MANAGEMENT OF TRAUMATIC LIVER LESIONS.

AIM: To determine the correct therapeutic approach to the different grades of liver trauma. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study is based on a retrospective analysis of treatment outcomes in 56 patients with abdominal trauma admitted over a 9-year period to in the IIIrd Surgical Clinic of the Iasi "Sf. Spiridon" Hospital. It is focused on operative or non-operative management of liver trauma, surgical technique used, morbidity and postoperative mortality. Data were collected from electronic medical records and observation sheets and processed and interpreted using Microsoft Excel statistical functions. RESULTS: In the interval May 26, 2005-April 19, 2013 56 cases of abdominal trauma were recorded, 31 (55.35%) residing in urban areas, and 25 (44.64%) in rural areas. The mean age was 39 years, range 18-83 years old. The male/female ratio was 2.5/1 and the group consisted of 40 (71.42%) male patients and 16 (28.57%) female patients. The causes of abdominal trauma were: car accident in 29 (51%) cases, fall from different heights in 6 (10%) patients, workplace-related accidents in 8 patients (14%) and direct hit injury in 12 patients (12%). In our cohort, 51 (91%) patients with abdominal trauma have been emergency admitted, 3 patients (5%) were transferred from different medical units, and 2 patients (4%) were referred by a specialist doctor. Two or more simultaneous lesions were diagnosed in 53 (96%) cases. Of the 45 patients with traumatic liver injuries diagnosed on admission, 32 (71%) required surgical intervention. In the remaining 13 (29%) patients, the therapeutic management was conservative. CONCLUSIONS: Hepatic traumas are often severe, and frequently associated with multiple injuries. The non-operative management is indicated in liver lesions grade I, II and III according to the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST), if abdominal cavity organs are not injured. Higher grade liver lesions (over IV) in which the hemorrhagic risk persists or reappears require surgical intervention as soon as possible, and according to the type of lesion, the right procedure should be chosen.

MONITORING OF RECURRENCE IN PATIENTS RADICALLY OPERATED FOR PANCREATIC CANCER.

Pancreatic cancer is a diagnosis that carries a poor prognosis. It is the fourth leading cause of cancer death in Europe and the United States, despite advances in operative technique and postoperative management. Furthermore, there is no consensus on the optimal follow-up schedule of patients after surgery for pancreatic cancer, all recommendations on surveillance being based on low level evidence or no evidence and the leading societies propose different guidelines. As a consequence, follow-up strategies may differ between hospitals depending on preference of physicians. The vast majority of patients develop recurrence within 2 years after surgery, suggesting the necessity of a more intensive follow-up the first 2 years after surgery. It usually occurs after surgery as migratory metastases along major upper abdominal arteries and veins to the liver or peritoneum (70%) and less commonly as loco regional disease as masses closely applied to the surgical margins in the neck or body of the pancreas (30%). Currently, there are no effective means to prevent pancreatic cancer recurrence, despite the fact that it is responsible for the majority of postoperative deaths.