The impact of smoking on inguinal hernia repair outcomes: a meta-analysis of multivariable-adjusted studies.

PURPOSE: While the detrimental effects of smoking on postoperative outcomes are recognized, the extent of its risk for inguinal hernia repair remains unclear. Our study aims to assess the influence of smoking on patients who undergo inguinal hernia repair. METHODS: We systematically reviewed PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Our goal was to identify studies that compared postoperative outcomes in smoking and non-smoking patients after inguinal hernia repair, and which employed a multivariate analysis to reduce possible confounding factors. Outcomes were recurrence, postoperative complications, and surgical site infection. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed with the use of a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was examined with I2 statistics. This review was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023445513). RESULTS: Our analysis encompassed 11 studies, involving a total of 577,901 patients. Of these, 77,226 (or 13.4%) identified as smokers, with males constituting 90% of the cohort. In terms of surgical approaches, 58% underwent laparoscopic procedures were most common at 58%, followed by open surgeries at 41%, and 1% used robotic techniques. All included studies had a low risk of bias. Smoking was associated with a higher incidence of hernia recurrence (OR 2.95; 95% CI 2.08 to 4.18; p < 0.001; I2 = 0%). No differences were found in postoperative complication (OR 1.15; 95% CI 1.00 to 1.32; p = 0.05; I2 = 56%) or surgical site infection (OR 2.94; 95% CI 0.80 to 10.88; p = 0.11; I2 = 79%). CONCLUSION: Smoking was associated with a three-fold increase in recurrence. Further studies are needed to evaluate the impact of preoperative smoking cessation on reducing recurrence.

Prophylactic mesh augmentation in emergency laparotomy closure: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials with trial sequential analysis.

BACKGROUND: Prophylactic mesh augmentation in emergency laparotomy closure is controversial. We aimed to perform a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT) evaluating the placement of prophylactic mesh during emergency laparotomy. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of Cochrane, Scopus, and PubMed databases to identify RCT comparing prophylactic mesh augmentation and no mesh augmentation in patients undergoing emergency laparotomy. We excluded observational studies, conference abstracts, elective surgeries, overlapping populations, and trial protocols. Postoperative outcomes were assessed by pooled analysis and meta-analysis. Statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4. Heterogeneity was assessed with I2 statistics. Risk of bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (RoB 2). The review protocol was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42023412934). RESULTS: We screened 1312 studies and 33 were thoroughly reviewed. Four studies comprising 464 patients were included in the analysis. Mesh reinforcement was significantly associated with a decrease in incisional hernia incidence (OR 0.18; 95% CI 0.07-0.44; p < 0.001; I2 = 0%), and synthetic mesh placement reduced fascial dehiscence (OR 0.07; 95% CI 0.01-0.53; p = 0.01; I2 = 0%). Mesh augmentation was associated with an increase in operative time (MD 32.09 min; 95% CI 6.39-57.78; p = 0.01; I2 = 49%) and seroma (OR 3.89; 95% CI 1.54-9.84; p = 0.004; I2 = 0%), but there was no difference in surgical-site infection or surgical-site occurrences requiring procedural intervention or reoperation. CONCLUSIONS: Mesh augmentation in emergency laparotomy decreases incisional hernia and fascial dehiscence incidence. Despite the risk of seroma, prophylactic mesh augmentation appears to be safe and might be considered for emergency laparotomy closure. Further studies evaluating long-term outcomes are still needed.

Mesh repair versus non-mesh repair for incarcerated and strangulated groin hernia: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Mesh repair in incarcerated or strangulated groin hernia is controversial, especially when bowel resection is required. We aimed to perform a meta-analysis comparing mesh and non-mesh repair in patients undergoing emergency groin hernia repair. METHODS: We performed a literature search of databases to identify studies comparing mesh and primary suture repair of patients with incarcerated or strangulated inguinal or femoral hernias who underwent emergency surgery. Postoperative outcomes were assessed by pooled analysis and meta-analysis. Statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4. Heterogeneity was assessed with I2 statistics. RESULTS: 1095 studies were screened and 101 were thoroughly reviewed. Twenty observational studies and four randomized controlled trials comprising 12,402 patients were included. We found that mesh-based repair had reduced recurrence (OR 0.36; 95% CI 0.19, 0.67; P = 0.001; I2 = 35%), length of hospital stay (OR - 1.02; 95% CI - 1.87, - 0.17; P = 0.02; I2 = 94%) and operative time (OR - 9.21; 95% CI - 16.82, - 1.61; P = 0.02; I2 = 95%) without increasing surgical site infection, mortality or postoperative complications such as seroma, chronic, ileus or urinary retention. In the subgroup analysis of patients that underwent bowel resection, we found that mesh repair was associated with an increased risk of surgical site infection (OR 1.74; 95% CI 1.04, 2.91; P = 0.04; I2 = 9%). CONCLUSIONS: Mesh repair for incarcerated and strangulated groin hernias reduces recurrence without an increase in postoperative complications and should be considered in clean cases. However, in the setting of bowel resection, mesh repair might increase the incidence of surgical site infection.

Drain placement in retromuscular ventral hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Drain placement in retromuscular ventral hernia repair is controversial. Although it may reduce seroma formation, there is a concern regarding an increase in infectious complications. We aimed to perform a meta-analysis on retromuscular drain placement in retromuscular ventral hernia repair. METHODS: We performed a literature search of Cochrane, Scopus and PubMed databases to identify studies comparing drain placement and the absence of drain in patients undergoing retromuscular ventral hernia repair. Postoperative outcomes were assessed by pooled analysis and meta-analysis. Statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4. Heterogeneity was assessed with I2 statistics. RESULTS: 3808 studies were screened and 48 were thoroughly reviewed. Four studies comprising 1724 patients were included in the analysis. We found that drain placement was significantly associated with a decrease in seroma (OR 0.34; 95% CI 0.12-0.96; P = 0.04; I2 = 78%). Moreover, no differences were noted in surgical site infection, hematoma, surgical site occurrences or surgical site occurrences requiring procedural intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the analysis of short-term outcomes, retromuscular drain placement after retromuscular ventral hernia repair significantly reduces seroma and does not increase infectious complications. Further prospective randomized studies are necessary to confirm our findings, evaluate the optimal duration of drain placement, and report longer-term outcomes.

A phase II trial of cisplatin, methotrexate, levofolinic acid, and 5-fluorouracil in the treatment of patients with locally advanced, metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck.

BACKGROUND: Induction chemotherapy in locoregionally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) might improve survival with respect to radiation therapy alone. Furthermore, chemotherapy represents the only therapeutic option in metastatic head and neck carcinoma. METHODS: To improve further the results that could be obtained with an induction regimen of cisplatin (CDDP) plus 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), the authors treated 50 patients with locally advanced or metastatic SCCHN with a combination of CDDP 65 mg/m2 on Day 1, methotrexate 500 mg/m2 on Day 1, levofolinic acid 250 mg/m2 on Day 2, and 5-FU 800 mg/m2 on Day 2. Cycles were repeated every 2 weeks. The authors' aim was to increase the activity of CDDP plus 5-FU (PF) using a regimen that combined the three most active drugs in SCCHN and provided an adequate biochemical modulation of 5-FU, which was administered as an intravenous bolus infusion. RESULTS: Forty objective responses were observed among 50 evaluable patients (80%; 95% confidence interval [C.I.], 66-90%), including 7 complete responses (14%; 95% C.I., 5-27%), and 33 partial responses (66%; 95% C.I., 51-79%). Locoregional treatment, consisting of radiotherapy or surgery, was given at the end of chemotherapy. On completion of induction chemotherapy and locoregional treatment, 42 of 46 patients (91%) were rendered disease free. After a median follow-up of 20 months, the median duration of response was 10 months, the median failure free survival was 10 months, and the median overall survival was 21 months. The treatment was generally well tolerated. Grade 3-4 neutropenia occurred in 25 patients (50%), but it was febrile in only 3 patients. Nausea and vomiting were well managed with serotonin-3 blocking agents. Severe mucositis was seldom observed and easily manageable, and it never required hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: The high level of activity, the manageable toxicity, and the noteworthy survival data of this regimen compare favorably with most of the drug combinations used worldwide to treat similar patient populations, with the additional advantage of significantly lower cost.

A comparison of two GM-CSF schedules to counteract the granulo-monocytopenia of carboplatin-etoposide chemotherapy.

In order to obtain the beneficial effects from granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) on granulo-monocyte recovery with the minimum dose and toxicity, we compared the effect of two different GM-CSF schedules (5 micrograms/kg/day subcutaneously, days 5 to > 18 versus days 12 to > 18 on the cytopenias which follow cytostatic treatment with carboplatin (400 mg/m2 intravenous (i.v.) day 1) and etoposide (100 mg/m2 i.v. days 1 to > 3). 13 patients entered the study for a total of 36 evaluable cycles. The cytostatic treatment produced a neutropenia that persisted for up to day 22 (absolute neutrophil count (ANC) < 1000/microliters in 25% and ANC < 2000 in 50% of control cycles). Early GM-CSF administration markedly increased the leucocyte nadir and produced two waves of leucocytosis: an early one, linked to marrow reserve release and presumably of no value to the patients; and a delayed one, due to marrow precursor and progenitor cell proliferation, in which the granulomonocytosis was associated with a marked eosinophilia. The delayed GM-CSF administration markedly increased the leucocyte nadir and accelerated granulo-monocyte recovery (with an only modest eosinophilia), so that chemotherapy could be repeated every 21 days in all the patients.

[Nasopharyngeal carcinoma: multidisciplinary treatment]. / Il trattamento multidisciplinare del carcinoma del rinofaringe.

One hundred and twenty-eight cases of nasopharyngeal carcinoma treated at National Cancer Institute of Naples from 1980 to 1992 were retrospectively studied in order to evaluate the effectiveness of radio and chemotherapy. The histological types were the following: 75 cases of undifferentiated carcinoma, 49 cases of squamocellular carcinoma, 3 cases of lymphoma and 1 case of chordoma. Four cases were classified as Stage I (UICC 1977), 10 cases Stage II, 30 cases Stage III and 84 cases Stage IV. The patients were classified in four groups in relation to the treatment given: group A: 46 patients treated with radical radiotherapy alone; group B: 45 patients treated with radiotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy (VCA); group C: 13 patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (CABO); group D: 24 patients treated with alternating radio-chemotherapy (CDDP-5FU) in the period between 1990-1992. The overall actuarial survival rate in all groups was 59% at three years and 52% at five years. There was a significative difference in survival actuarial rates between group A and B: the three-year survival rate was 54% in group A vs 46% in group B and the five-year survival rate was 43% vs 35%. In group D complete remission was obtained in 62.5% of the cases and partial remission in 25% of the cases. In conclusion the use of chemotherapy in combination with radiotherapy appeared to significantly increase the chance of long-term survival and probable healing.