The novel use of wooden spoons for control of massive intra-abdominal hemorrhage.

Massive intra-abdominal hemorrhage represents a challenging operative emergency. Temporary control of the aorta and inferior vena cava (IVC) using intra-luminal balloon occlusion, preemptive trans-thoracic clamping or infra-diaphragmatic clamping has been achieved with variable success. We report the use of wooden spoons with convex arches cut from their bases as a cheap and effective alternative. They can be used to compress the aorta or IVC against the vertebrae, giving vascular control while leaving good surgical access. This equipment requires minimal financial investment and only basic woodworking skills.

Optimum mesh and port sizes for laparoscopic incisional hernia repair.

PURPOSE: Since incisional hernia repair was introduced into laparoscopic surgical practice it has been recognized that larger meshes can be problematic to successfully insert through laparoscopic ports. This study aims to facilitate the choice of mesh and port by documenting the minimum port sizes realistically needed for insertion of different types and sizes of onlay mesh. It also aims to evaluate the optimal insertion techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using four specified insertion techniques--simple roll, a tight roll along the longest edge; diagonal roll, a tight roll along the longest axis; roll and bind, the optimal roll with an additional vicryl tie as binding; and unprepared, grasped by the corner, the diagonal length of the mesh is presented head-on to the port--two independent investigators attempted insertion of different sizes of four onlay meshes--DualMesh (1 mm and 1.5 mm), Surgisis Gold, and Permacol--down 10- to 18-mm Endopath and Versaport ports positioned within a sham abdomen. The maximum mesh sizes used were DualMesh, 34 x 26 cm; Surgisis Gold, 22 x 13 cm; and Permacol, 10 x 10 cm. Two types of ports were used, Endopath ports which have an integral seal and Versaport ports with a removable seal. RESULTS: The largest mesh widths successfully passed down 18-, 12-, 11-, and 10-mm ports, respectively, were: DualMesh 1 mm--26, 17, 15, and 13 cm; Surgisis Gold--13, 13, 13, and 10 cm; DualMesh 1.5 mm--26, 15, 12, and 9 cm; and Permacol--10, 10, 10, and 7 cm. The novel roll and bind insertion technique showed improved insertion than the simple roll technique alone for the biological meshes. CONCLUSION: Small differences in mesh size and type can lead to marked changes in optimal port size. The availability of a guide such as the one produced by this study in the operating room will help surgeons to plan and select appropriate combinations of ports and meshes, potentially reducing intraoperative delays.

Perceptions of the application of fast-track surgical principles by general surgeons.

INTRODUCTION: Fast-track surgery is a novel approach which uses a multimodal package of changes to traditional surgical care to reduce the stress response evoked by surgery allowing for enhanced recovery times. The depth of understanding and application of fast-track principles to general surgical practice by consultant surgeons is unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 'Core management features' central to published fast-track general surgical studies were identified following a comprehensive Medline literature search. The knowledge and application of these features were examined in a postal questionnaire sent to 116 general surgeons in a single region. RESULTS: Of respondents, 31% indicated they were currently using fast-track surgery (the 'fast-trackers'). The number of fast-track compliant responses was calculated for each consultant (range, 1-12 of 14). Mean scores for 'fast-trackers' of 8.45 (+/- 2.188) and 'non-fast-trackers' of 6.16 (+/- 2.352) showed no significant differences (P > 0.6). The 'fast-trackers' median estimated length of stay (LOS) was 5 days (inter-quartile range [IQR], 4-7) which was significantly lower than the 7 day (IQR 6-8) LOS estimates given by the 'non-fast-trackers' (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Despite estimating reduced LOS, no significant difference in total fast-track compliant responses was found between the 'fast-tracker' and 'non-fast-tracker' groups. The 'fast-trackers' estimated LOS of 5 days is 2.5 times the 2 day LOS reported in the published fast-track studies. A significant gap exists between the perception and realisation of fast-track methodology amongst general surgeons.