RESUMO
Objectives Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has become quite a popular course of treatment and has tremendous healing properties. Our research question inquired about the effectiveness of injected formula of PRP as the cure for diabetic foot ulcer in comparison to the conventional dressing. Methodology A prospective observational study was conducted at the Department of Diabetes and Endocrinology, Lady Reading Hospital, Peshawar, Pakistan, between July 2020 to January 2021. Patients' data were collected from the department's database after taking approval from the department. In our study, the selected patients were categorized into two equal groups - i.e. 80 cases in each group and were randomized by using randomization allocation software. In group I (study group) patients received PRP (1 ml /1 cm2) around the wound edges and in the base of the ulcer, while group II (control group) patients were treated with conventional dressing. Each patient was inspected for wounds on days 0, 14, 28, 90, and 180 on the basis of Wagner's classification of wounds to assess efficacy. A proforma was used to collect the required data and then utilized electronically for research analysis. Results The mean ± SD of age was 54.4±8.56 and 57.7±10.1 years in the injected PRP (study) and conventional dressing (control) groups, respectively. Of the 30 patients, 13 (43.3%) males and 17 (56.7%) females were enrolled in the study group, while 14 (46.7%) males and 16 (53.3%) females were included in the control group. The PRP was found effective in reducing the wound in about 64 (80%) patients, while wound dressing was effective in 37 (46.25%) patients (p<0.0001). In female patients, the wound healing was significantly better in the study group as compared to the control group (p<0.0001). Moreover, in patients aged above 55 years, frequently higher rates of wound reduction were observed in the study group as compared to the control group (p<0.0001). Conclusion The study concluded that injected PRP was significantly better than conventional dressing in the management of diabetic foot ulcer. More clinical trials are necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of injected PRP to validate the current findings.
RESUMO
Introduction Acute appendicitis can lead to perforation which can be lethal. The present study assessed the outcomes of laparoscopic appendectomy versus open appendectomy in patients with perforated appendicitis. Methodology A comparative study was conducted at the Department of Surgery, Liaquat University of Medical & Health Sciences (LUMHS), between March 2, 2019 and July 7, 2020. The inclusion criteria consisted of a diagnosis of perforated appendicitis. Exclusion criteria consisted of intellectual disability hindering the procurement of informed consent, pediatric patients < 15 years of age, patients with an appendicular mass or abscess unsuited for laparoscopic appendectomy, severe sepsis or septic shock on presentation, and pregnant women. Patients were allocated to either open appendectomy (Group A) or laparoscopic appendectomy (Group B). The data gathering proforma recorded demographics, surgical findings, operating room (OR) time, length of inpatient care, requirement of analgesic, and any adverse events following surgery. All of the surgeries were conducted by an experienced surgical consultant with an experience of at least five years. Results A total of 85 patients were included in the laparoscopic appendectomy group, while 101 cases were included in the open appendectomy group. The use of analgesics thrice a day to manage the postoperative pain was significantly associated with the open appendectomy (p < 0.0001). Moreover, the postoperative length of hospitalization was substantially greater in patients who underwent open appendectomy than those who underwent laparoscopic procedure (p < 0.0001). Wound-related complications were considerably lower in patients who had laparoscopic appendectomy as compared to those who had open appendectomy (23.53% versus 40.5%; p = 0.013). Conclusion The length of stay was significantly lower in patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy. Moreover, laparoscopic appendectomy was also associated with a lower rate of wound infection postoperatively, thus giving the former an edge over the latter. Despite the finding that the postoperative pain was not considerably different between the two groups, patients who underwent open appendectomy group required significantly more painkillers to manage the postoperative pain.
