RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In critically ill patients, temporary abdominal closure (TAC) is utilized for conditions like abdominal compartment syndrome risk, gross abdominal contamination, and intestinal loop viability doubts. TAC techniques aim to safeguard abdominal contents, drain intraperitoneal fluids, and minimize fascia and skin damage. Our goal is to outline clinical characteristics and surgical outcomes in oncological patients undergoing peritoneostomy. METHODS: Patients undergoing TAC with vacuum therapy at a tertiary oncological center were studied, with data sourced from an institutional database. RESULTS: Forty-seven patients (54.3% female), with an average age of 63.1 ± 12.3 years, were included in the study. The primary tumor site was predominantly gastrointestinal (78.2%). Patients presented systemic signs of chronic disease, reflected by a mean body mass index of 18.2 ± 7.6 kg/m², hemoglobin level of 9.2 ± 1.8 g/dL, and albumin level of 2.3 ± 0.6 g/dL. Additionally, most patients had a low-performance status (53% Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 1/2, 44.8% Karnofsky score ≤80, and 61.2% Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥6). Emergency surgical complications were the main reasons for initial surgery (68%), with the majority attributed to fecal peritonitis (65.9%). Only 14.8% of patients achieved complete abdominal closure with an average of 24.8 days until closure. The in-hospital mortality rate was 85.2%. CONCLUSION: TAC is an alternative for oncological patients with surgical complications, but it carries a high mortality rate due to the compromised conditions of the patients.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Thoracoscopic esophagectomy is related to an extended lymphadenectomy, and a high number of retrieved lymph nodes, compared to the transhiatal approach; however, its association with an improvement in overall survival (OS) is debatable. AIM: To compare thoracoscopic esophagectomy with transhiatal esophagectomy in patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEGJ) in terms of survival, number of lymph nodes, and complications. METHODS: In total, 147 patients with AEGJ were selected retrospectively from 2002 to 2019, and divided into Group A for thoracoscopic esophagectomy, and group B for transhiatal esophagectomy. OS, disease-free survival, postoperative complications, and number of nodes, were similarly evaluated. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty (88%) were male; the mean age was 64 years. Group A had a mean age of 61.1 years and group B 65.7 years (P = 0.009). Concerning the extent of lymphadenectomy, group A showed a higher number of retrieved lymph nodes (mean of 31.89 ± 8.2 vs 20.73 ± 7; P < 0.001), with more perioperative complications, such as hoarseness, surgical site infections, and respiratory complications. Although both groups had similar OS rates, subgroup analysis showed better survival of transthoracic esophagectomy in patients with earlier diseases. CONCLUSION: Both methods are safe, having similar morbidity and mortality rates. Transthoracic thoracoscopic esophagectomy allows a more extensive resection of the lymph nodes and may have better oncological outcomes during earlier stages of the disease. Prospective studies are warranted to better evaluate these findings.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: Present an updated classification for symptomatic hemorrhoids, which not only guides the treatment of internal hemorrhoids but also the treatment of external components. In addition, this new classification includes new treatment alternatives created over the last few years. METHODS: Throughout the past 7 years, the authors developed a method to classify patients with symptomatic hemorrhoids. This study, besides presenting this classification proposal, also retrospectively analyzed 149 consecutive patients treated between March 2011 and November 2013 and aimed to evaluate the association between the management adopted with Goligher classification and our proposed BPRST classification. RESULTS: Both classifications had a statistically significant association with the adopted management strategies. However, the BPRST classification tended to have fewer management discrepancies when each stage of disease was individually analyzed. CONCLUSION: Although there is much disagreement about how the classification of hemorrhoidal disease should be updated, it is accepted that some kind of revision is needed. The BPRST method showed a strong association with the management that should be adopted for each stage of the disease. Further studies are needed for its validation, but the current results are encouraging.