through as many reiterative rounds were needed. Systematic literature reviews were conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses instructions. The Consensus took place between February 2019 and July 2020. Twenty-six Italian centres participated. Eighteen clinically relevant items were identified. After a total of three Delphi rounds, 30-tree recommendations reached expert consensus establishing the herein presented guidelines. The Italian Consensus on MI surgery for SCRLM indicates possible pathways to optimise the treatment for these patients as consensus papers express a trend that is likely to become shortly a standard procedure for clinical pictures still on debate. As matter of fact, no RCT or relevant case series on simultaneous treatment of SCRLM are available in the literature to suggest guidelines. It remains to be investigated whether the MI technique for the simultaneous treatment of SCRLM maintain the already documented benefit of the two separate surgeries.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Neoplasias Colorrectales/cirugía , Consenso , Hepatectomía , Humanos , Italia , Neoplasias Hepáticas/cirugía
11.
Updates Surg ; 72(2): 379-385, 2020 Jun.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32468424

RESUMEN

The value of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (MIPS) is still uncertain, despite the growing number of publications, including reviews and meta-analyses, and the quick diffusion of these procedures worldwide. The Italian Group of Minimally Invasive Pancreas Surgery (IGoMIPS) was created under the auspices of three Scientific Societies: Associazione Italiana Studio Pancreas (AISP), Associazione Italiana Chirurgia Epato-Bilio-Pancreatica (AICEP, former IT-IHPBA), and Società Italiana di Chirurgia Endoscopica (SICE). The main aim of IGoMIPS is to develop and implement a national registry for MIPS. IGoMIPS was founded on February 22, 2019 in Pisa. The IGoMIPS registry became operational in September 2019, following approval by the Ethic Committees of founding Institutions, inscription into the Registry of Patient Registries (RoPR), and a wrap-up meeting held in Bologna during the Annual Congress of the Italian Surgical Society. During this meeting IGoMIPS members approved that the Italian Registry will provide data to the European Registry, while retaining the right to analyze and publish Italian data. An audience survey was also conducted to obtain information on perceived value and current implementation of MIPS in founding Institutions. MIPS is performed in 94.7% of IGoMIPS centers, including pancreaticoduodenectomy in 42.1%. Robotic assistance was employed in 52.6% of Institutions. The annual volume of MIPS was 6-10 cases in 38.9% of the centers, 11-20 cases in 16.7%, 21-30 cases in 22.2%, and > 30 cases in 22.2%. The registry was felt to be extremely important for both safety improvement and educational purposes by 94.5% of the centers.


Asunto(s)
Cirugía General/organización & administración , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Mínimamente Invasivos , Páncreas/cirugía , Sistema de Registros , Sociedades Médicas/organización & administración , Sociedades Científicas/organización & administración , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Italia , Laparoscopía/métodos , Laparoscopía/estadística & datos numéricos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Mínimamente Invasivos/métodos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Mínimamente Invasivos/estadística & datos numéricos , Pancreatectomía/métodos , Pancreatectomía/estadística & datos numéricos , Pancreaticoduodenectomía/métodos , Pancreaticoduodenectomía/estadística & datos numéricos
12.
J Gastrointest Surg ; 24(10): 2233-2243, 2020 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31506894

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Increased expertise with minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) could cause an unjustified extension of indications to resect liver benign disease (BD). The aim of this study was to evaluate the operative risk of MILS for BD and if implementation and diffusion of MILS have widened indications for BD resection. METHODS: A prospective study including centers with > 6 MILS for BD, enrolled in the I Go MILS registry from January 2015 to October 2016. Cysts fenestrations were excluded. RESULTS: Eight hundred eighteen MILS were performed in 15 centers. One hundred seventy-three of these (21.1%) were for BD: conversion rate was 6.9%, postoperative mortality and morbidity rates were 0 and 13.9%. During the same period, 3713 liver resections (open + MILS) were performed and 407 (11.0%) were for BD. A time-trend analysis showed that the total number of MILS and the number of MILS for malignant disease significantly increased, but this increasing trend was not documented for the number of MILS for BD, which remained stable during the study period of time. This trend was confirmed for the overall rate of resected BD (open + MILS) that remained stable. DISCUSSION: BD represents a valid indication for MILS. For BD, 21.1% of MILS was performed, rate significantly lower than that previously reported in Italy. Although an evident growth of the use of MILS was observed during the time period analysis in Italy, this trend did not correspond to an increased number of MILS for BD, and the overall rate of resected BD was comparable to that reported in previous large open series.


Asunto(s)
Laparoscopía , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Hepatectomía , Humanos , Italia , Neoplasias Hepáticas/cirugía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Mínimamente Invasivos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Estudios Prospectivos , Sistema de Registros
13.
Updates Surg ; 71(1): 97-103, 2019 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29770922

RESUMEN

The value of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (MIPS) is still debated. To assess the diffusion of MIPS in Italy and identify the barriers preventing wider implementation, a questionnaire was developed under the auspices of three Scientific Societies (AISP, It-IHPBA, SICE) and was sent to the largest possible number of Italian surgeons also using the mailing list of the two main Italian Surgical Societies (SIC and ACOI). The questionnaire consisted of 25 questions assessing: centre characteristics, facilities and technologies, type of MIPS performed, surgical techniques employed and opinions on the present and future value of MIPS. Only one reply per unit was considered. Fifty-five units answered the questionnaire. While 54 units (98.2%) declared to perform MIPS, the majority of responders were not dedicated to pancreatic surgery. Twenty-five units (45.5%) performed < 20 pancreatic resections/year and 39 (70.9%) < 10 MIPS per year. Forty-nine units (89.1%) performed at least one minimally invasive (MI) distal pancreatectomy (DP), and 10 (18.2%) at least one MI pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). Robotic assistance was used in 18 units (31.7%) (14 DP, 7 PD). The major constraints limiting the diffusion of MIPS were the intrinsic difficulty of the technique and the lack of specific training. The overall value of MIPS was highly rated. Our survey illustrates the current diffusion of MIPS in Italy and underlines the great interest for this approach. Further diffusion of MIPS requires the implementation of standardized protocols of training. Creation of a prospective National Registry should also be considered.


Asunto(s)
Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Mínimamente Invasivos/métodos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Mínimamente Invasivos/estadística & datos numéricos , Páncreas/cirugía , Pancreatectomía/métodos , Pancreatectomía/estadística & datos numéricos , Pancreaticoduodenectomía/métodos , Pancreaticoduodenectomía/estadística & datos numéricos , Utilización de Procedimientos y Técnicas/estadística & datos numéricos , Cirujanos , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Cirugía General/organización & administración , Humanos , Italia/epidemiología , Laparoscopía/estadística & datos numéricos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/estadística & datos numéricos , Sociedades Médicas/organización & administración
14.
Dig Surg ; 36(1): 7-12, 2019.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29339658

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Favorable outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for gallbladder cancer (GBC) have been reported; yet consensus on the indications and surgical techniques for laparoscopic surgery for GBC is lacking. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the current status of laparoscopic surgery for GBC by analyzing the results of a survey of experts and by reviewing the relevant published literature. METHODS: Before an expert meeting was held on September 10, 2016 in Seoul, Korea, an international survey was undertaken of expert surgeons in the field of GBC surgery. RESULTS: The majority of surgeons who responded agreed that laparoscopic surgery has an acceptable role for suspicious or early GBC, and that laparoscopic extended cholecystectomy has a value comparable to that of open surgery in selected patients with GBC. However, the selection criteria for laparoscopic surgery for overt GBC and the details of the surgical techniques varied among surgeons. CONCLUSIONS: This survey and literature review revealed that laparoscopic surgery for GBC is performed in highly selected cases. However, the favorable outcomes in the published reports and the positive view of experienced surgeons for this operative procedure suggest a high likelihood that laparoscopic surgery will be more frequently performed for GBC in the future.


Asunto(s)
Colecistectomía Laparoscópica , Neoplasias de la Vesícula Biliar/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Vesícula Biliar/cirugía , Actitud del Personal de Salud , Colecistectomía Laparoscópica/métodos , Conferencias de Consenso como Asunto , Neoplasias de la Vesícula Biliar/patología , Humanos , Hallazgos Incidentales , Selección de Paciente , Reoperación , Encuestas y Cuestionarios
15.
Dig Surg ; 36(1): 1-6, 2019.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29339660

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Despite the increasing number of reports on the favorable outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for gallbladder cancer (GBC), there is no consensus regarding this surgical procedure. OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to develop a consensus statement on the application of laparoscopic surgery for GBC based on expert opinions. METHODS: A consensus meeting among experts was held on September 10, 2016, in Seoul, Korea. RESULTS: Early concerns regarding port site/peritoneal metastasis after laparoscopic surgery have been abated by improved preoperative recognition of GBC and careful manipulation to avoid bile spillage. There is no evidence that laparoscopic surgery is associated with decreased survival compared with open surgery in patients with early-stage GBC if definitive resection during/after laparoscopic cholecystectomy is performed. Although experience with laparoscopic extended cholecystectomy for GBC has been limited to a few experts, the postoperative and survival outcomes were similar between laparoscopic and open surgeries. Laparoscopic reoperation for postoperatively diagnosed GBC is technically challenging, but its feasibility has been demonstrated by a few experts. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic surgery for GBC is still in the early phase of the adoption curve, and more evidence is required to assess this procedure.


Asunto(s)
Colecistectomía Laparoscópica , Neoplasias de la Vesícula Biliar/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Vesícula Biliar/cirugía , Colecistectomía Laparoscópica/efectos adversos , Consenso , Contraindicaciones de los Procedimientos , Hepatectomía/métodos , Humanos , Hallazgos Incidentales , Escisión del Ganglio Linfático/métodos , Selección de Paciente , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Reoperación , Tasa de Supervivencia
16.
J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci ; 25(1): 3-16, 2018 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29090866

RESUMEN

Antimicrobial therapy is a mainstay of the management for patients with acute cholangitis and/or cholecystitis. The Tokyo Guidelines 2018 (TG18) provides recommendations for the appropriate use of antimicrobials for community-acquired and healthcare-associated infections. The listed agents are for empirical therapy provided before the infecting isolates are identified. Antimicrobial agents are listed by class-definitions and TG18 severity grade I, II, and III subcategorized by clinical settings. In the era of emerging and increasing antimicrobial resistance, monitoring and updating local antibiograms is underscored. Prudent antimicrobial usage and early de-escalation or termination of antimicrobial therapy are now important parts of decision-making. What is new in TG18 is that the duration of antimicrobial therapy for both acute cholangitis and cholecystitis is systematically reviewed. Prophylactic antimicrobial usage for elective endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is no longer recommended and the section was deleted in TG18. Free full articles and mobile app of TG18 are available at: http://www.jshbps.jp/modules/en/index.php?content_id=47. Related clinical questions and references are also included.


Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Colangiopancreatografia Retrógrada Endoscópica/métodos , Colangitis/tratamiento farmacológico , Colecistitis Aguda/tratamiento farmacológico , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Enfermedad Aguda , Antibacterianos/farmacología , Colangitis/diagnóstico por imagen , Colangitis/microbiología , Colecistitis Aguda/diagnóstico por imagen , Colecistitis Aguda/microbiología , Toma de Decisiones Clínicas , Infecciones Comunitarias Adquiridas/diagnóstico , Infecciones Comunitarias Adquiridas/tratamiento farmacológico , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Tokio , Resultado del Tratamiento
17.
J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci ; 25(1): 96-100, 2018 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29090868

RESUMEN

Management bundles that define items or procedures strongly recommended in clinical practice have been used in many guidelines in recent years. Application of these bundles facilitates the adaptation of guidelines and helps improve the prognosis of target diseases. In Tokyo Guidelines 2013 (TG13), we proposed management bundles for acute cholangitis and cholecystitis. Here, in Tokyo Guidelines 2018 (TG18), we redefine the management bundles for acute cholangitis and cholecystitis. Critical parts of the bundles in TG18 include the diagnostic process, severity assessment, transfer of patients if necessary, and therapeutic approach at each time point. Observance of these items and procedures should improve the prognosis of acute cholangitis and cholecystitis. Studies are now needed to evaluate the dissemination of these TG18 bundles and their effectiveness. Free full articles and mobile app of TG18 are available at: http://www.jshbps.jp/modules/en/index.php?content_id=47. Related clinical questions and references are also included.


Asunto(s)
Lista de Verificación , Colangitis/terapia , Colecistitis Aguda/terapia , Manejo de la Enfermedad , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Enfermedad Aguda , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Colangitis/diagnóstico por imagen , Colecistectomía/métodos , Colecistitis Aguda/diagnóstico por imagen , Tratamiento Conservador , Drenaje/métodos , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Pronóstico , Tokio
18.
J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci ; 25(1): 73-86, 2018 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29095575

RESUMEN

In some cases, laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) may be difficult to perform in patients with acute cholecystitis (AC) with severe inflammation and fibrosis. The Tokyo Guidelines 2018 (TG18) expand the indications for LC under difficult conditions for each level of severity of AC. As a result of expanding the indications for LC to treat AC, it is absolutely necessary to avoid any increase in bile duct injury (BDI), particularly vasculo-biliary injury (VBI), which is known to occur at a certain rate in LC. Since the Tokyo Guidelines 2013 (TG13), an attempt has been made to assess intraoperative findings as objective indicators of surgical difficulty; based on expert consensus on these difficulty indicators, bail-out procedures (including conversion to open cholecystectomy) have been indicated for cases in which LC for AC is difficult to perform. A bail-out procedure should be chosen if, when the Calot's triangle is appropriately retracted and used as a landmark, a critical view of safety (CVS) cannot be achieved because of the presence of nondissectable scarring or severe fibrosis. We propose standardized safe steps for LC to treat AC. To achieve a CVS, it is vital to dissect at a location above (on the ventral side of) the imaginary line connecting the base of the left medial section (Segment 4) and the roof of Rouvière's sulcus and to fulfill the three criteria of CVS before dividing any structures. Achieving a CVS prevents the misidentification of the cystic duct and the common bile duct, which are most commonly confused. Free full articles and mobile app of TG18 are available at: http://www.jshbps.jp/modules/en/index.php?content_id=47. Related clinical questions and references are also included.


Asunto(s)
Colecistectomía Laparoscópica/métodos , Colecistitis Aguda/cirugía , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Grabación en Video , Colecistectomía Laparoscópica/efectos adversos , Colecistitis Aguda/diagnóstico por imagen , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Selección de Paciente , Pronóstico , Medición de Riesgo , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Tokio , Resultado del Tratamiento
19.
J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci ; 25(1): 31-40, 2018 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28941329

RESUMEN

The initial management of patients with suspected acute biliary infection starts with the measurement of vital signs to assess whether or not the situation is urgent. If the case is judged to be urgent, initial medical treatment should be started immediately including respiratory/circulatory management if required, without waiting for a definitive diagnosis. The patient's medical history is then taken; an abdominal examination is performed; blood tests, urinalysis, and diagnostic imaging are carried out; and a diagnosis is made using the diagnostic criteria for cholangitis/cholecystitis. Once the diagnosis has been confirmed, initial medical treatment should be started immediately, severity should be assessed according to the severity grading criteria for acute cholangitis/cholecystitis, and the patient's general status should be evaluated. For mild acute cholangitis, in most cases initial treatment including antibiotics is sufficient, and most patients do not require biliary drainage. However, biliary drainage should be considered if a patient does not respond to initial treatment. For moderate acute cholangitis, early endoscopic or percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage is indicated. If the underlying etiology requires treatment, this should be provided after the patient's general condition has improved; endoscopic sphincterotomy and subsequent choledocholithotomy may be performed together with biliary drainage. For severe acute cholangitis, appropriate respiratory/circulatory management is required. Biliary drainage should be performed as soon as possible after the patient's general condition has been improved by initial treatment and respiratory/circulatory management. Free full articles and mobile app of TG18 are available at: http://www.jshbps.jp/modules/en/index.php?content_id=47. Related clinical questions and references are also included.


Asunto(s)
Colangitis/diagnóstico por imagen , Colangitis/terapia , Colecistitis Aguda/diagnóstico por imagen , Colecistitis Aguda/terapia , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Esfinterotomía Endoscópica/métodos , Enfermedad Aguda , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Colangitis/patología , Colecistitis Aguda/patología , Toma de Decisiones Clínicas , Drenaje/métodos , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Monitoreo Fisiológico/métodos , Medición de Riesgo , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Diseño de Software , Tokio , Resultado del Tratamiento
20.
Dig Surg ; 35(4): 289-293, 2018.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29032378

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Because laparoscopic donor surgery has been successful in pediatric living donor liver transplantation, its application is expanding to right hepatectomy. However, there is no consensus on the indications for laparoscopic donor hepatectomy or on the details of the surgical technique. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the current status of laparoscopic donor hepatectomy and to summarize the expert opinion on it. METHODS: Before the expert meeting on September 8, 2016, in Seoul, Korea, a survey was undertaken from expert liver surgeons from around the world. RESULTS: Fifteen of 17 (88.2%) surgeons responded to the survey. The selection criteria for laparoscopic donor surgery are stricter than for open surgery in terms of the anatomy, remnant liver volume, and recipient's condition. There is no consensus on the instruments or equipment used. A literature review of laparoscopic donor hepatectomy showed that the use of this method is increasing and the short-term outcomes are similar to those of open surgery. CONCLUSIONS: This survey and literature review show that laparoscopic donor hepatectomy is performed by experienced surgeons in selected cases, and that its incidence is increasing worldwide.


Asunto(s)
Hepatectomía/métodos , Trasplante de Hígado , Donadores Vivos , Encuestas de Atención de la Salud , Humanos , Laparoscopía
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA