Water-jet-assisted liposuction for the treatment of lipedema: Standardized treatment protocol and results of 63 patients.

BACKGROUND: Lipedema is a condition of painful increase in subcutaneous fat affecting almost exclusively women. Several studies have examined the effectiveness of liposuction in the treatment of lipedema, but none has focused on water-jet-assisted liposuction technique. METHODS: A standardized treatment protocol for liposuction in lipedema, which was established over the course of 15 years, is presented. Patients received questionnaires preoperatively and after operative treatment assessing characteristics and symptom severity on visual analog scales in a prospective manner. RESULTS: Pre- and postoperative questionnaires were available for 63 patients. Median age was 35 years and mean (body mass index) BMI 28.4 ± 0.6, all patients had stages I or II lipedema diagnosed by two separate specialists. After a mean follow-up of 22 months after operative treatment, all assessed symptom had decreased significantly in severity. All patients wore compression garments and/or received manual lymphatic drainage preoperatively; this could be reduced to only 44% of patients needing any conservative treatment postoperatively. CONCLUSION: Liposuction in water-jet-assisted technique using the presented treatment protocol is an efficient method of operative treatment of early-stage lipedema patients leading to a marked decrease in symptom severity and need for conservative treatment.

Laparoscopic versus open surgical techniques for ventral or incisional hernia repair.

BACKGROUND: There are many different techniques currently in use for ventral and incisional hernia repair. Laparoscopic techniques have become more common in recent years, although the evidence is sparse. OBJECTIVES: We compared laparoscopic with open repair in patients with (primary) ventral or incisional hernia. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the following electronic databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, metaRegister of Controlled Trials. The last searches were conducted in July 2010. In addition, congress abstracts were searched by hand. SELECTION CRITERIA: We selected randomised controlled studies (RCTs), which compared the two techniques in patients with ventral or incisional hernia. Studies were included irrespective of language, publication status, or sample size. We did not include quasi-randomised trials. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors assessed trial quality and extracted data independently. Meta-analytic results are expressed as relative risks (RR) or weighted mean difference (WMD). MAIN RESULTS: We included 10 RCTs with a total number of 880 patients suffering primarily from primary ventral or incisional hernia. No trials were identified on umbilical or parastomal hernia. The recurrence rate was not different between laparoscopic and open surgery (RR 1.22; 95% CI 0.62 to 2.38; I(2) = 0%), but patients were followed up for less than two years in half of the trials. Results on operative time were too heterogeneous to be pooled. The risk of intraoperative enterotomy was slightly higher in laparoscopic hernia repair (Peto OR 2.33; 95% CI 0.53 to 10.35), but this result stems from only 7 cases with bowel lesion (5 vs. 2). The most clear and consistent result was that laparoscopic surgery reduced the risk of wound infection (RR = 0.26; 95% CI 0.15 to 0.46; I(2)= 0%). Laparoscopic surgery shortened hospital stay significantly in 6 out of 9 trials, but again data were heterogeneous. Based on a small number of trials, it was not possible to detect any difference in pain intensity, both in the short- and long-term evaluation. Laparoscopic repair apparently led to much higher in-hospital costs. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The short-term results of laparoscopic repair in ventral hernia are promising. In spite of the risks of adhesiolysis, the technique is safe. Nevertheless, long-term follow-up is needed in order to elucidate whether laparoscopic repair of ventral/incisional hernia is efficacious.

EAES recommendations on methodology of innovation management in endoscopic surgery.

BACKGROUND: Under the mandate of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) a guideline on methodology of innovation management in endoscopic surgery has been developed. The primary focus of this guideline is patient safety, efficacy, and effectiveness. METHODS: An international expert panel was invited to develop recommendations for the assessment and introduction of surgical innovations. A consensus development conference (CDC) took place in May 2009 using the method of a nominal group process (NGP). The recommendations were presented at the annual EAES congress in Prague, Czech Republic, on June 18th, 2009 for discussion and further input. After further Delphi processes between the experts, the final recommendations were agreed upon. RESULTS: The development and implementation of innovations in surgery are addressed in five sections: (1) definition of an innovation, (2) preclinical and (3) clinical scientific development, (4) scientific approval, and (5) implementation along with monitoring. Within the present guideline each of the sections and several steps are defined, and several recommendations based on available evidence have been agreed within each category. A comprehensive workflow of the different steps is given in an algorithm. In addition, issues of health technology assessment (HTA) serving to estimate efficiency followed by ethical directives are given. CONCLUSIONS: Innovations into clinical practice should be introduced with the highest possible grade of safety for the patient (nil nocere: do no harm). The recommendations can contribute to the attainment of this objective without preventing future promising diagnostic and therapeutic innovations in the field of surgery and allied techniques.

Clinical effectiveness of selective granulocyte, monocyte adsorptive apheresis with the Adacolumn device in ulcerative colitis.

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to determine whether selective adsorptive granulocyte and monocyte apheresis (GMA apheresis) using the Adacolumn device can effectively reduce clinical symptoms and endoscopic signs of inflammation in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). A comprehensive search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to May 2008 was performed. Each study's quality was evaluated, and the data reported in the results were abstracted. Pooled relative risk (RR) estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using the fixed-effects model. Heterogeneity was quantified statistically and explained by the variation in the trial design. Seven RCTs including 594 patients were found, and six RCTs on active UC contributed to the main analyses. In half of the trials, GMA apheresis was compared to steroids. Only one trial was fully blinded. A response or remission after 6 weeks was achieved more often in patients treated with GMA apheresis (RR 1.42; CI 1.15-1.75). Also, after 12 weeks, GMA apheresis produced significantly higher remission rates (RR 1.41; CI 1.08-1.83), but long-term data were sparse. In the trials that compared GMA apheresis and steroids (n = 220 patients), side effects were much less frequent in the GMA apheresis groups (RR 0.19; CI 0.11-0.34). Homogeneous evidence from seven RCTs shows that GMA apheresis induces a clinical remission in a higher proportion of UC patients as compared to conventional medical therapy.