Topical and subconjunctival anesthesia versus topical anesthesia alone in patients with senile cataracts undergoing phacoemulsification: a double-blind randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: This study compared topical anesthesia to a combination of topical anesthesia and subconjunctival anesthesia for phacoemulsification. METHODS: This double-blinded parallel placebo-controlled randomized trial involved senile cataract patients scheduled for phacoemulsification between May and December 2022. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either topical anesthesia with 0.5% tetracaine hydrochloride and subconjunctival balanced salt solution injection (Control group) or topical anesthesia and subconjunctival injection with 2% lidocaine (Lidocaine group). Baseline parameters, cataract grades, and various outcomes were recorded, including pain scores at specific time points, patient cooperation scores, requests for additional anesthesia, and complications. Statistical methods included Fisher's exact test, the t-test, ordinal logistic regression, and linear regression with robust standard errors. RESULTS: In total, 176 patients were included in the study after excluding 33 patients. A significant reduction in immediate postoperative pain was achieved in the Lidocaine group (p < 0.001) and was maintained for 2 h (p = 0.011). Additionally, better cooperation was observed in this group (p = 0.038). However, patients in the Lidocaine group experienced more pain during the subconjunctival injection (p = 0.001) and a significant increase in subconjunctival hemorrhage related to the injection (p < 0.001). Despite this, the rates of surgical complications were comparable between the groups, and all phacoemulsification procedures were successfully completed using the assigned anesthetic technique. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of subconjunctival lidocaine injection to topical anesthesia reduced postoperative pain and improved patient cooperation during phacoemulsification. However, the lidocaine injection was painful, and it carried a higher risk of spontaneous-relief subconjunctival hemorrhage. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial Registration Number: TCTR20220804003, date of registration August 4, 2022, retrospectively registered.

Preoperative admission is non-essential in most patients receiving elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A cohort study.

We evaluated conventional overnight-stay laparoscopic cholecystectomy, focusing on the preoperative admission day, to assess the feasibility of implementing daycare laparoscopic cholecystectomy, which is currently underutilized in developing and some Asian countries. We retrospectively reviewed elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy data from March 2020 to February 2022 at a 700-bed tertiary hospital in Thailand. Variables included age, sex, body mass index, comorbidities, American Society of Anesthesiologists status, presence of preoperative anesthesiology visit, laparoscopic cholecystectomy indications, additional intraoperative cholangiography, and surgery cancellations. The primary focus was on preoperative treatment and monitoring needs; secondary outcomes included morbidity, mortality within 30 days, and prolonged hospital stay (>48 hours). Statistical analysis was conducted using the Fisher exact test, t-test, and logistic regression. The study included 405 patients. Of these, 65 (16.1%) received preoperative treatment, with 21 unnecessary (over) treatments and six under-treatments. Based on the results, approximately 12.1% (n = 49) of patients may have theoretically required preoperative admission and treatment. Multivariable analysis showed that the increasing of comorbidities was significantly associated with preoperative management (odds ratio [95% Confidence interval]: 7.0 [2.1, 23.1], 23.9 [6.6, 86.6], 105.5 [17.5, 636.6]) for one, two, and three comorbidities, respectively), but factors such as age, obesity, and American Society of Anesthesiologists status were not. The cohort had 4.2% morbidity (2.2% medical complications), with no mortality. Surgery cancellations occurred in 0.5%. In conclusion, on the basis of our data, a small proportion (12.1%) of patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy may require preoperative admissions to receive the necessary treatment, and most (87.9%) preoperative admissions may not provide treatment benefit. The traditional admission approach was safe but required re-evaluation for optimal resource management.

Development of a Predictive Model for Common Bile Duct Stones in Patients With Clinical Suspicion of Choledocholithiasis: A Cohort Study.

Background: Current choledocholithiasis guidelines heavily focus on patients with low or no risk, they may be inappropriate for populations with high rates of choledocholithiasis. We aimed to develop a predictive scoring model for choledocholithiasis in patients with relevant clinical manifestations. Methods: A multivariable predictive model development study based on a retrospective cohort of patients with clinical suspicion of choledocholithiasis was used in this study. The setting was a 700-bed public tertiary hospital. Participants were patients who had completed three reference tests (endoscopic retrograde cholangiography, magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography, and intraoperative cholangiography) from January 2019 to June 2021. The model was developed using logistic regression analysis. Predictor selection was conducted using a backward stepwise approach. Three risk groups were considered. Model performance was evaluated by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, calibration, classification measures, and decision curve analyses. Results: Six hundred twenty-one patients were included; the choledocholithiasis prevalence was 59.9%. The predictors were age > 55 years, pancreatitis, cholangitis, cirrhosis, alkaline phosphatase level of 125 - 250 or > 250 U/L, total bilirubin level > 4 mg/dL, common bile duct size > 6 mm, and common bile duct stone detection. Pancreatitis and cirrhosis each had a negative score. The sum of scores was -4.5 to 28.5. Patients were categorized into three risk groups: low-intermediate (score ≤ 5), intermediate (score 5.5 - 14.5), and high (score ≥ 15). Positive likelihood ratios were 0.16 and 3.47 in the low-intermediate and high-risk groups, respectively. The model had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.80 (95% confidence interval: 0.76, 0.83) and was well-calibrated; it exhibited better statistical suitability to the high-prevalence population, compared to current guidelines. Conclusions: Our scoring model had good predictive ability for choledocholithiasis in patients with relevant clinical manifestations. Consideration of other factors is necessary for clinical application, particularly regarding the availability of expert physicians and specialized equipment.

Evaluation of the American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 2019 and the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines' performances for choledocholithiasis prediction in clinically suspected patients: A retrospective cohort study.

Background and Aim: The American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) and the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) have published guidelines for choledocholithiasis. However, the guidelines were formulated using data from a large number of patients with no to low risk of common bile duct (CBD) stones. This study aimed to assess the guidelines' predictive performance in a population with a high frequency of stones. Methods: Data for three choledocholithiasis standard reference tests were retrospectively reviewed from January 2019 to June 2021. Clinical parameters were used to categorize patients into risk groups according to the guidelines, and then the guidelines' predictive abilities were calculated. Results: Among 1185 patients, 521 were included. The stone prevalence was 61.0% (n = 318). Twelve (2.3%), 146 (28.0%), and 363 (69.7%) patients were classified into low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups according to the ASGE guidelines, and 30 (5.8%), 149 (28.6%), and 342 (65.6%) according to the ESGE guidelines. Focusing on the high-risk group, the ASGE guidelines had a positive predictive value of 73.6 and a positive likelihood ratio of 1.78. The ESGE guidelines had a positive predictive value of 73.7 and positive likelihood ratio of 1.79. Both guidelines had equivalent areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.69 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.65-0.73) and 0.68 (95% CI: 0.64-0.72), respectively. Conclusion: In the high-risk group, the guidelines increased the chance of detecting choledocholithiasis by approximately 10% (61.0% prevalence to 73.6 and 73.7% positive predictive value). However, statistically, the guidelines had marginal discriminative performance in a population with high stone prevalence.

Colonic actinomycosis presenting as a palpable colonic mass with normal colonic mucosa.

Colonic actinomycosis is rare and can present as an ill-defined intra-abdominal mass that can be difficult to differentiate from colon cancer. This case report aims to share the details of this case and provide diagnostic clues. A 63-year-old female presented with a palpable right-sided abdominal mass. Computed tomography (CT) revealed irregular thickening of the colonic hepatic flexure, and colonoscopy detected no abnormalities. Five months later, the patient returned with an increase in the mass size. Repeat CT revealed lesion expansion, with suspected abdominal wall invasion. Extended right-hemicolectomy with abdominal wall wedge resection was performed, and the histological results were compatible with actinomycosis infection. Colonic actinomycosis is a rare chronic inflammatory disease. Normal colonic mucosa during colonoscopy, with clinical and imaging findings, may help physicians diagnose the condition preoperatively.

Operative outcome of laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery in a regional hospital in a developing country: A propensity score-matched comparative analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Laparoscopic surgery is an alternative procedure for colorectal cancers. However, high-level supporting evidence has been derived from high-volume centers in developed countries. During the early phase of applying the laparoscopic approach, we evaluated the procedure's short-term outcomes in our regional middle-volume hospital in a developing country. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data for a cohort of 223 colorectal cancer patients who underwent elective surgery from October 2017 to September 2019. We compared 165 patients undergoing open surgery (OS group) with 58 undergoing laparoscopic surgery (LS group) using a propensity score-matched analysis. RESULTS: After matching, each group contained 58 patients for evaluating outcomes. The LS group had more harvested mesenteric lymph nodes (5.0 nodes, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.8-8.1; p-value: <0.01) with comparable blood loss (p-value: 0.54) and margin status (p-value: 0.66). However, LS was more time-consuming (68.8 min longer; 95% CI: 53.0-84.7; p-value: <0.01). Morbidity and mortality rates were equivalent (odds ratio (OR): 1.3, 95% CI: 0.25-2.73, p-value: 0.74, and OR: 2, 95% CI: 0.18-22.1, p-value: 0.57, respectively). The LS group experienced fewer days to begin normal eating (-0.5 days, 95% CI: -0.9 to -0.1, p-value: 0.04) and shorter hospital stay (-1.5 days, 95% CI: -2.7 to -0.4, p-value: <0.01). The conversion rate was 3.5%. CONCLUSION: The laparoscopic approach was applicable even in a regional middle-volume hospital in a developing country. However, longer surgical time was a drawback.