1,720,975 research outputs found
Escalation related decision-making in acute deterioration: A retrospective case note review
No full textAim To describe how decision making inter-relates with the sequence of events in individuals who die during admission and identify situations where formal treatment escalation plans (TEPs) may have utility. Design and methods A retrospective case note review using stratified sampling. Two data analysis methods were applied concurrently: directed content analysis and care management process mapping via annotated timelines for each case. Analysis was followed by expert clinician review (n=7), contributing to data interpretation.Sample 45 cases, age range 38–96 years, 23 females and 22 males. Length of admission ranged from <24 hours to 97 days.Results Process mapping led to a typology of care management, encompassing four trajectories: early de-escalation due to catastrophic event; treatment with curative intent throughout; treatment with curative intent until significant point; and early treatment limits set. Directed content analysis revealed a number of contextual issues influencing decision making. Three categories were identified: multiple clinician involvement, family involvement and lack of planning clarity; all framed by clinical complexity and uncertainty.Conclusions The review highlighted the complex care management and related decision-making processes for individuals who face acute deterioration. These processes involved multiple clinicians, from numerous specialities,often within hierarchical teams. The review identified the need for visible and clear management plans, in spite of the frame of clinical uncertainty. Formal TEPs can be used to convey such a set of plans. Opportunities need to be created for patients and their families to request TEPs, in consultation with the clinicians who know them best, outside of the traumatic circumstances of acute deterioration
Oncological outcomes of laparoscopic surgery of liver metastases: a single-centre experience
No full textIn the era of multimodal management of liver metastases, surgical resection remains the only curative option, with open approach still being referred to as the standard of care. Currently, the feasibility and benefits of the laparoscopic approach for liver resection have been largely demonstrated. However, its oncologic adequacy remains to be confirmed. The aim of this study is to report the oncological results of laparoscopic liver resection for metastatic disease in a single-centre experience. A single-centre database of 413 laparoscopic liver resections was reviewed and procedures for liver metastases were selected. The assessment of oncologic outcomes included analysis of minimal tumour-free margin, R1 resection rate and 3-year survival. The feasibility and safety of the procedures were also evaluated through analysis of perioperative outcomes. The study comprised 209 patients (294 procedures). Colorectal liver metastases were the commonest indication (67.9%). Fourteen patients had conversion (6.7%) and oncological concern was the commonest reason for conversion (42.8%). Median tumour-free margin was 10 mm and complete radical resections were achieved in 211 of 218 curative-intent procedures (96.7%). For patients affected by colorectal liver metastases, 1- and 3-year OS resulted 85.9 and 66.7%. For patients affected by neuroendocrine liver metastases, 1- and 3-year OS resulted 93 and 77.8%. Among the patients with metastases from other primaries, 1- and 3-year OS were 83.3 and 70.5%. The laparoscopic approach is a safe and valid option in the treatment of patients with metastatic liver disease undergoing curative resection. It does offer significant perioperative benefits without compromise of oncologic outcomes
Exploring the role of laparoscopic surgery in two-stage hepatectomy for bilobar colorectal liver metastases
No full textBACKGROUND: The role of laparoscopy in two-stage hepatectomy for bilobar colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs) has not yet been extensively investigated.PATIENTS AND METHODS: We reviewed a prospectively collected database of 302 consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic liver resection at our institution between 2003 and 2011.RESULTS: Eight patients undergoing laparoscopic first/second-stage hepatectomy for bilobar CRLMs (male/female 6:2; median age, 64 years) were analyzed. The first stage consisted of laparoscopic clearance of the left lobe in all patients with no postoperative morbidity and mortality. Seven patients underwent portal vein embolization or ligation. The median interval between first- and second-stage hepatic resections was 89 days (range, 36-123 days). Second-stage hepatectomy with right lobar clearance (open, n=5; laparoscopic, n=2; laparoscopic to open, n=1) was associated with no mortality and an operative morbidity rate of 50%. Adhesions were judged to be minimal or absent during the second-stage procedure. Complications included intra-abdominal collection (n=2), bleeding requiring re-operation (n=1), and bile leak (n=1). R0 resection was obtained in 7 of 8 cases after first-stage resection and in 8 of 8 cases after second-stage resection. Three patients (38%) died from disease recurrence. Of the remaining 5 patients, 4 are disease-free at a median follow-up of 24 months (range, 9-27 months).CONCLUSIONS: The well-recognized advantages of laparoscopy may play a favorable role in the management of patients with bilobar CRLMs candidate for a two-stage resection. The first-stage laparoscopic clearance of the left lobe could progressively become the "gold standard." Laparoscopic second-stage hepatectomy should be limited to selected cases
Bleeding and hemostasis in laparoscopic liver surgery
No full textBackground: minimally invasive liver resection is gaining acceptance worldwide. However, the laparoscopic approach often is reserved for small segmental resections due to the fear of significant blood loss. The expansion of laparoscopic liver surgery will depend on the ability of expert surgeons and technological advances to address the management of bleeding and hemostasis with any new approach. The 4½- year experience of a single center performing totally laparoscopic liver resections is presented, with special reference to the techniques the authors have developed to limit blood loss. Methods: between 2003 and 2007, 80 patients underwent laparoscopic liver surgery for benign and malignant conditions including colorectal cancer metastases (n = 31), hepatocellular carcinoma (n = 6), neuroendocrine tumor (n = 3), cystic lesion (n = 10), adenoma (n = 8), and focal nodular hyperplasia (n = 7). Totally laparoscopic resections included sectionectomy (n = 27), hemihepatectomy (n = 10), and single/multiple segmentectomies (n = 21). Data for all resections were recorded and analyzed retrospectively to assess blood loss, hospital stay, and morbidity. Results: the median operative time was 150 min, and the median blood loss was 120 ml, with significantly more blood loss for right-sided transections than for the left liver surgery (821 vs 147 ml; p = 0.012). Four (57%) of seven resections converted to open procedures because of bleeding. No deaths occurred, and only two patients required intraoperative blood transfusions. There were eight complications and one bile leak. The median length of hospital stay was 3 days. Conclusions: the authors’ experience with 80 totally laparoscopic liver resections over a 4½-year period demonstrates that laparoscopic liver surgery is safe and effective in experienced hands for major resections. An intimate knowledge of the technology and techniques available for preventing and managing significant hemorrhage during laparoscopic liver resection is required for all surgeons performing laparoscopic liver surger
Laparoscopic versus open left lateral hepatectomy
No full textLaparoscopic liver surgery is becoming more popular, and many high-volume liver centers are now gaining expertise in this area. Laparoscopic left lateral hepatectomy (LLLH) is a standardized and anatomically well-defined resection and may transform into a primarily laparoscopic procedure for cancer surgery or living donor hepatectomy for transplantation. Five case-control series were identified comparing a total of 167 cases (86 cases of LLLH plus 81 cases of open left lateral hepatectomy). Groups were matched by age and sex, with broadly similar indications for surgery and resection techniques. LLLH is associated with shorter hospital stays and less blood loss without compromising the margin status or increasing complication rates. Donors of LLLH grafts did not have higher graft-related morbidity. Prospective studies are required to define the safety in terms of disease-free and overall survival in this new avenue in laparoscopic liver surger
Pure laparoscopic liver resection for large malignant tumors: does size matter?
No full textBackgroundLaparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for large malignant tumors can be technically challenging. Data on this topic are scarce, and many question its feasibility, safety, and oncologic efficiency. This study aimed to assess outcomes of LLR for large (≥5 cm) and giant (≥10 cm) malignant liver tumors.MethodsA prospectively collected database of 422 LLRs was reviewed from August 2003 to August 2013. The data for 52 patients undergoing LLR for large malignant tumors were analyzed. A subgroup analysis of giant tumors also is reported.ResultsDuring the period studied, 52 LLRs were performed (males, 53.8 %; mean age, 64.6 years) for large malignant tumors. Colorectal liver metastasis was the most common indication (42.3 %). The 52 LLRs included 32 major (61.5 %) and 20 minor (38.5 %) LLRs for tumors with a mean diameter of 83 mm. The median operative time was 240 min [interquartile range (IQR), 150–330 min], and the blood loss was 500 ml (IQR, 200–1,373 ml). Eight conversions (15.4 %) were performed. Six patients experienced complications (11.5 %). Among the 44 patients with successful LLRs, two patients (4.5 %) had an R1 resection. The median hospital stay was 5 days (range, 1–21 days), and no mortality occurred during a 90-day period. A subgroup analysis of patients with giant tumors showed greater blood loss (p = 0.002) and a longer operative time (p = 0.052) but no difference in terms of conversions (p = 0.64) or complications (p = 0.32).ConclusionThe findings showed that LLR is feasible and safe for large malignant tumors and can be performed with acceptable morbidity and oncologic efficiency. When used for giant malignant tumors, LLR is associated with greater blood loss and a longer operative time but no increase in complications
Aggressive multi-visceral pancreatic resections for locally advanced neuroendocrine tumours. Is it worth it?
No full textContext Traditional surgical principles state that pancreatic resection should not be contemplated when malignancies arise in thepancreas and involve other organs. While this is logic for ductal adenocarcinoma and other tumours with aggressive biologicalbehavior; for even large neuroendocrine tumours, aggressive multivisceral resection may achieve useful palliation and excellent survival. Design Case records were retrospectively analyzed. Patients and interventions Twelve consecutive patients (7 males, 5 females; median age 57 years, range: 37-79 years) underwent multi-visceral en bloc resections for neuroendocrine tumour arising in the pancreas between 1994 and 2008. Results Three patients underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy; 9 patients had left sided pancreatic resections for neuroendocrine tumour of median diameter 9.5 cm ( 5-25 cm). They had a median of 3 (range: 1-4) additional organs resected. There were no post-operative deaths or late mortality with median follow up of 24 months. Five patients experienced a complication (major in 3 patients). Median disease free survival was not attained and 3 patients experienced recurrent disease mostly in the liver and may be candidates for further resection. Conclusion Aggressive multi-visceral resection for locally advanced neuroendocrine tumour involving the pancreas is technically feasible and in selected patients can be achieved with lowmortality and acceptable morbidity, offering good disease free and overall survival. However this complex surgery should be only performed in specialist centers
A comparative analysis of safety and efficacy of different methods of tube placement for enteral feeding following major pancreatic resection. A non-randomized study
No full textContext: postoperative enteral nutrition is thought to reduce complications and speed recovery after pancreatic resection. There is little evidence on the best route for delivery of enteral nutrition. Currently we use percutaneous transperitoneal jejunostomy or percutaneous transperitoneal gastrojejunostomy, or the nasojejunal route to deliver enteral nutrition, according to surgeon preference.Objective: to compare morbidity, efficiency, and safety of these three routes for enteral nutrition following pancreaticoduodenectomy.Patients: data were obtained from a prospectively maintained database, for all patients undergoing pancreatic resection between January 2007 and June 2008. One-hundred pancreatic resected patients underwent enteral nutrition: 93 had Whipple’s operations and 7 had total pancreatectomies.Intervention: enteral nutrition was delivered by agreed protocol, starting within 24 h of operation and increasing over 2-3 days to meet full nutritional requirement.Results: delivery route of enteral nutrition was: percutaneous transperitoneal jejunostomy in 25 (25%), percutaneous transperitoneal gastrojejunostomy in 32 (32%) and nasojejunal in 43 (43%). The incidence of catheter-related complications was higher in percutaneous techniques: 24% in percutaneous transperitoneal jejunostomy and 34% in percutaneous transperitoneal gastrojejunostomy as compared to nasojejunal technique (12%). Median time to complete establishment of oral intake was 14, 14 and 10 days in percutaneous transperitoneal jejunostomy, percutaneous transperitoneal gastrojejunostomy, and nasojejunal groups, respectively. Nasojejunal tubes were removed at median 11 days (mean 11.5 days) compared to 5-6 weeks for percutaneous transperitoneal jejunostomy and percutaneous transperitoneal gastrojejunostomy. Commonest catheter-related complication in the percutaneous transperitoneal jejunostomy and percutaneous transperitoneal gastrojejunostomy was blockage (n=6; 10.5%), followed by pain after removal of feeding tube at 5-6 weeks (n=5; 8.8%), whereas in the nasojejunal group it was blockage (n=3; 7.0%), followed by displacement (n=2; 4.7%). Two patients died postoperatively in this cohort, however, there were no catheter-related mortalities.Conclusion: enteral nutrition following pancreatic resection can be delivered in different ways. Nasojejunal feeding was associated with fewest and less serious complications. On current evidence surgeon preference is a reasonable way to decide enteral nutrition but a randomized controlled trial is needed to address this issu
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
- …
