Is combined rather than single antibiotic therapy actually reasonable in patients with acute calculous cholecystitis?

OBJECTIVE: Acute calculous cholecystitis (AC) is a frequently encountered emergency surgery disease and its standard treatment is cholecystectomy. In patients with high risk in surgery, antibiotic treatment (AT) is important. In routine clinical practices, antibiotics are frequently used either as single or in combination in the treatment of AC. This study examined whether or not combined antibiotic treatment (CAT) had superiority over single antibiotic treatment (SAT) in AC. METHODS: Patients with cholecystitis who received treatment in the period of 2016-2019 were retrospectively examined. The treatment procedures applied, patient findings, and laboratory data were analyzed using relevant statistical software. The patients were categorized into groups based on the treatment approaches applied, and the effects of SAT and CAT on infection parameters were analyzed. RESULTS: In all, 184 patients received treatment for AC, with a mean age of 57.7, and the female-to-male ratio was 77:107. Of these, 139 patients received SAT and 45 received CAT. No significant difference was found in terms of effectiveness between the SAT and CAT in the patients who received early cholecystectomy treatment and those who received medical treatment with noninvasive intervention. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with AC, antibiotics are commonly used either as single or in combination for prophylaxis and therapeutic purposes. As no significant difference was observed between single and combined use in terms of treatment effectiveness and hospitalization duration, CAT is not recommended due to its possibility of allergic side effects, toxicity, and cost-increasing effects.

Is combined rather than single antibiotic therapy actually reasonable in patients with acute calculous cholecystitis?

SUMMARY OBJECTIVE Acute calculous cholecystitis (AC) is a frequently encountered emergency surgery disease and its standard treatment is cholecystectomy. In patients with high risk in surgery, antibiotic treatment (AT) is important. In routine clinical practices, antibiotics are frequently used either as single or in combination in the treatment of AC. This study examined whether or not combined antibiotic treatment (CAT) had superiority over single antibiotic treatment (SAT) in AC. METHODS Patients with cholecystitis who received treatment in the period of 2016-2019 were retrospectively examined. The treatment procedures applied, patient findings, and laboratory data were analyzed using relevant statistical software. The patients were categorized into groups based on the treatment approaches applied, and the effects of SAT and CAT on infection parameters were analyzed. RESULTS In all, 184 patients received treatment for AC, with a mean age of 57.7, and the female-to-male ratio was 77:107. Of these, 139 patients received SAT and 45 received CAT. No significant difference was found in terms of effectiveness between the SAT and CAT in the patients who received early cholecystectomy treatment and those who received medical treatment with noninvasive intervention. CONCLUSIONS In patients with AC, antibiotics are commonly used either as single or in combination for prophylaxis and therapeutic purposes. As no significant difference was observed between single and combined use in terms of treatment effectiveness and hospitalization duration, CAT is not recommended due to its possibility of allergic side effects, toxicity, and cost-increasing effects.

TEP versus Lichtenstein, which one to choose? A retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Inguinal hernioplasty techniques have been improved since the first hernioplasty. Tension-free techniques that apply synthetic mesh materials, as in the Lichtenstein approach, are the gold standard. Laparoscopic hernioplasty is the strongest alternative to Lichtenstein. The superiority of laparoscopic hernioplasty over Lichtenstein is a major topic of debate. In this study, we aimed to find a conclusion to this debate by comparing our totally extraperitoneal (TEP) experiences with Lichtenstein experiences. METHODS: Patients who underwent inguinal hernioplasty at the Gulhane Training and Research Hospital from 2013 to 2018 were included in this retrospective cohort study. The sample included 96 TEP and 90 Lichtenstein patients for a total of 186 patients. The variables assessed were hospitalization duration, postoperative early visual analog scale score, chronic pain, paresthesia, recurrence, and early postoperative complications. Data were collected from patient records and via telephone questionnaire if needed. Data analysis was done by SPSS v20, using chi-square, Fisher's exact, and Mann-Whitney U tests. RESULTS: Male/female ratios were similar between the TEP and Lichtenstein groups. There was no difference in mean age between groups (p=0.1). The hospital stay was shorter (p=0.0001), and early postoperative visual analog scale score was lower in the TEP group (p=0.003). Chronic pain, paresthesia, recurrence, and early postoperative complications (hematoma, seroma, wound infection) were similar. CONCLUSIONS: TEP is superior to Lichtenstein with shorter hospitalization duration and lower rates of early postoperative pain. No difference between the two techniques was found for chronic pain. We believe that laparoscopic hernioplasty approach may be the best alternative technique for inguinal hernia repair.

TEP versus Lichtenstein, which one to choose? A retrospective cohort study

SUMMARY OBJECTIVES Inguinal hernioplasty techniques have been improved since the first hernioplasty. Tension-free techniques that apply synthetic mesh materials, as in the Lichtenstein approach, are the gold standard. Laparoscopic hernioplasty is the strongest alternative to Lichtenstein. The superiority of laparoscopic hernioplasty over Lichtenstein is a major topic of debate. In this study, we aimed to find a conclusion to this debate by comparing our totally extraperitoneal (TEP) experiences with Lichtenstein experiences. METHODS Patients who underwent inguinal hernioplasty at the Gulhane Training and Research Hospital from 2013 to 2018 were included in this retrospective cohort study. The sample included 96 TEP and 90 Lichtenstein patients for a total of 186 patients. The variables assessed were hospitalization duration, postoperative early visual analog scale score, chronic pain, paresthesia, recurrence, and early postoperative complications. Data were collected from patient records and via telephone questionnaire if needed. Data analysis was done by SPSS v20, using chi-square, Fisher's exact, and Mann-Whitney U tests. RESULTS Male/female ratios were similar between the TEP and Lichtenstein groups. There was no difference in mean age between groups (p=0.1). The hospital stay was shorter (p=0.0001), and early postoperative visual analog scale score was lower in the TEP group (p=0.003). Chronic pain, paresthesia, recurrence, and early postoperative complications (hematoma, seroma, wound infection) were similar. CONCLUSIONS TEP is superior to Lichtenstein with shorter hospitalization duration and lower rates of early postoperative pain. No difference between the two techniques was found for chronic pain. We believe that laparoscopic hernioplasty approach may be the best alternative technique for inguinal hernia repair.

RESUMO OBJETIVOS As técnicas de hernioplastia inguinal foram melhoradas desde a primeira hernioplastia. Técnicas livres de tensão que aplicam materiais de malha sintética, como na abordagem de Lichtenstein, são o padrão ouro. A hernioplastia laparoscópica é a alternativa mais forte ao Lichtenstein. A superioridade da hernioplastia laparoscópica sobre o Lichtenstein é um dos principais temas debatidos. Neste estudo, procuramos encontrar uma conclusão para esse debate comparando nossas experiências totalmente extraperitoneais (TEP) com as experiências de Lichtenstein. MÉTODOS Pacientes submetidos à hernioplastia inguinal no Gulhane Training and Research Hospital de 2013 a 2018 foram incluídos neste estudo de coorte retrospectivo. A amostra incluiu 96 pacientes TEP e 90 pacientes Lichtenstein para um total de 186 pacientes. As variáveis avaliadas foram tempo de internação, escore da escala analógica visual precoce no pós-operatório, dor crônica, parestesia, recidiva e complicações pós-operatórias precoces. Os dados foram coletados dos prontuários e do questionário por telefone, se necessário. A análise dos dados foi realizada pelo SPSS v20, utilizando os testes qui-quadrado, exato de Fisher e U de Mann-Whitney. RESULTADOS As razões homem/mulher foram semelhantes entre os grupos TEP e Lichtenstein. Não houve diferença na média de idade entre os grupos (p=0,1). A permanência hospitalar foi menor (p=0,1) e a escala visual analógica precoce foi menor no grupo TEP (p=0,003). Dor crônica, parestesia, recorrência e complicações pós-operatórias imediatas (hematoma, seroma, infecção da ferida) foram semelhantes. CONCLUSÕES O TEP é superior ao Lichtenstein, com menor tempo de internação e menores taxas de dor pós-operatória precoce. Nenhuma diferença entre as duas técnicas foi encontrada para dor crônica. Acreditamos que a abordagem de hernioplastia laparoscópica pode ser a melhor técnica alternativa para correção de hérnia inguinal.

Conventional versus endoscopic components separation technique: New anthropometric calculation for selection of surgical approach

Background/aim: Giant ventral incisional hernias (GVIHs) are hard to manage for surgeons. This problem was resolved in 1990 with the components separation technique (CST). We aimed to compare endoscopic and conventional CST for GVIHs and find a new anthropometric calculation. Materials and methods: In this prospective nonrandomized clinical trial, 21 patients were treated with endoscopic or conventional CST between 2012 and 2016. Eight patients (38.1%) were operated endoscopically and 13 (61.9%) conventionally on the basis of preoperative tomography results, hernia surface area (HSA), number of recent abdominal operations, comorbidities, and the presence or history of ostomy. Groups in which prosthetic material was applied were also compared with groups in which it was not Results: There was no statistically significant difference between endoscopic and conventional CST groups in terms of complications. A weakly statistically significant difference (P = 0.069) was found between the components separation index (CSI) of mesh-applied and not-applied patients. HSA/body surface area (BSA) was statistically significantly different between endoscopic and conventional CST groups. Conclusion: According to our results, HSA/BSA and CSI are statistically successful for preoperative prediction of mesh placement. Furthermore, HSA/BSA preoperatively successfully predicts whether conventional or endoscopic CST should be used in patients with GVIH

BRAF Inhibitors for BRAF V600E Mutant Colorectal Cancers: Literature Survey and Case Report.

The main method of fighting against colon cancer is targeted treatment. BRAF inhibitors, which are accepted as standard treatment for V600E mutant malign melanomas, are the newest approach for targeted treatment of V600E mutant colorectal cancers. In this case report, we share our experience about the use of BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib on a V600E mutant metastatic right colon adenocarcinoma patient. A 59-year-old male with only lung multiple metastatic V600E mutant right colon cancer presented to our clinic. The patient was evaluated and FOLFOX + bevacizumab treatment was initiated, which was then continued with vemurafenib. A remarkable response was achieved with vemurafenib treatment in which the drug resistance occurred approximately in the sixth month. Even though the patient benefited majorly from vemurafenib, he died on the 20th month of the diagnosis. The expected overall survival for metastatic V600E mutant colon adenocarcinoma patients is 4.7 months. BRAF inhibitors provide new treatment alternatives for V600E mutant colorectal cancers, with prolonged overall survival. BRAF inhibitors in combination with MEK inhibitors are reported as feasible treatment to overcome BRAF inhibitor drug resistance on which phase studies are still in progress. To conclude, BRAF inhibitors alone or in combination with other drugs provide a chance for curing BRAF V600E mutant colorectal cancer patients.