RESUMO
SUMMARY OBJECTIVE: Peptic ulcer perforation presents the most serious complication of ulcer disease with mortality that varies significantly depending on the age and conditions. The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic was effective worldwide in 2020 and continues to date. The aim of this study was to investigate the initial clinical parameters and short-term outcomes of patients with acute peptic ulcer perforation before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in the Department of Surgery, University Hospital Ostrava, Czech Republic. The patients undergoing surgical modality of a simple suture of peptic ulcer perforation with/without omentoplasty in the post-coronavirus disease 2019 (January 1, 2020 to December 31, 2021) and the pre-coronavirus disease 2019 (January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2019) had been incorporated in this study. RESULTS: This study included a total of 46 cases (26 in the pre-coronavirus disease 2019, 20 in the post-coronavirus disease 2019). The age, body mass index, Boey score, duration of symptoms, surgery time, and length of hospital stay were comparable in both study subgroups. During the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, patients were admitted with a statistically significantly lower degree of perioperative risk according to the American Society of Anesthesiologists classification (p=0.013). Notably, 30-day postoperative morbidity was significantly higher in pre-coronavirus disease 2019 (73.1 vs. 55.0%, p=0.038). The mortality rate in the laparoscopic group was 13.6%, in the laparotomy group 41.4%, and the mortality rate was higher in pre-coronavirus disease 2019 than in post-coronavirus disease 2019 (34.6 vs. 20.0%, p=0.166). CONCLUSION: In fact, the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic had not significantly influenced therapeutic management and short-term outcomes of patients undergoing acute surgical repair of peptic ulcer perforation.
RESUMO
SUMMARY OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate our experience with the use of Magseed, the magnetic metallic marker, as a localization technique followed by Sentimag probe detection in patients with solitary intra-abdominal local metastases with subsequent resection of the lesions. METHODS: Five patients underwent resection after the lesion was marked with the Magseed magnetic marker. Prior to the surgery, a computed tomography scan of the chest and abdomen and/or positron emission tomography was performed to rule out the dissemination of the disease. The indication for surgery was evaluated in a meeting of a multidisciplinary team, and the placement of the magnetic marker under computed tomography control had been performed the day before the planned procedure. RESULTS: The present preliminary outcomes have revealed that Magseed might be a promising technique that is feasible and safe, particularly when the postsurgical anatomic conditions in the abdominal cavity are altered and the lesions are not visible or palpable. Surgical extirpation of lesions occurred without complications in each case. In all the cases, the resection was complete and curative, and one wound infection in all (20%), without any major complications, had occurred. The mean hospital stay was 6.6 days. CONCLUSION: Magseed utilization, as a localization technique, followed by Sentimag probe detection in intra-abdominal tumors has not been reported before. Improving the visualization and, consequently, the precise marking of the lesion with subsequent radical removal can prevent insufficient or excessive removal of healthy tissue, leading to a faster diagnosis and better overall clinical outcomes.
RESUMO
SUMMARY OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of body mass index on patients' short-term results following lung lobectomy. METHODS: In this retrospective study, we compared the perioperative and short-term postoperative results of obese (BMI≥30 kg/m2) versus non-obese patients (BMI<30 kg/m2) who underwent anatomical lung resection for cancer. The two groups had the same distribution of input risk factors and the same ratio of surgical approaches (thoracoscopy vs. thoracotomy). RESULTS: The study included a total of 144 patients: 48 obese and 96 non-obese patients. Both groups had the same ratio of thoracoscopic vs. thoracotomy approach (50/50%), and were comparable in terms of demographics and clinical data. The g roups did not significantly differ in the frequency of perioperative or postoperative complications. Postoperative morbidity was higher among non-obese patients (34.4 vs. 27.1%), but this difference was not statistically significant (p=0.053). Hospital stay was similar in both study groups (p=0.100). Surgery time was significantly longer among obese patients (p=0.133). Postoperative mortality was comparable between the study groups (p=0.167). CONCLUSIONS: Obesity does not increase the frequency of perioperative and postoperative complications in patients after lung lobectomy. The slightly better results in obese patients suggest that obesity may have some protective role.