Biomedical subjects
A Fingerhut
Publications and source records attributed to A Fingerhut.
Multicentre, randomized clinical trial of primary versus secondary sigmoid resection in generalized peritonitis complicating sigmoid diverticulitis.
BACKGROUND: The best way to manage generalized peritonitis complicating sigmoid diverticulitis is controversial. This randomized clinical trial involved a comparison of primary resection and suture, drainage with proximal colostomy followed by secondary resection. METHODS: From January 1989 to December 1996, 105 patients of mean(s.d.) age 66(14) (range 32-91) years were randomized to undergo primary or secondary resection. The main endpoint was occurrence of generalized or localized postoperative peritonitis. The Mannheim Peritonitis Index score was calculated for each patient to check for comparability of groups. RESULTS: Postoperative peritonitis occurred less often after primary than secondary resection whether considering the first procedure only (one of 55 patients versus ten of 48; P < 0.01) or all procedures (one of 55 versus 12 of 48; P < 0.001). Likewise, early reoperation was performed less often following primary resection than secondary resection (two of 55 versus nine of 48 (P < 0.02) and two versus 11 (P < 0.01)), leading to a shorter median first hospital stay for patients having primary resection (15 days) than for those undergoing secondary resection (24 days) (P < 0.05). The mortality rate did not differ significantly with regard to operative policy (primary resection 24 per cent versus secondary resection 19 per cent) or type of peritonitis (faeculent 27 per cent versus purulent 19 per cent). No patient died following a second or third procedure. CONCLUSION: Primary resection is superior to secondary resection in the treatment of generalized peritonitis complicating sigmoid diverticulitis because of significantly less postoperative peritonitis, fewer reoperations and shorter hospital stay.
Epilogue: key considerations in surgical publishing.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Surgical management of liver injuries in adults--current indications and pitfalls of operative and non-operative policies: a review.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Neither pelvic nor abdominal drainage is needed after anastomosis in elective, uncomplicated, colorectal surgery.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Hoarseness due to leech ingestion.
This paper presents a case of hoarseness caused by the pharyngolaryngeal localization of a leech. This pathological lesion is extremely rare in western European countries, but is more frequent in endemic areas. Possibly lethal dyspnoea, haemoptysis or haematemesis can be the revealing symptoms. When the diagnosis is suspected simple examination under anaesthesia and removal of the leech will effect a cure.
Prospective trials in laparoscopic bile duct exploration.
Laparoscopic exploration of the common bile duct (CBD) is performed either for the diagnosis or the treatment of CBD stones. Laparoscopic intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) versus ultrasonography (LUS) and laparoscopic versus endoscopic extraction of CBD stones were compared through a review of the prospective, comparative studies, randomized or not, evaluating these different techniques. Cystic duct cholangiography and fluoroscopic imaging are the standards for IOC. The potential protective effect of IOC regarding the risk or severity of CBD injuries might be the major argument for a routine use of laparoscopic IOC. Most if not all the purported advantages of LUS versus IOC for the diagnosis of CBD stones remain to be proven. Laparoscopic intraoperative diagnosis of CBD stones by cholangiography or ultrasonography followed by the laparoscopic extraction or, in case of failure, by postoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy, might represent the future for the diagnosis and treatment of CBD stones.
Senna vs polyethylene glycol for mechanical preparation the evening before elective colonic or rectal resection: a multicenter controlled trial. French Association for Surgical Research.
HYPOTHESIS: Senna is more efficient than polyethylene glycol as mechanical preparation before elective colorectal surgery. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, single-blind study. SETTING: Multicenter study (18 centers). PATIENTS: Five hundred twenty-three consecutive patients with colonic or rectal carcinoma or sigmoid diverticular disease, undergoing elective colonic or rectal resection followed by immediate anastomosis. INTERVENTION: Two hundred sixty-two patients were randomly allotted to receive senna (1 package diluted in a glass of water) and 261 to receive polyethylene glycol (2 packages diluted in 2-3 L of water), administered the evening before surgery. All patients received 5% povidone iodine antiseptic enemas (2 L) the evening and the morning before surgery. Ceftriaxone sodium and metronidazole were given intravenously at anesthetic induction. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Degree of colonic and rectal cleanliness. RESULTS: Colonic cleanliness was better (P=.006), fecal matter in the colonic lumen was less fluid (P=.001), and the risk for moderate or large intraoperative fecal soiling was lower (P=.11) with senna. Overall, clinical tolerance did not differ significantly between groups, but 20 patients receiving polyethylene glycol (vs 16 with senna) had to interrupt their preparation, and 15 patients (vs 8 with senna) complained of abdominal distension. Senna, however, was better tolerated (P = .03) in the presence of stenosis. There was no statistically significant difference found in the number of patients with postoperative infective complications (14.7% vs 17.7%) or anastomotic leakage (5.3% vs 5.7%) with senna and polyethylene glycol, respectively. CONCLUSION: Mechanical preparation before colonic or rectal resection with senna is better and easier than with polyethylene glycol and should be proposed in patients undergoing colonic or rectal resection, especially patients with stenosis.
Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: time to decide.
Although widely practiced, laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) has not met with universal approval. Several controlled trials have been conducted, some in favor, others not. The goal of this review was to ascertain (1) if laparoscopy was capable of improving the diagnostic and therapeutic difficulties encountered during open appendectomy (OA) and (2) if the introduction of laparoscopy in the overall management of acute appendicitis has changed anything in practice. Analysis and criticism of 17 controlled studies (nearly 1800 patients) on laparoscopic appendectomy and 2 randomized studies dealing with diagnostic laparoscopy are reported. Because of the questionable quality of randomized controlled trials (number of patients, exclusions, withdrawals, blinding, intention-to-treat analysis), publication biases, local practice variations (hospital stay, rate of enrollment), results regarding analgesia requirements, return to activity and work, duration of hospital stay, outcome, follow-up, and antibiotic prophylaxis the studies must be interpreted with caution. The real world of appendicitis probably differs greatly from the atmosphere under which controlled trials comparing LA and OA have been performed. Statistical significance is contrary to the clinical significance of the results. Consistently longer operating times [the difference ranging from 8 minutes (NS) to 29 minutes (p < 0.0001)], a minimal reduction in hospital stay [0. 1 day (NS) to 2.1 days (p < 0.007)], and, somewhat more controversial, an earlier return to normal activity were reported for LA. Data on analgesic requirements were confusing, but wound complications were more frequent after OA [pooled odds ratio for 10 studies: 2.6 (95% CI 1.3-5.2)]. Unsolved problems include national behavioral problems, age and experience of operating surgeons (LA or OA), and emergency conditions (availability of staff, instruments). Results of cost analysis vary according to the standpoint of disease, the patient, the surgeon, the treatment center, industry, and society. Three questions remain: Because of the competition of LA versus OA, OA has improved greatly. Can it be improved any more? Is there a place or need for further randomized controlled trials? Should we not conclude once and for all that LA is out?
Omentoplasty in the prevention of deep abdominal complications after surgery for hydatid disease of the liver: a multicenter, prospective, randomized trial. French Associations for Surgical Research.
BACKGROUND: Omentoplasty (OP) is thought to fill residual cavity, to assist healing of raw surfaces, and to promote resorption of serosal fluid and macrophagic migration in septic foci. Results published to date, whether retrospective or prospective, are not controlled and are discordant. STUDY DESIGN: The authors investigated whether OP, either filling the residual cavity after unroofing, or covering the hepatic raw surface after pericystectomy, could reduce the rate or severity of deep abdominal complications (DAC) after surgical treatment of hydatid disease of the liver. Between January 1993 and December 1996, 115 consecutive patients (51 males and 64 females, mean age 42+/-16 years [range 10 to 80 years]) with previously unoperated uni- or multilocular hydatid disease of the liver, complicated or not, without other abdominal hydatid disease, were randomly allotted to OP (n = 58) or not (NO) (n = 57) after unroofing, total, or partial pericystectomy. Patients were divided into 2 strata according to the site of the cyst with respect to the diaphragm: a) posterosuperior segments II, VII, and VIII or b) anterior segments III, IV, V, and VI. Main outcomes measures included deep bleeding, hematoma, infection, or bile leakage. Subsidiary measures included wound complications, extraabdominal complications, duration of operation, and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: Both groups were comparable regarding patient demographics, cyst characteristics, intraoperative procedures, search for bile leaks, and intraoperative transfusion requirements. On the other hand, more patients (86%) in NO had associated drainage of the abdominal cavity than in OP (64%) and the duration of operation was 9 minutes longer in OP, but neither of these differences was statistically significant. Less DAC occurred in OP (10%) than in NO (23%) (a posteriori gamma risk < 0.05) and fewer deep abdominal abscesses (0 versus 11%) (p < 0.03). Median duration of hospital stay, however, was similar. CONCLUSIONS: OP decreases the rate of DAC and especially deep abdominal abscess after surgical treatment (unroofing or pericystectomy) for hydatid disease of the liver and should be recommended in this setting.
Drainage after thyroid surgery: a prospective randomized study.
Between November, 1996 and May, 1997 a series of 100 consecutive unselected patients undergoing all types of thyroid surgery--including even those inducing large dead space e.g. substernal goitre and carcinoma thyroid with recurrent nerve dissection--were randomly allotted to either receive drainage (n = 43) or not (n = 57). Patients with cervical dissection for lymph node metastasis were not included. Severe intra-operative haemorrhage was not a reason for exclusion. No complications such as haematoma or seroma were found in the undrained group whereas only minor complications such as haematoma (n = 4) were noted in the drained group. Whatever the group, none of the patients required re-exploration. The difference in overall hospital stay (1.72 days in the group of undrained patients versus 2.09 days in the drained group) was not statistically significant.
Survey of the impact of randomised clinical trials on surgical practice in France. French Associations for Research in Surgery (AURC and ACAPEM). Association Universitaire de Recherche en Chirurgie. Association des Chirurgiens de l'Assistance Publique pour l'Evaluation Médicale.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of randomised clinical trials (RCT) on decision-making and therapeutic policies among general and gastrointestinal surgeons in France. DESIGN: Telephone questionnaire. SETTING: Multicentre study, France. SUBJECTS: A random sample of 152 surgeons, mean (SD) age 50 (8) years. INTERVENTIONS AND MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Surgeons were asked 12 questions about their knowledge of RCT and how trials were conducted; influence of RCT on their treatment policies; means of obtaining information about treatments; how they evaluated their own results; whether they were willing to take part in RCT; and personal details including age, speciality, and type of practice. Surgeons were stratified according to age and type of practice. RESULTS: 148 questionnaires were suitable for analysis. 83 surgeons (56%) were under 50 years old, 38 (26%) were exclusively gastrointestinal surgeons, 82 (56%) worked in private practice, and 36 (24%) worked in teaching and university hospitals. The rest undertook mixed duties. When asked to say where they obtained their knowledge about antibiotics, 91 (61%) referred to RCT; these were mainly hospital-based, gastrointestinal, and younger surgeons. Asked to name a RCT-based policy, 81 (55%) gave medical rather than operative examples. 80 (54%) had already participated in a RCT; 79 (53%) said that they were willing to participate in a RCT that included random allocation of patients (there were no statistically significant differences in answers according to speciality or type of practice, although younger surgeons answered "yes" to both questions). Specialised journals were the main source of information for 115 (78%), and surgeons read a mean of 40 issues/year. 142 (96%) read journals in French and 66 (45%) in English, but this number fell to 10 (15%) of the 65 surgeons aged 50 or more. Personal experience was considered a more important source of therapeutic knowledge by older and specialist surgeons. 109 surgeons (74%) recalled patients during the first month postoperatively to evaluate their results. CONCLUSIONS: French surgeons, particularly those aged 50 or over, are not well informed about the nature, conduct, and value of RCT. Most of their information is acquired through reading and attending scientific meetings and congresses. Surgeons tended to attach more importance to the fame of the author than to the conduct of the study. The overall impact of RCT was weak among the surgeons questioned.
Cluster of differentiation antigen 4 (CD4) endocytosis and adaptor complex binding require activation of the CD4 endocytosis signal by serine phosphorylation.
Cluster of differentiation antigen 4 (CD4), the T lymphocyte antigen receptor component and human immunodeficiency virus coreceptor, is down-modulated when cells are activated by antigen or phorbol esters. During down-modulation CD4 dissociates from p56(lck), undergoes endocytosis through clathrin-coated pits, and is then sorted in early endosomes to late endocytic organelles where it is degraded. Previous studies have suggested that phosphorylation and a dileucine sequence are required for down-modulation. Using transfected HeLa cells, in which CD4 endocytosis can be studied in the absence of p56(lck), we show that the dileucine sequence in the cytoplasmic domain is essential for clathrin-mediated CD4 endocytosis. However, this sequence is only functional as an endocytosis signal when neighboring serine residues are phosphorylated. Phosphoserine is required for rapid endocytosis because CD4 molecules in which the cytoplasmic domain serine residues are substituted with glutamic acid residues are not internalized efficiently. Using surface plasmon resonance, we show that CD4 peptides containing the dileucine sequence bind weakly to clathrin adaptor protein complexes 2 and 1. The affinity of this interaction is increased 350- to 700-fold when the peptides also contain phosphoserine residues.
Is prophylactic pelvic drainage useful after elective rectal or anal anastomosis? A multicenter controlled randomized trial. French Association for Surgical Research.
OBJECTIVE: We investigated the role of drainage in the prevention of complications after elective rectal or anal anastomosis in the pelvis. Anastomotic leakage after colorectal resection is more prevalent when the anastomosis is in the distal or infraperitoneal pelvis than in the abdomen. The benefit of pelvic drains versus their potential harm has been questioned. Drain-related complications include (1) those possibly benefiting from drainage (leakage, intra-abdominal infection, bleeding) and (2) those possibly caused by drainage (wound infection or hernia, intestinal obstruction, fistula). METHODS: Between September 1990 and June 1995, 494 patients (249 men and 245 women), mean age 66 +/- 15 (range 15 to 101) years, with either carcinoma, benign tumor, colonic Crohn's disease, diverticular disease of the sigmoid colon, or another disorder located anywhere from the right colon to the midrectum undergoing resection followed by rectal or anal anastomosis were randomized to undergo either drainage (n = 248) with 2 multiperforated 14F suction drains or no drainage (n = 246). The primary end point was the number of patients with one or more postoperative drain-related complications. Secondary end points included severity of these complications as assessed by the rate of related repeat operations and associated deaths as well as extra-abdominally related morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: After withdrawal of 2 patients (1 in each group) both groups were comparable with regard to preoperative characteristics and intraoperative findings. The overall leakage rate was 6.3% with no significant difference between those with or without drainage. There were 18 deaths (3.6%), 8 (3.2%) in those with drainage and 10 (4%) in those without drainage. Five patients with anastomotic leakage died (1%), 3 of whom had drainage. There were 32 repeat operations (6.5%) for anastomotic leakage 11 in the group with drainage and 4 in the group with no drainage. The rate of these and the other intra-abdominal and extra-abdominal complications did not differ significantly between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: Prophylactic drainage of the pelvic space does not improve outcome or influence the severity of complications.
[What are the results of surgical treatments?].
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
[Mechanical and bacteriologic preparation for colorectal surgery: evolution and current recommendations. Associations of Research in Surgery].
Before surgical resection of the colon and/or rectum, we propose: 1) mechanical preparation of the intestine using X prep Sarget (1 pack, 120 mg, diluted in water or two packs in case of obesity) and an antiseptic (iodine polyvidone) (two 2-liter enemas at 5%, one the day before surgery and one 2 hours prior to surgery) associated with; 2) bitherapy (1 g dose of ceftriaxone plus 1 g ornidazole or metronidazole diluted in 125 mg saline solution, for 15 minutes) administered parenterally at least half an hour before the skin incision.
Prophylactic abdominal drainage after elective colonic resection and suprapromontory anastomosis: a multicenter study controlled by randomization. French Associations for Surgical Research.
BACKGROUND: Only 4 controlled trials have investigated whether prophylactic abdominal drainage was of value after colonic resection. None have been able to find any statistically significant difference, but the number of patients was small and the beta error risk was high. OBJECTIVES: To compare patients who underwent abdominal drainage with those who did not for the rate and severity of complications after elective colonic resection followed immediately by anastomosis of the suprapromontory colon and to compare suction drains with nonsuction drains. PATIENTS: Between September 1990 and June 1995, 319 patients (135 men and 184 women), whose mean age was 67 years (range, 22-95 years), with carcinoma, benign tumors, or colitis, located anywhere between the ascending and sigmoid colons, were included in the study. Patients were comparable for demographic characteristics, except that there were more patients with ascites in the group that did not undergo abdominal drainage (P<.02). INTERVENTIONS: After 2 protocol violations, 156 patients were randomized to the abdominal drainage group and 161 to the no abdominal drainage group. All 317 anastomoses were tested for airtightness intraoperatively and repaired if leakage was found (n=71), and all patients with anastomoses received a routine diatrizoate sodium enema to detect infraclinical leakage. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The postoperative complications possibly influenced by drainage included (1) deep complications for which drainage can lead to early diagnosis, such as generalized or localized peritonitis, intraabdominal hemorrhage, or hematoma; (2) complications believed to be enhanced by drainage, such as an operative wound (an abscess, disruption, or incisional hernia) or pulmonary (microatelectasis) and intestinal obstructions; and (3) complications directly due to the drains, such as ulcerations leading to fistulae, hemorrhages, drainage tract infections, difficulty in removal, intra-abdominal retention, and incisional disruptions. Subsidiary end points were the severity of these complications as assessed by the number of related subsequent operations and deaths. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients overall (8%) had postoperative complications possibly influenced by drainage (9% in the group that underwent abdominal drainage and 8% in the group that did not). This difference was not statistically significant (P<.90). One patient had a fistula directly imputable to drainage. There was no difference between suction and nonsuction drainage (P<.90). CONCLUSIONS: Routine abdominal drainage after colonic resection and immediate anastomosis decreases neither the rate nor the severity of anastomotic leakage. It can, occasionally, be detrimental.
General and gastrointestinal tract surgery in France.
Forty-three state-run medical schools admit 30000 students per year but only 3500 receive their diploma after 6 years of studies. After passing a special examination, 480 of 2000 residents choose surgery and train during twelve 6-month rotations. Surgical research is organized through government agencies, individual units, or volunteer groups. In 1992, of 8268114 procedures, appendectomy represented 4.15%; hernia, 4.09%; varicose veins, 3.61%; and cholecystectomy, 1.82%. Appendectomy has decreased from 306500 per year in 1980 (34% of all gastrointestinal surgical procedures) to 159900 (15%) in 1996, whereas cholecystectomy has increased from 64700 to 95300. Emergency gastrointestinal procedures represented 15% of all surgical procedures in 1996, doubling in the last 4 years (essentially for labor and endoscopic procedures). Ambulatory procedures have increased 12-fold since 1980, essentially (75%) in private practice. About 27% of 160000 appendectomies and 77% of 95300 cholecystectomies were performed laparoscopically in 1997. One person of 4 in France has or has had cancer, mainly due to tobacco abuse. In 1993, 32000 surgical procedures were performed for gastrointestinal cancer. Of 532000 deaths (1992), about 150000 were due to cancer, 10000 to alcohol-related disease, and 22000 to trauma. Transplantation in France increased from 3180 procedures in 1993 to 2807 in 1996, essentially lungs and heart and lungs. Between 60% and 100% of health expenditures are reimbursed by the government, the remaining being covered by private insurances. Approximately 60% of 4500 French surgeons are in private practice; 25% also have part-time hospital employment. Almost 40% of surgeons work full-time in hospitals.