PubMed · 8646526
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
B Vikram. 1996. Sphincter-sparing surgery.. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02305805
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
To study the effects of preoperative radiochemotherapy (RCT) on the healing of colonic anastomosis, the rectosigmoid colon in male Wistar rats was irradiated up to an end dose of 41.6 Gy (RT) or sham-irradiated (SR). During the last 5 days of the irradiation schedule, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) was administered intraperitoneally in either a high dose (20 mg/kg, chemotherapy-high dose [CH]) or a low dose (10 mg/kg, chemotherapy-low dose [CL]). Animals were randomly arranged into six groups: group I, control (SR + saline intraperitoneally); group II, RT only; group III, SR + CL; group IV, RT + CL; group V, SR + CH; group VI, RT + CH. Four days after RCT, a side-to-side anastomosis was constructed between the irradiated rectosigmoid and the nonirradiated caecum. Animals were killed 10 days postoperatively. No significant differences were found in the anastomotic bursting pressure or the bursting wall tension. In group VI, mitoses were less (P < 0.01) and mucosal ulceration was more (P = 0.03) pronounced compared to group I. Sclerotic arteries were seen in all irradiated groups and in animals that received high-dose 5-FU alone. 5-FU administration in high or low dose, with or without RT, induced more inflammation in the submucosa compared to controls (P < 0.05). Conclusively, RCT has no detrimental effect on the mechanical strength of colonic anastomosis in this rat model. However, RCT with high-dose 5-FU induces more histological alterations at the anastomotic site.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a period of starvation (nil by mouth) after gastrointestinal surgery is beneficial in terms of specific outcomes. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comparing any type of enteral feeding started within 24 hours after surgery with nil by mouth management in elective gastrointestinal surgery. Three electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane controlled trials register) were searched, reference lists checked, and letters requesting details of unpublished trials and data sent to pharmaceutical companies and authors of previous trials. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Anastomotic dehiscence, infection of any type, wound infection, pneumonia, intra-abdominal abscess, length of hospital stay, and mortality. RESULTS: Eleven studies with 837 patients met the inclusion criteria. In six studies patients in the intervention group were fed directly into the small bowel and in five studies patients were fed orally. Early feeding reduced the risk of any type of infection (relative risk 0.72, 95% confidence interval 0.54 to 0.98, P=0.036) and the mean length of stay in hospital (number of days reduced by 0.84, 0.36 to 1.33, P=0.001). Risk reductions were also seen for anastomotic dehiscence (0.53, 0.26 to 1.08, P=0.080), wound infection, pneumonia, intra-abdominal abscess, and mortality, but these failed to reach significance (P>0.10). The risk of vomiting was increased among patients fed early (1.27, 1.01 to 1.61, P=0.046). CONCLUSIONS: There seems to be no clear advantage to keeping patients nil by mouth after elective gastrointestinal resection. Early feeding may be of benefit. An adequately powered trial is required to confirm or refute the benefits seen in small trials.
Traditional microsurgery involves the use of bulky and expensive stereo microscopes that have limited portability. Recent advances in video technology have enabled the exploration of alternative visualization methods. The purpose of this study was to evaluate standard laparoscopic equipment for microvascular anastomoses. Eight surgeons completed anastomoses on rat femoral and synthetic vessels using stereo microsurgery and video microsurgery visualization systems. All surgeons had previous experience with stereo microsurgery and none had ever used video microsurgery. Data were collected on overall anastomosis and individual suture times. A sample of completed anastomoses was placed in a video database and evaluated by use of a quality rating scale (8 to 10, excellent; 6 to 7, adequate; less than 6, poor). All surgeons subjectively evaluated the video microsurgery system. A total of 48 anastomoses were completed. The average total anastomosis time for the stereo microsurgery was 1018.9 +/- 463.2 seconds versus 1738.9 +/- 460.1 seconds for the video microsurgery. The average individual suture placement time was 114.6 +/- 60.6 seconds for the stereo microsurgery versus 211.7 +/- 128.4 seconds for the video microsurgery (p < 0.05). Twenty-five of the anastomoses underwent quality review. The overall score of the stereo microsurgery group was 8.1 +/- 1.7, and the video microsurgery group had an overall score of 7.3 +/- 1.6. Survey results revealed that 75 percent of the participants thought that the video microsurgery would be useful for human operations and would improve surgeon comfort, but 87.5 percent would not use the present video microsurgery system over stereo microsurgery in their practice. Although significant differences exist in overall anastomosis and individual suture completion times, no difference was found in the overall quality. Video microsurgery could become a useful tool on the basis of surgeon ergonomics; however, optical parameters require further refinement.