RESUMO
Background:Spasmolytics and NSAIDs are a therapy of choice in colic pain. However, the tolerability and effectiveness of this combination remains unexplored. The aim of this prospective, single-arm, open label, multicenter study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of Anafortan-N�(fixed-dose combination of camylofin dihydrochloride 50 mg + nimesulide 100 mg) in patients with acute colicky abdominal pain.Methods: In all, 295 patients with acute colicky abdominal pain and at least one episode of colicky pain in the last 24 hours were enrolled in this study. None of the patients were hospitalized. All patients were advised Anafortan-N畉ablets twice daily orally for 5 days. The safety of Anafortan-N畐as assessed by number and percentage of patients with adverse events (AEs) and change in the severity and frequency of AEs by the end of treatment. The tolerability was determined by number and percentage of patients who hadto discontinue the treatment due to AEs. The effectiveness was evaluated as percentage change in the mean intensity of pain score (based on a 100-mm visual analog scale) from baseline to end of treatment.Results: Overall, 14 (4.7%) patients reported 14 AEs, all of which were treatment-emergent and non-serious. Of the 14 AEs, 7 AEs were mild, 6 AEs were moderate, and 1 AE was severe. No serious adverse events (SAEs) were reported. No adjustment of the study medication was required in response to any of the AEs, and none of the AEs led to discontinuation of the study treatment. At end of treatment(EOT), the pain intensity significantly (p<0.0001) reduced to 1.7�49 with a mean change of -69.9�.42 from baseline, and the daily pain intensity significantly (p<0.0001) reduced to 0.1�38 with a mean change of -3.5�77 from baseline.Conclusions: Among Indian patients presenting with acute abdominal colicky pain, twice daily treatment with a FDC of camylofin dihydrochloride 50 mg and nimesulide 100 mg (Anafortan-N�) showed significant reduction in pain intensity with very few side effects, thereby confirming its safety, tolerability, and effectiveness in acute colicky abdominal pain.
RESUMO
Background and objectives: Incisional hernia is the one true iatrogenic hernia. The Incisional hernia occurs in less than 5-11% of patients subjected to abdominal operation. Incisional hernia usually starts within few months after surgery, as a result of failure of the lines of closure of the abdominal wall following laparotomy. If left unattended they tend to attain large size and cause discomfort to the patient. This study has been undertaken to assess the magnitude of this problem, various factors leading to development of this condition and the different modalities of treatment practiced in our set up. Methodology: The present study was conducted at the Department of General Surgery; AMC MET Medical college and Seth L. G. Hospital Ahmedabad, in which 60 patients of incisional hernia were treated during June 2018 to April 2020. Interpretation and Conclusion: Successful repair relies on knowledge of the dynamics of the abdominal wall, thorough technical execution, appropriate selection of synthetic or bioprosthetic material, and constitution of surgical team. Though laparoscopic repair has been demonstrated to be safe and a more resilient repair than open repair, open mesh repair remains a suitable alternative.
RESUMO
Background and objective : Blunt abdominal injury remains one of the commonest injuries. The solid organs, namely the Liver, Spleen & Kidney are the most commonly injured intra-abdominal organs. Non operative line of management is now considered the line of treatment for patients with intra-abdominal organ injury who are hemodynamically stable. In the case of polytraumatized patients with open or blunt abdominal trauma, the liver is the most frequently injured abdominal organ. Earlier, surgical treatment was the standard procedure globally for all kinds of trauma-related liver injuries. However, development of new interventional radiological techniques has changed the paradigm towards a non-surgical patient management. Methodology: An observational study of 50 patients with solid organ injuries of the abdomen following abdominal trauma admitted over a period from July 2018 up to August 2020 was carried out. Patient management either operative or conservative was decided on basis of hemodynamic status and they were divided in groups OP (Operated) and NOM (Non Operative Management). Interpretation and conclusion : In our study, majority of liver injury were treated conservatively. Splenic injury patients were mostly managed by operative intervention and renal injury patients were managed according to grading of organ injury.
RESUMO
Background and Objective : Common bile duct stone typically requires surgical intervention, which primarily involves open CBD exploration + Laparoscopic cholecystectomy, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and laparoscopic CBD exploration. Open CBD exploration has multiple complications, high mortality rate and long recovery time. Methodology : A total of 50 cases presenting as choledocholithiasis between July 2018 to August 2020 were taken for study. 1st group of 20 patients underwent open cholecystectomy with open CBD exploration. 2nd group of 20 patients underwent ERCP followed by interval (6 weeks) laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Results : ERCP found to be better when compared with open CBD exploration in terms of less post-operative complications (5% in ERCP vs 20% in Open CBD exploration) and less mean duration of hospital stay(5 days in ERCP vs 8 days in Open CBD exploration). Interpretation and Conclusion : For management of CBD stone patient, gold standard treatment is ERCP followed by Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy. While in patients with incomplete clearance of CBD stone after ERCP, CBD exploration either laparoscopically or by open approach should be preferred. While in patients with CBD stone greater than 2 cm size, direct open CBD exploration is the preferred option380008