Robotic Treatment for Large Duodenal Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor.

BACKGROUND: Duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumors (D-GISTs) represent a rare entity.1 Surgery is the primary treatment choice for localized or potentially resectable D-GISTs. The main principle is the complete excision of the lesion with microscopically negative margins, without performing lymph node dissection.2 Nevertheless, the best surgical choice is still controversial since the strategy depends not only on the tumor size but also on its anatomic location.3,4 As a result, surgical management ranges from a major resection such as pancreaticoduodenectomy to more conservative procedures.5-8 This video presents a duodenal sparing robotic resection of a large GIST of the second-third duodenal portion. METHODS: A 49-year-old healthy female complained episodes of melena. Endoscopy with endoscopic ultrasound identified a 6-cm lesion of the second-third portion of the duodenum with recent bleeding, arising from muscolaris propria. A computed tomography scan confirmed a large mass suspected to be a GIST without metastases or involvement of the ampulla of Vater. On the basis of these findings, after a multidisciplinary consultation, she was offered robotic surgery with a radical intent. RESULTS: A duodenal-sparing da Vinci®Si™ resection with robot-sewn primary duodenal closure was performed. After an uneventful postoperative course, the patient was discharged on post-operative day 7. Final pathology revealed a high-grade risk D-GIST with free margins: adjuvant Imatinib was recommended.9 At 4 years follow-up, no recurrence has been detected. CONCLUSIONS: A robotic approach might be considered in cases of large D-GISTs amenable to a conservative R0 surgery. This system provides several technical advantages that facilitate otherwise complex resection and reconstruction.10.

Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation After Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to evaluate the efficacy of the use of the neuromuscular electrical stimulation after total knee arthroplasty. DESIGN: The study used a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (MEDLINE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and PEDro) using Patient Population or Problem, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, Setting approach to formulate the research question, controlled terms, and Boolean operators. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were defined in advance. "Neuromuscular electrical stimulation" and "total knee arthroplasty" were used as keywords. The overall risk of bias was determined according to the following: random sequence generation, concealment, blinding mass of participants and staff, commissioning blind assessment results, incomplete data, and loans received. RESULTS: Of the 36 identified studies, six were included in the review (496 participants). In these studies, one group of patients followed a rehabilitation protocol (control group) and the other followed a rehabilitation program plus a session of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (neuromuscular electrical stimulation group). Patients of neuromuscular electrical stimulation groups got the best scores (timed up and go test, stair climbing test, and walk test). Neuromuscular electrical stimulation benefits were strong in the first postoperative weeks/months and gradually diminished. CONCLUSIONS: Neuromuscular electrical stimulation allows a slightly better functional recovery after total knee arthroplasty, especially in the first period, with more evident benefits in patients with a severe lack of muscular activation. Nevertheless, there is no difference at medium-long term.