Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

V Paolucci

Publications and source records attributed to V Paolucci.

48 records · Page 3Linked to original sources
PubMed1991

["Routine" versus "on demand" ultrasonography in the surgical intensive care patient. A prospective randomized study].

Between May 1988 und March 1989 all patients who underwent elective or emergency surgery followed by intensive care were randomly assigned to group A (n = 149): routine sonography at the postoperative day 1, 3, 7 and 9, group B (n = 151): sonography on demand. In these two groups, the following parameters were compared: number of relaparotomies, lethality of relaparotomies, total lethality, moment of relaparotomy, period of hospitalisation, time spent with sonography. In the analyzed parameters, our examination showed no difference between the two groups. For this we state that the routine sonographical control of the surgical patient with intensive care being opposed to the sonography on demand shows no significant advantage. The demand for a routine sonography as a postoperative control can not be generally supported.

Adult↗
PubMed1990

[Endoscopic palliative tube and laser therapy in advanced cancer of the esophagus and cardia].

The treatment of patients with advanced carcinomas of esophagus and gastric cardia endoscopic palliation should restore the passage for normal oral uptake. We compared the results of two methods: endoscopic neodym-YAG-laser-therapy (group I: 24 patients) and endoscopic perturbation (group II: 56 patients). An initial recanalisation was achieved after 1-4 sessions in group I and after 1-2 sessions in group II. Recurrence of dysphagia caused in median 5 endoscopic interventions in group I and 2 in group II. We observed no complications in group I and 5 complications in group II. The median survival times were not significantly different. The results and the follow-up show no definite superiority of one of the two methods, the selection of treatment modality depends on the technical possibilities and the personal experience of the physicians.

Cardia↗
PubMed1985

[Conservative treatment of esophageal stenoses with balloon catheters].

A total of 92 dilatations using the balloon-catheter were carried out in 46 patients with oesophageal strictures. Of these 73 were in 36 patients having a benign primary disease, predominantly stenoses following anastomotic operations or with stenoses resulting from reflux oesophagitis. The average relapse-free period after balloon-catheter dilatation was 6.3 times greater than with bougienage. Balloon-catheter dilatation has proved to be a simple and safe procedure that can be applied inexpensively in an outpatient department. It has now become the method of choice in our hospital for the non-operative treatment of strictures of the oesophagus.

Deglutition Disorders↗
PubMed1984

Esophageal stenosis: treatment with balloon catheters.

We have performed 84 balloon dilatations in 40 patients who had esophageal strictures. Of these patients, 31 who had benign diseases improved, and the procedure proved to be safe, reliable, and easy to perform; in 77% of these patients, only one or two dilatations were necessary. In 10 patients who had previously undergone treatment with bougienage, the symptom-free interval of 9.3 months following balloon dilatation is four times longer than that experienced following bougienage. In patients who have malignant disease, though the symptom-free intervals are short, the procedure can be repeated easily and is accepted well by patients so that palliation can be achieved. Since only readily controlled transverse forces act in the balloon therapy, rupture is virtually eliminated, while the use of a flexible angiographic guidewire to traverse the strictures practically excludes perforation. Balloon dilatation offers distinct advantages compared with bougienage for the treatment of esophageal strictures.

Angioplasty, Balloon↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Disposable versus reusable instruments in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A prospective, randomised study.

We quantified and compared the advantages and disadvantages of disposable and reusable laparoscopic instruments in a prospective, randomised study of 158 cholecystectomies. The patients were randomly divided into two groups: 80 underwent surgery with reusable instruments, 78 with disposable instruments. The following parameters were recorded in both groups: duration of surgery, number of complications, technical problems during surgery, rate of conversion to open surgery, subjective postoperative pain, postoperative hospitalisation time, length of inability to work, and postoperative evaluation by the operating room personnel. No overall differences were found in subjective pain, postoperative complications, postoperative hospitalisation time, or time before returning to work. Surgery with disposable instruments was on the whole faster, with fewer conversions to open surgery, but this was statistically non-significant. Reusable instruments were associated with a statistically significant increase in the rate of intraoperative, instrument-related difficulties. In spite of longer operation times and higher personnel costs with reusable instruments, we found that cholecystectomy with reusable instruments costs an average of 1,015 DM less per procedure.

Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic↗