To compare the outcomes of low central venous pressure (CVP) to standard CVP during laparoscopic liver resection. The study design was a systematic review following the PRISMA statement standards. The available literature was searched to identify all studies comparing low CVP with standard CVP in patients undergoing laparoscopic liver resection. The outcomes included intraoperative blood loss (primary outcome), need for blood transfusion, mean arterial pressure, operative time, Pringle time, and total complications. Random-effects modelling was applied for analyses. Type I and type II errors were assessed by trial sequential analysis (TSA). A total of 8 studies including 682 patients were included (low CVP group, 342; standard CVP group, 340). Low CVP reduced intraoperative blood loss during laparoscopic liver resection (mean difference [MD], –193.49 mL; 95% confidence interval [CI], –339.86 to –47.12; p = 0.01).However, low CVP did not have any effect on blood transfusion requirement (odds ratio [OR], 0.54; 95% CI, 0.28–1.03; p = 0.06), mean arterial pressure (MD, –1.55 mm Hg; 95% CI, –3.85–0.75; p = 0.19), Pringle time (MD, –0.99 minutes; 95% CI, –5.82–3.84; p = 0.69), operative time (MD, –16.38 minutes; 95% CI, –36.68–3.39; p = 0.11), or total complications (OR, 1.92; 95% CI, 0.97–3.80; p = 0.06). TSA suggested that the meta-analysis for the primary outcome was not subject to type I or II errors. Low CVP may reduce intraoperative blood loss during laparoscopic liver resection (moderate certainty); however, this may not translate into shorter operative time, shorter Pringle time, or less need for blood transfusion. Randomized controlled trials with larger sample sizes will provide more robust evidence.

To compare the outcomes of low central venous pressure (CVP) to standard CVP during laparoscopic liver resection. The study design was a systematic review following the PRISMA statement standards. The available literature was searched to identify all studies comparing low CVP with standard CVP in patients undergoing laparoscopic liver resection. The outcomes included intraoperative blood loss (primary outcome), need for blood transfusion, mean arterial pressure, operative time, Pringle time, and total complications. Random-effects modelling was applied for analyses. Type I and type II errors were assessed by trial sequential analysis (TSA). A total of 8 studies including 682 patients were included (low CVP group, 342; standard CVP group, 340). Low CVP reduced intraoperative blood loss during laparoscopic liver resection (mean difference [MD], –193.49 mL; 95% confidence interval [CI], –339.86 to –47.12; p = 0.01).However, low CVP did not have any effect on blood transfusion requirement (odds ratio [OR], 0.54; 95% CI, 0.28–1.03; p = 0.06), mean arterial pressure (MD, –1.55 mm Hg; 95% CI, –3.85–0.75; p = 0.19), Pringle time (MD, –0.99 minutes; 95% CI, –5.82–3.84; p = 0.69), operative time (MD, –16.38 minutes; 95% CI, –36.68–3.39; p = 0.11), or total complications (OR, 1.92; 95% CI, 0.97–3.80; p = 0.06). TSA suggested that the meta-analysis for the primary outcome was not subject to type I or II errors. Low CVP may reduce intraoperative blood loss during laparoscopic liver resection (moderate certainty); however, this may not translate into shorter operative time, shorter Pringle time, or less need for blood transfusion. Randomized controlled trials with larger sample sizes will provide more robust evidence.

To compare the outcomes of low central venous pressure (CVP) to standard CVP during laparoscopic liver resection. The study design was a systematic review following the PRISMA statement standards. The available literature was searched to identify all studies comparing low CVP with standard CVP in patients undergoing laparoscopic liver resection. The outcomes included intraoperative blood loss (primary outcome), need for blood transfusion, mean arterial pressure, operative time, Pringle time, and total complications. Random-effects modelling was applied for analyses. Type I and type II errors were assessed by trial sequential analysis (TSA). A total of 8 studies including 682 patients were included (low CVP group, 342; standard CVP group, 340). Low CVP reduced intraoperative blood loss during laparoscopic liver resection (mean difference [MD], –193.49 mL; 95% confidence interval [CI], –339.86 to –47.12; p = 0.01).However, low CVP did not have any effect on blood transfusion requirement (odds ratio [OR], 0.54; 95% CI, 0.28–1.03; p = 0.06), mean arterial pressure (MD, –1.55 mm Hg; 95% CI, –3.85–0.75; p = 0.19), Pringle time (MD, –0.99 minutes; 95% CI, –5.82–3.84; p = 0.69), operative time (MD, –16.38 minutes; 95% CI, –36.68–3.39; p = 0.11), or total complications (OR, 1.92; 95% CI, 0.97–3.80; p = 0.06). TSA suggested that the meta-analysis for the primary outcome was not subject to type I or II errors. Low CVP may reduce intraoperative blood loss during laparoscopic liver resection (moderate certainty); however, this may not translate into shorter operative time, shorter Pringle time, or less need for blood transfusion. Randomized controlled trials with larger sample sizes will provide more robust evidence.

To compare the outcomes of low central venous pressure (CVP) to standard CVP during laparoscopic liver resection. The study design was a systematic review following the PRISMA statement standards. The available literature was searched to identify all studies comparing low CVP with standard CVP in patients undergoing laparoscopic liver resection. The outcomes included intraoperative blood loss (primary outcome), need for blood transfusion, mean arterial pressure, operative time, Pringle time, and total complications. Random-effects modelling was applied for analyses. Type I and type II errors were assessed by trial sequential analysis (TSA). A total of 8 studies including 682 patients were included (low CVP group, 342; standard CVP group, 340). Low CVP reduced intraoperative blood loss during laparoscopic liver resection (mean difference [MD], –193.49 mL; 95% confidence interval [CI], –339.86 to –47.12; p = 0.01).However, low CVP did not have any effect on blood transfusion requirement (odds ratio [OR], 0.54; 95% CI, 0.28–1.03; p = 0.06), mean arterial pressure (MD, –1.55 mm Hg; 95% CI, –3.85–0.75; p = 0.19), Pringle time (MD, –0.99 minutes; 95% CI, –5.82–3.84; p = 0.69), operative time (MD, –16.38 minutes; 95% CI, –36.68–3.39; p = 0.11), or total complications (OR, 1.92; 95% CI, 0.97–3.80; p = 0.06). TSA suggested that the meta-analysis for the primary outcome was not subject to type I or II errors. Low CVP may reduce intraoperative blood loss during laparoscopic liver resection (moderate certainty); however, this may not translate into shorter operative time, shorter Pringle time, or less need for blood transfusion. Randomized controlled trials with larger sample sizes will provide more robust evidence.

BACKGROUND: Knee disarticulations (KD) are most commonly employed following trauma or tumor resection but represent less than 2% of all lower extremity amputations performed in the United States annually. KDs provide enhanced proprioception, a long lever arm, preservation of adductor muscle insertion, decreased metabolic cost of ambulation, and an end weight-bearing stump. The role for KDs in the setting of arterial insufficiency or overwhelming infection is less clear. The purpose of this study is to describe technique modifications and report surgical outcomes following KDs at a high-volume Limb Salvage Center. METHODS: A retrospective study of medical records for all patients who underwent a through-knee amputation performed by the senior author (C.E.A.) between 2004 and 2012 was completed. Medical records were reviewed to collect demographic, operative, and postoperative information for each of the patients identified. RESULTS: Between 2004 and 2012, 46 through-knee amputations for 41 patients were performed. The mean patient age was 68 and indications for surgery included infection (56%), arterial thrombosis (35%), and trauma (9%). Postoperative complications included superficial cellulitis (13%), soft tissue infection (4%), and flap ischemia (4%) necessitating one case of surgical debridement (4%) and four trans-femoral amputations (9%). 9 (22%) patients went on to ambulate. Postoperative ambulation was greatest in the traumatic cohort and for patients less than 50 years of age, P<0.05. Alternatively, diabetes mellitus and infection reduced the likelihood of postoperative ambulation, P<0.01. CONCLUSIONS: Knee disarticulations are a safe and effective alternative to other lower extremity amputations when clinically feasible. For patient unlikely to ambulate, a through-knee amputation maximizes ease of transfers, promotes mobility by providing a counterbalance, and eliminates the potential for knee flexion contracture with subsequent skin breakdown.
Amputation* ; Arm ; Cellulitis ; Cohort Studies ; Contracture ; Debridement ; Diabetes Mellitus ; Disarticulation ; Extremities ; Humans ; Ischemia ; Knee* ; Limb Salvage ; Lower Extremity ; Medical Records ; Postoperative Complications ; Proprioception ; Retrospective Studies ; Skin ; Soft Tissue Infections ; Thrombosis ; United States ; Walking ; Weight-Bearing

Purpose: This study was performed to evaluate the association between mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) and perioperative outcomes following nephrectomy in the minimally invasive surgery (MIS) era. Methods: All partial and radical nephrectomies between 2019 and 2021 from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database were evaluated. Thirty-day perioperative outcomes were compared between groups where MBP was performed vs. not, in both the MIS and open surgery (OS) cohorts. A propensity score matching technique was utilized within MIS cases to control for covariates. The chi-square and t tests were used to determine significance. Results: A total of 11,869 cases met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis.Of these, 8,204 (69.1%; comprising 65.3% robotic and 34.7% laparoscopic) underwent MIS, while 3,655 (30.9%) underwent OS. The rate of MBP was higher in the MIS group (16.0% vs.10.0%, p < 0.001). Within the MIS group, MBP was associated with reduced rates of postoperative ileus (0.9% vs. 1.9%, p = 0.02), while other complications were comparable.Propensity score matching showed no association between MBP and postoperative ileus.However, a lower rate of 30-day readmission in the MBP group became statistically significant (4.4% vs. 6.4%, p = 0.01). Conversely, patients in the MBP group also demonstrated higher rates of pneumonia (1.29% vs. 0.46%, p = 0.002) and pulmonary embolism (0.6% vs. 0%, p < 0.001) after matching. Conclusion MBP practice prior to nephrectomy is infrequent in both OS and MIS cases, with minor differences in perioperative outcomes for patients undergoing MIS. Routine MBP should continue to be excluded from the standard of care for nephrectomy in the MIS era.

Purpose: This study was performed to evaluate the association between mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) and perioperative outcomes following nephrectomy in the minimally invasive surgery (MIS) era. Methods: All partial and radical nephrectomies between 2019 and 2021 from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database were evaluated. Thirty-day perioperative outcomes were compared between groups where MBP was performed vs. not, in both the MIS and open surgery (OS) cohorts. A propensity score matching technique was utilized within MIS cases to control for covariates. The chi-square and t tests were used to determine significance. Results: A total of 11,869 cases met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis.Of these, 8,204 (69.1%; comprising 65.3% robotic and 34.7% laparoscopic) underwent MIS, while 3,655 (30.9%) underwent OS. The rate of MBP was higher in the MIS group (16.0% vs.10.0%, p < 0.001). Within the MIS group, MBP was associated with reduced rates of postoperative ileus (0.9% vs. 1.9%, p = 0.02), while other complications were comparable.Propensity score matching showed no association between MBP and postoperative ileus.However, a lower rate of 30-day readmission in the MBP group became statistically significant (4.4% vs. 6.4%, p = 0.01). Conversely, patients in the MBP group also demonstrated higher rates of pneumonia (1.29% vs. 0.46%, p = 0.002) and pulmonary embolism (0.6% vs. 0%, p < 0.001) after matching. Conclusion MBP practice prior to nephrectomy is infrequent in both OS and MIS cases, with minor differences in perioperative outcomes for patients undergoing MIS. Routine MBP should continue to be excluded from the standard of care for nephrectomy in the MIS era.

Purpose: This study was performed to evaluate the association between mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) and perioperative outcomes following nephrectomy in the minimally invasive surgery (MIS) era. Methods: All partial and radical nephrectomies between 2019 and 2021 from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database were evaluated. Thirty-day perioperative outcomes were compared between groups where MBP was performed vs. not, in both the MIS and open surgery (OS) cohorts. A propensity score matching technique was utilized within MIS cases to control for covariates. The chi-square and t tests were used to determine significance. Results: A total of 11,869 cases met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis.Of these, 8,204 (69.1%; comprising 65.3% robotic and 34.7% laparoscopic) underwent MIS, while 3,655 (30.9%) underwent OS. The rate of MBP was higher in the MIS group (16.0% vs.10.0%, p < 0.001). Within the MIS group, MBP was associated with reduced rates of postoperative ileus (0.9% vs. 1.9%, p = 0.02), while other complications were comparable.Propensity score matching showed no association between MBP and postoperative ileus.However, a lower rate of 30-day readmission in the MBP group became statistically significant (4.4% vs. 6.4%, p = 0.01). Conversely, patients in the MBP group also demonstrated higher rates of pneumonia (1.29% vs. 0.46%, p = 0.002) and pulmonary embolism (0.6% vs. 0%, p < 0.001) after matching. Conclusion MBP practice prior to nephrectomy is infrequent in both OS and MIS cases, with minor differences in perioperative outcomes for patients undergoing MIS. Routine MBP should continue to be excluded from the standard of care for nephrectomy in the MIS era.

Purpose: This study was performed to evaluate the association between mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) and perioperative outcomes following nephrectomy in the minimally invasive surgery (MIS) era. Methods: All partial and radical nephrectomies between 2019 and 2021 from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database were evaluated. Thirty-day perioperative outcomes were compared between groups where MBP was performed vs. not, in both the MIS and open surgery (OS) cohorts. A propensity score matching technique was utilized within MIS cases to control for covariates. The chi-square and t tests were used to determine significance. Results: A total of 11,869 cases met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis.Of these, 8,204 (69.1%; comprising 65.3% robotic and 34.7% laparoscopic) underwent MIS, while 3,655 (30.9%) underwent OS. The rate of MBP was higher in the MIS group (16.0% vs.10.0%, p < 0.001). Within the MIS group, MBP was associated with reduced rates of postoperative ileus (0.9% vs. 1.9%, p = 0.02), while other complications were comparable.Propensity score matching showed no association between MBP and postoperative ileus.However, a lower rate of 30-day readmission in the MBP group became statistically significant (4.4% vs. 6.4%, p = 0.01). Conversely, patients in the MBP group also demonstrated higher rates of pneumonia (1.29% vs. 0.46%, p = 0.002) and pulmonary embolism (0.6% vs. 0%, p < 0.001) after matching. Conclusion MBP practice prior to nephrectomy is infrequent in both OS and MIS cases, with minor differences in perioperative outcomes for patients undergoing MIS. Routine MBP should continue to be excluded from the standard of care for nephrectomy in the MIS era.

There is evidence that a substantial part of genetic predisposition to prostate cancer (PCa) may be due to lower penetrance genes which are found by genome-wide association studies. We have recently conducted such a study and seven new regions of the genome linked to PCa risk have been identified. Three of these loci contain candidate susceptibility genes: MSMB, LMTK2 and KLK2/3. The MSMB and KLK2/3 genes may be useful for PCa screening, and the LMTK2 gene might provide a potential therapeutic target. Together with results from other groups, there are now 23 germline genetic variants which have been reported. These results have the potential to be developed into a genetic test. However, we consider that marketing of tests to the public is premature, as PCa risk can not be evaluated fully at this stage and the appropriate screening protocols need to be developed. Follow-up validation studies, as well as studies to explore the psychological implications of genetic profile testing, will be vital prior to roll out into healthcare.
Genetic Predisposition to Disease ; genetics ; Genetic Testing ; Humans ; Kallikreins ; genetics ; Male ; Membrane Proteins ; genetics ; Prostatic Neoplasms ; diagnosis ; genetics ; Prostatic Secretory Proteins ; genetics ; Protein-Serine-Threonine Kinases ; genetics ; Risk Factors