2.Axillary Reconstruction for Hidradenitis Suppurativa with an Inner-Arm Transposition Flap Creating a Brachioplasty Effect.
Daniel L CHING ; Maleeha MUGHAL ; Athanasios PAPAS ; Mark SOLDIN
Archives of Plastic Surgery 2017;44(3):228-233
BACKGROUND: Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a chronic skin condition that can affect any area with apocrine sweat glands and has the potential to involve multiple sites concurrently. Commonly affected sites include the axilla, groin, perineum and perianal areas. In this study we performed a literature review on the surgical methods for HS and describe an innovative technique for reconstructing axilla HS using an inner-arm transposition flap. METHODS: We reviewed all cases (5 cases from 4 patients) of transposition flap reconstruction performed by the senior author at a single London tertiary hospital from 2008–2013. Patient related outcome measures were collected using the Derriford appearance scale (DAS 24) and a study specific questionnaire. RESULTS: All patients were satisfied with their final result. One out of five cases had a complication but did not result in flap failure. There is no disease recurrence to date. DAS 24 scores collected demonstrated acceptable postoperative distress that did not deviate far from the norm tables while study specific questionnaire reveal desirable outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: We have managed to achieve our aim through the use of the innovative inner-arm transposition flap. Our study hopes to provide an additional technique for axillary reconstruction. This technique offers the effective concealment of scars with the benefit of tightening of the arm tissue producing ‘brachioplasty like’ effects. All things considered it would be reasonable to conclude the innovative flap technique is a reliable, effective, and simple method that results in multiple benefits.
Arm
;
Axilla
;
Cicatrix
;
Groin
;
Hidradenitis Suppurativa*
;
Hidradenitis*
;
Hope
;
Humans
;
Methods
;
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
;
Perineum
;
Recurrence
;
Skin
;
Surgical Flaps
;
Sweat Glands
;
Tertiary Care Centers
4.Evaluation of the Perkins handheld applanation tonometer in horses and cattle.
Silvia Franco ANDRADE ; Daniel Silva KUPPER ; Luiz Fernando Rodrigues DE PINHO ; Elizabeth Cunha FRANCO ; Marcus Vinicius Felix Fabri PRATAVIERA ; Rodrigo Rolim DUARTE ; Jose Ricardo Cecilio JUNQUEIRA
Journal of Veterinary Science 2011;12(2):171-176
The objective of this study was to evaluate and validate the accuracy of the Perkins handheld applanation tonometer for measuring intraocular pressure (IOP) in horses and cattle. Both eyes of 10 adult horses and cattle were evaluated in a postmortem study. The eyes from 10 clinically normal adult horses and cattle were also examined after bilateral auriculopalpebral nerve block and topical anesthesia for an in vivo study. IOP was measured postmortem using direct manometry (measured with an aneroid manometer) and tonometry (measured with a Perkins handheld applanation tonometer). The correlation coefficients (r2 ) for the data from the postmortem manometry and Perkins tonometer study were 0.866 for horses and 0.864 for cattle. In the in vivo study, IOP in horses was 25.1 +/- 2.9 mmHg (range 19.0~30.0 mmHg) as measured by manometry and 23.4 +/- 3.2 mmHg (range 18.6~28.4 mmHg) according to tonometry. In cattle, IOP was found to be 19.7 +/- 1.2 mmHg (range 18.0~22.0 mmHg) by manometry and 18.8 +/- 1.7 mmHg (range 15.9~20.8 mmHg) by tonometry. There was a strong correlation between the IOP values obtained by direct ocular manometry and the tonometer in both horses and cattle. Our results demonstrate that the Perkins handheld tonometer could be an additional tool for accurately measuring IOP in equine and bovine eyes.
Animals
;
Cattle/*physiology
;
Eye/*physiopathology
;
Horses/*physiology
;
Intraocular Pressure/*physiology
;
Linear Models
;
Manometry/instrumentation/veterinary
;
Tonometry, Ocular/instrumentation/*veterinary
5.Do some patients receive unnecessary parenteral nutrition after pancreatoduodenectomy?Results from an international multicentre study
Thomas B. RUSSELL ; Peter L. LABIB ; Paula MURPHY ; Fabio AUSANIA ; Elizabeth PANDO ; Keith J. ROBERTS ; Ambareen KAUSAR ; Vasileios K. MAVROEIDIS ; Gabriele MARANGONI ; Sarah C. THOMASSET ; Adam E. FRAMPTON ; Pavlos LYKOUDIS ; Manuel MAGLIONE ; Nassir ALHABOOB ; Hassaan BARI ; Andrew M. SMITH ; Duncan SPALDING ; Parthi SRINIVASAN ; Brian R. DAVIDSON ; Ricky H. BHOGAL ; Daniel CROAGH ; Ismael DOMINGUEZ ; Rohan THAKKAR ; Dhanny GOMEZ ; Michael A. SILVA ; Pierfrancesco LAPOLLA ; Andrea MINGOLI ; Alberto PORCU ; Nehal S. SHAH ; Zaed Z. R. HAMADY ; Bilal AL-SARRIEH ; Alejandro SERRABLO ; ; Somaiah AROORI
Annals of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery 2024;28(1):70-79
Background:
s/Aims: After pancreatoduodenectomy (PD), an early oral diet is recommended; however, the postoperative nutritional management of PD patients is known to be highly variable, with some centers still routinely providing parenteral nutrition (PN). Some patients who receive PN experience clinically significant complications, underscoring its judicious use. Using a large cohort, this study aimed to determine the proportion of PD patients who received postoperative nutritional support (NS), describe the nature of this support, and investigate whether receiving PN correlated with adverse perioperative outcomes.
Methods:
Data were extracted from the Recurrence After Whipple’s study, a retrospective multicenter study of PD outcomes.
Results:
In total, 1,323 patients (89%) had data on their postoperative NS status available. Of these, 45% received postoperative NS, which was “enteral only,” “parenteral only,” and “enteral and parenteral” in 44%, 35%, and 21% of cases, respectively. Body mass index < 18.5 kg/m2 (p = 0.03), absence of preoperative biliary stenting (p = 0.009), and serum albumin < 36 g/L (p = 0.009) all correlated with receiving postoperative NS. Among those who did not develop a serious postoperative complication, i.e., those who had a relatively uneventful recovery, 20% received PN.
Conclusions
A considerable number of patients who had an uneventful recovery received PN. PN is not without risk, and should be reserved for those who are unable to take an oral diet. PD patients should undergo pre- and postoperative assessment by nutrition professionals to ensure they are managed appropriately, and to optimize perioperative outcomes.
6.Do some patients receive unnecessary parenteral nutrition after pancreatoduodenectomy?Results from an international multicentre study
Thomas B. RUSSELL ; Peter L. LABIB ; Paula MURPHY ; Fabio AUSANIA ; Elizabeth PANDO ; Keith J. ROBERTS ; Ambareen KAUSAR ; Vasileios K. MAVROEIDIS ; Gabriele MARANGONI ; Sarah C. THOMASSET ; Adam E. FRAMPTON ; Pavlos LYKOUDIS ; Manuel MAGLIONE ; Nassir ALHABOOB ; Hassaan BARI ; Andrew M. SMITH ; Duncan SPALDING ; Parthi SRINIVASAN ; Brian R. DAVIDSON ; Ricky H. BHOGAL ; Daniel CROAGH ; Ismael DOMINGUEZ ; Rohan THAKKAR ; Dhanny GOMEZ ; Michael A. SILVA ; Pierfrancesco LAPOLLA ; Andrea MINGOLI ; Alberto PORCU ; Nehal S. SHAH ; Zaed Z. R. HAMADY ; Bilal AL-SARRIEH ; Alejandro SERRABLO ; ; Somaiah AROORI
Annals of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery 2024;28(1):70-79
Background:
s/Aims: After pancreatoduodenectomy (PD), an early oral diet is recommended; however, the postoperative nutritional management of PD patients is known to be highly variable, with some centers still routinely providing parenteral nutrition (PN). Some patients who receive PN experience clinically significant complications, underscoring its judicious use. Using a large cohort, this study aimed to determine the proportion of PD patients who received postoperative nutritional support (NS), describe the nature of this support, and investigate whether receiving PN correlated with adverse perioperative outcomes.
Methods:
Data were extracted from the Recurrence After Whipple’s study, a retrospective multicenter study of PD outcomes.
Results:
In total, 1,323 patients (89%) had data on their postoperative NS status available. Of these, 45% received postoperative NS, which was “enteral only,” “parenteral only,” and “enteral and parenteral” in 44%, 35%, and 21% of cases, respectively. Body mass index < 18.5 kg/m2 (p = 0.03), absence of preoperative biliary stenting (p = 0.009), and serum albumin < 36 g/L (p = 0.009) all correlated with receiving postoperative NS. Among those who did not develop a serious postoperative complication, i.e., those who had a relatively uneventful recovery, 20% received PN.
Conclusions
A considerable number of patients who had an uneventful recovery received PN. PN is not without risk, and should be reserved for those who are unable to take an oral diet. PD patients should undergo pre- and postoperative assessment by nutrition professionals to ensure they are managed appropriately, and to optimize perioperative outcomes.
7.Do some patients receive unnecessary parenteral nutrition after pancreatoduodenectomy?Results from an international multicentre study
Thomas B. RUSSELL ; Peter L. LABIB ; Paula MURPHY ; Fabio AUSANIA ; Elizabeth PANDO ; Keith J. ROBERTS ; Ambareen KAUSAR ; Vasileios K. MAVROEIDIS ; Gabriele MARANGONI ; Sarah C. THOMASSET ; Adam E. FRAMPTON ; Pavlos LYKOUDIS ; Manuel MAGLIONE ; Nassir ALHABOOB ; Hassaan BARI ; Andrew M. SMITH ; Duncan SPALDING ; Parthi SRINIVASAN ; Brian R. DAVIDSON ; Ricky H. BHOGAL ; Daniel CROAGH ; Ismael DOMINGUEZ ; Rohan THAKKAR ; Dhanny GOMEZ ; Michael A. SILVA ; Pierfrancesco LAPOLLA ; Andrea MINGOLI ; Alberto PORCU ; Nehal S. SHAH ; Zaed Z. R. HAMADY ; Bilal AL-SARRIEH ; Alejandro SERRABLO ; ; Somaiah AROORI
Annals of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery 2024;28(1):70-79
Background:
s/Aims: After pancreatoduodenectomy (PD), an early oral diet is recommended; however, the postoperative nutritional management of PD patients is known to be highly variable, with some centers still routinely providing parenteral nutrition (PN). Some patients who receive PN experience clinically significant complications, underscoring its judicious use. Using a large cohort, this study aimed to determine the proportion of PD patients who received postoperative nutritional support (NS), describe the nature of this support, and investigate whether receiving PN correlated with adverse perioperative outcomes.
Methods:
Data were extracted from the Recurrence After Whipple’s study, a retrospective multicenter study of PD outcomes.
Results:
In total, 1,323 patients (89%) had data on their postoperative NS status available. Of these, 45% received postoperative NS, which was “enteral only,” “parenteral only,” and “enteral and parenteral” in 44%, 35%, and 21% of cases, respectively. Body mass index < 18.5 kg/m2 (p = 0.03), absence of preoperative biliary stenting (p = 0.009), and serum albumin < 36 g/L (p = 0.009) all correlated with receiving postoperative NS. Among those who did not develop a serious postoperative complication, i.e., those who had a relatively uneventful recovery, 20% received PN.
Conclusions
A considerable number of patients who had an uneventful recovery received PN. PN is not without risk, and should be reserved for those who are unable to take an oral diet. PD patients should undergo pre- and postoperative assessment by nutrition professionals to ensure they are managed appropriately, and to optimize perioperative outcomes.
8.Do some patients receive unnecessary parenteral nutrition after pancreatoduodenectomy?Results from an international multicentre study
Thomas B. RUSSELL ; Peter L. LABIB ; Paula MURPHY ; Fabio AUSANIA ; Elizabeth PANDO ; Keith J. ROBERTS ; Ambareen KAUSAR ; Vasileios K. MAVROEIDIS ; Gabriele MARANGONI ; Sarah C. THOMASSET ; Adam E. FRAMPTON ; Pavlos LYKOUDIS ; Manuel MAGLIONE ; Nassir ALHABOOB ; Hassaan BARI ; Andrew M. SMITH ; Duncan SPALDING ; Parthi SRINIVASAN ; Brian R. DAVIDSON ; Ricky H. BHOGAL ; Daniel CROAGH ; Ismael DOMINGUEZ ; Rohan THAKKAR ; Dhanny GOMEZ ; Michael A. SILVA ; Pierfrancesco LAPOLLA ; Andrea MINGOLI ; Alberto PORCU ; Nehal S. SHAH ; Zaed Z. R. HAMADY ; Bilal AL-SARRIEH ; Alejandro SERRABLO ; ; Somaiah AROORI
Annals of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery 2024;28(1):70-79
Background:
s/Aims: After pancreatoduodenectomy (PD), an early oral diet is recommended; however, the postoperative nutritional management of PD patients is known to be highly variable, with some centers still routinely providing parenteral nutrition (PN). Some patients who receive PN experience clinically significant complications, underscoring its judicious use. Using a large cohort, this study aimed to determine the proportion of PD patients who received postoperative nutritional support (NS), describe the nature of this support, and investigate whether receiving PN correlated with adverse perioperative outcomes.
Methods:
Data were extracted from the Recurrence After Whipple’s study, a retrospective multicenter study of PD outcomes.
Results:
In total, 1,323 patients (89%) had data on their postoperative NS status available. Of these, 45% received postoperative NS, which was “enteral only,” “parenteral only,” and “enteral and parenteral” in 44%, 35%, and 21% of cases, respectively. Body mass index < 18.5 kg/m2 (p = 0.03), absence of preoperative biliary stenting (p = 0.009), and serum albumin < 36 g/L (p = 0.009) all correlated with receiving postoperative NS. Among those who did not develop a serious postoperative complication, i.e., those who had a relatively uneventful recovery, 20% received PN.
Conclusions
A considerable number of patients who had an uneventful recovery received PN. PN is not without risk, and should be reserved for those who are unable to take an oral diet. PD patients should undergo pre- and postoperative assessment by nutrition professionals to ensure they are managed appropriately, and to optimize perioperative outcomes.
9.A practical and adaptive approach to lung cancer screening: a review of international evidence and position on CT lung cancer screening in the Singaporean population by the College of Radiologists Singapore.
Charlene Jin Yee LIEW ; Lester Chee Hao LEONG ; Lynette Li San TEO ; Ching Ching ONG ; Foong Koon CHEAH ; Wei Ping THAM ; Haja Mohamed Mohideen SALAHUDEEN ; Chau Hung LEE ; Gregory Jon Leng KAW ; Augustine Kim Huat TEE ; Ian Yu Yan TSOU ; Kiang Hiong TAY ; Raymond QUAH ; Bien Peng TAN ; Hong CHOU ; Daniel TAN ; Angeline Choo Choo POH ; Andrew Gee Seng TAN
Singapore medical journal 2019;60(11):554-559
Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death around the world, being the top cause of cancer-related deaths among men and the second most common cause of cancer-related deaths among women in Singapore. Currently, no screening programme for lung cancer exists in Singapore. Since there is mounting evidence indicating a different epidemiology of lung cancer in Asian countries, including Singapore, compared to the rest of the world, a unique and adaptive approach must be taken for a screening programme to be successful at reducing mortality while maintaining cost-effectiveness and a favourable risk-benefit ratio. This review article promotes the use of low-dose computed tomography of the chest and explores the radiological challenges and future directions.