Biomedical subjects
Publications and source records attributed to B J Mehigan.
Acute pancreatitis is an important and extremely common cause of acute hospital admission which may be associated with major morbidity and mortality. Modern treatment is largely supportive with a limited role for surgery.
BACKGROUND: Attenuation of the immune response to surgery, as demonstrated with the laparoscopic approach to cholecystectomy, has potential benefits in patients undergoing laparoscopic colonic resection for malignancy. We aimed to study the perioperative immune response in patients undergoing laparoscopically assisted and open surgery for colorectal cancer. METHODS: This study involved 23 patients undergoing laparoscopically assisted (n = 13) and open surgery (n = 10). Interleukin-6 (IL-6) C-reactive protein (CRP), the total lymphocyte count, and the CD3, CD4, CD8, CD16, and CD19 lymphocyte subpopulations were assayed preoperatively and at 4, 8, 10, 24, 48, and 168 h postoperatively. RESULTS: Significant rises in IL-6 and CRP were demonstrated within 4 and 24 h, respectively (p < 0.001) in both groups. However, no significant difference between the groups was seen. Significant decreases in total lymphocyte count and all T cell subsets were demonstrated in both groups, beginning at 4 h (p < 0.01). However, no significant difference between the groups was seen. All parameters, excluding CRP, had returned to baseline by 7 days postoperatively in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with malignancy exhibit significant perioperative immune disturbance with laparoscopically assisted and open surgery. The current data do not provide justification for the laparoscopically assisted approach on grounds of immune preservation.
PURPOSE: Total mesorectal excision offers the lowest reported rates of local recurrence for rectal cancer; however, the ability to perform total mesorectal excision laparoscopically remains unproven. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and adequacy of a totally laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. METHODS: A prospective review of all patients undergoing laparoscopic-assisted surgery for rectal cancer by a single surgeon was undertaken. These were compared with a control group undergoing open rectal resections by another colorectal consultant in the unit (n = 22). Comparison of total specimen length, longitudinal and radial excision margins, and lymph node yield was made between groups. RESULTS: Of 42 laparoscopic-assisted rectal resections attempted, 14 (33 percent) were converted to open procedures and six had their dissection completed open. One resection was considered noncurative. Twenty-one total mesorectal excisions (50 percent) were completed totally laparoscopically. No significant difference was detected between groups for specimen length, radial margin, or lymph node yield. Longitudinal margin of excision was longer in the laparoscopic group (4 (3.5-5) vs. 2.5 (1.05-3.5) cm; P = 0.02, Mann-Whitney). Operating time was significantly longer in the laparoscopic group (180 (168-218) vs. 125 (104-144) minutes; P = 0.003, Mann-Whitney). Data are medians (interquartile ranges). Four patients in the laparoscopic-assisted group had clinical anastomotic leakage vs. one in the open group (P = 0.329, Fisher's exact test). At median follow-up of 38 (range, 6-53) months, one local recurrence had occurred in each group and crude mortality rates were 29 and 23 percent in the laparoscopic-assisted and open groups, respectively (P = 0.736, Fisher's exact test). CONCLUSION: Totally laparoscopic excision of the mesorectum is feasible in 50 percent of patients and where possible yields histologic parameters comparable to open surgery. Early survival and recurrence figures also appear to be comparable.
Laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection is a feasible and reasonable undertaking in skilled trained hands. Obviating the need for an abdominal incision has resulted in significant benefits in terms of patient recovery. Oncologic outcomes seem comparable to that achieved with open surgery and the authors would argue that the magnified dissection has many benefits. Laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection, as correctly prophesied by Heald in 1993, may become the first widely accepted laparoscopic procedure for cancer cure.
BACKGROUND: The explosion in the use of therapeutic laparoscopy during the past decade has focused much research interest on finding a basic scientific support for the clinically apparent attenuation of the stress response to surgery. In particular, the potential impact that attenuation of the immune response to surgery may have on laparoscopy for the cure of malignancy has attracted much attention. METHODS: A review of the published literature on the stress response to laparoscopic surgery and the impact of laparoscopy on tumor growth was performed. RESULTS: Evidence favors an attenuation of the immune response to surgery with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Whether this is true also of more major procedures such as laparoscopically assisted colectomy for malignancy is currently unclear. In animal models, tumor growth after laparoscopic surgery is less than after laparotomy and depends on the insufflation agent used. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy appears to be associated with attenuation of the immune response to surgery. The implications of these findings for the future use of laparoscopic surgical techniques for malignant disease remain unclear.
BACKGROUND: Surgical haemorrhoidectomy has a reputation for being a painful procedure for a fairly benign disorder. The circular transanal stapled technique for the treatment of haemorrhoids has the potential to offer a less painful rectal procedure in place of ablative perianal surgery. We compared the short-term outcome of the circular stapled procedure for haemorrhoids with current standard surgery in a randomised controlled trial. METHODS: 40 patients admitted for surgical treatment of prolapsing haemorrhoids were randomly assigned to Milligan-Morgan haemorrhoidectomy (n=20) or the circular stapled procedure. Under general anaesthesia patients underwent standardised diathermy excision haemorrhoidectomy or had a circumferential doughnut of rectal mucosa and submucosa above the dentate line excised and closed with a standard circular end-to-end stapling device. All patients received standardised preoperative and postoperative analgesic and laxative regimens. Patients completed linear analogue pain charts each day and were interviewed at 1, 3, and 6-10 weeks postoperatively. Summary measures of average pain experience were calculated from 10 cm linear analogue pain scores and were used as the primary outcome measure. FINDINGS: The stapled group had shorter anaesthesia time (median 18 [range 9-25] vs 22 [15-35] mins). Average pain in the stapled group was significantly lower than it was in the Milligan-Morgan group (2.1 [0.2-7.6] vs 6.5 [3.1-8.5], 95.1% CI difference medians 1.9-4.7, p<0.0001. Mann-Whitney U test). Average pain relative to what the patient expected was also significantly less in the stapled group (-2.8 [-4.4 to 1.3] vs 0.7 [-1.8 to 3.4]. Hospital stay and time to first bowel motion were not significantly different between groups. Return to normal activity was significantly shorter in the stapled group (17 [3-60] vs 34 [14-90]. Early and late complications, patient-assessed symptom control, and functional outcome appear similar after short-term follow-up. INTERPRETATION: The circular stapled technique offers a significantly less painful alternative to Milligan-Morgan haemorrhoidectomy and is associated with an earlier return to normal activity. Early symptom control and functional outcome appear similar. However, long-term symptomatic and functional outcome need further study.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether survival and recurrence after laparoscopic-assisted surgery for colorectal cancer is compromised by an initial laparoscopic approach. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Laparoscopic colorectal resection for malignancy remains controversial 8 years after its first description. Fears regarding compromised oncologic principles and early recurrence (particularly the phenomenon of port-site metastases) have tempered enthusiasm for this approach. Long-term follow-up data are at present scarce. METHODS: A prospective comparative trial was undertaken between December 1993 and May 1996, during which 114 patients had laparoscopic-assisted resection by a single laparoscopic colorectal surgeon or conventional open surgery by a second specialist colorectal surgeon. Intensive follow-up for at least 2 years is available on 109 patients. Analysis was performed on an intention-to-treat basis. RESULTS: Recurrent disease has developed in 27 patients (25%), 16 of 57 in the laparoscopic group (28%) and 11 of 52 in the conventional group (21%). Crude death rates are 26/57 (46%) in the laparoscopic group and 24/52 (46%) in the conventional group. No port-site metastases have occurred; however, wound metastases associated with disseminated disease have developed in three patients in the open group and one in the laparoscopic group. Stage-for-stage survival and recurrence figures are comparable. CONCLUSION: Oncologic outcome at a minimum of 2 years is not compromised by the laparoscopic approach. Wound recurrences are a feature of laparoscopic and conventional surgery for advanced disease.
The management of rectal cancer remains a challenging and controversial area of surgical oncology. The spectre of local recurrence, with its' poor prognostic and palliative outcomes, is known to be highly dependent on operative technique and to vary widely between surgeons. The roles of radiotherapy and chemotherapy have been the subject of trials for 30 years and yet no consensus on treatment exists. In this review article we will summarise the evolution of radiotherapy and chemoradiation in the treatment of rectal cancer and evaluate the evidence available for the use of "neoadjuvant" chemoradiation. In particular, the role of adjuvant therapies in the setting of total mesorectal excision will be discussed.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
The first description of the laparoscopic approach to colorectal cancer resection was in 1991. Today, the exact role of laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery remains undefined and awaits the results of multicenter randomized controlled trials. Most authors agree that pending these results, such surgery should be performed only in specialist centers and on study populations. This hesitant adoption of the laparoscopic modality in colorectal cancer surgery is in stark contrast to the speed and enthusiasm with which laparoscopic cholecystectomy was adopted without a randomized controlled trial. Adapting laparoscopic techniques to malignant disease requires confirmation that the laparoscopic approach conforms to the principles of surgical oncology: adequacy of resection margins, wide clearance of lymph nodes fields, and the avoidance of iatrogenic tumor dissemination.