Umbilical hernia repair in patients with cirrhosis: who, when and how to treat.

PURPOSE: Hernia management in patients with cirrhosis is a challenging problem, where indication, timing and type of surgery have been a subject of debate. Given the high risk of morbidity and mortality following surgery, together with increased risk of recurrence, a wait and see approach was often advocated in the past. METHODS: The purpose of this review was to provide an overview of crucial elements in the treatment of patients with cirrhosis and umbilical hernia. RESULTS: Perioperative ascites control is regarded as the major factor in timing of hernia repair and is considered the most important factor governing outcome. This can be accomplished by either medical treatment, ascites drainage prior to surgery or reduction of portal hypertension by means of a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS). The high incidence of perioperative complications and inferior outcomes of emergency surgery strongly favor elective surgery, instead of a "wait and see" approach, allowing for adequate patient selection, scheduled timing of elective surgery and dedicated perioperative care. The Child-Pugh-Turcotte and MELD score remain strong prognostic parameters and furthermore aid in identifying patients who fulfill criteria for liver transplantation. Such patients should be evaluated for early listing as potential candidates for transplantation and simultaneous hernia repair, especially in case of umbilical vein recanalization and uncontrolled refractory preoperative ascites. Considering surgical techniques, low-quality evidence suggests mesh implantation might reduce hernia recurrence without dramatically increasing morbidity, at least in elective circumstances. CONCLUSION: Preventing emergency surgery and optimizing perioperative care are crucial factors in reducing morbidity and mortality in patients with umbilical hernia and cirrhosis.

Evaluating the accuracy of three international guidelines in identifying the risk of malignancy in pancreatic cysts: a retrospective analysis of a surgical treated population.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: The international consensus Fukuoka guideline (Fukuoka ICG), The European evidence-based guideline on pancreatic cystic neoplasms (European EBG) and the American Gastroenterological Association institute guideline on the diagnosis and management of asymptomatic neoplastic pancreatic cysts (AGA IG) are 3 frequently cited guidelines for the risk stratification of neoplastic pancreatic cysts. The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of detecting malignant cysts by strictly applying these guidelines retrospectively to a cohort of surgically resected pancreatic cysts. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 72 resected cysts were included in the analysis. Invasive carcinoma, high grade dysplasia and neuro-endocrine tumour were considered as "malignant cysts" for the purpose of the study. RESULTS: 32% of the resected cysts were malignant. The analysis showed that the Fukuoka ICG, European EBG and AGA IG had a sensitivity of 66,8%, 95,5%, 80%; a specificity of 26,8%, 11,3%, 43,8%; a positive predictive value of 31,8%, 35%, 47,1% and a negative predicted value of 61,1%, 83,3%, 77,8% respectively. The missed malignancy rate was respectively 11,3%, 1,5%, 7,7% and surgical overtreatment was respectively 48,4%, 59,1%, 34,6%. CONCLUSION: In this retrospective analysis, the European EBG had the lowest rate of missed malignancy at the expense of a high number of "unnecessary" resections. The Fukuoka ICG had the highest number of missed malignancy. The AGA IG showed the lowest rate of unnecessary surgery at the cost of a high number of missed malignancy. There is need to develop better biomarkers to predict the risk of malignancy.

TAMIS is a valuable alternative to TEM for resection of intraluminal rectal tumors.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the short-term outcome after Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery (TEM) and Transanal Minimally Invasive Surgery (TAMIS) for intraluminal rectal lesions. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database of all TEM and TAMIS procedures performed at a single institution by one surgeon between March 2009 and September 2017 was conducted. Primary outcome was operating time. Secondary outcomes were blood loss, pathological outcome, length of hospital stay, 30-day readmission and mortality. RESULTS: Fifty-three patients underwent TEM procedure and 68 patients underwent TAMIS. Operating time was significantly shorter for TAMIS compared with TEM (median 45 vs 65 min, p < 0.0001). Blood loss was negligible for both TEM and TAMIS. Resection margins, lesion grade and invasion depth were comparable for both approaches. A significantly higher postoperative readmission rate was observed in the TEM group (17% vs 4.4%, p = 0.031). Mortality was zero in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: TAMIS is a valuable alternative to TEM, leading to decreased operating times, because all resections can be done in lithotomy position.

The trauma surgeon in the emergency department, a life saver?

BACKGROUND: The golden age of trauma has gone. 25 years ago the trauma surgeon was the life saver in the emergency department. He was the leader of the resuscitation team and made the important decisions in the process. Nowadays different factors have diminished the role of the trauma surgeon. DISCUSSION: Thanks to the decrease of severely injured patients in Europe and the advances in diagnostic and treatment possibilities the approach to trauma victims is less often operative. Furthermore, the uprising of emergency medicine specialists has taken many tasks out of the hands of the trauma surgeon. However, experienced trauma surgeons can do both critical care and acute care surgery and should be included in the decision-making process in the emergency room. CONCLUSION: Although the trauma surgeon often is no longer the captain of the ship in the emergency department, he can still play an important role in trauma care. They still are life savers.