Background: Acute calculus cholecystitis (ACC) has a high incidence in the general population. The presence of several areas of uncertainty, along with the availability of new evidence, prompted the current update of the 2016 WSES (World Society of Emergency Surgery) Guidelines on ACC.Materials and methods: The WSES president appointed four members as a scientific secretariat, four members as an organization committee and four members as a scientific committee, choosing them from the expert affiliates of WSES. Relevant key questions were constructed, and the task force produced drafts of each section based on the best scientific evidence from PubMed and EMBASE Library; recommendations were developed in order to answer these key questions. The quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were reviewed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria (seehttps://www.gradeworkinggroup.org/). All the statements were presented, discussed and voted upon during the Consensus Conference at the 6th World Congress of the World Society of Emergency Surgery held in Nijmegen (NL) in May 2019. A revised version of the statements was voted upon via an online questionnaire until consensus was reached.Results: The pivotal role of surgery is confirmed, including in high-risk patients. When compared with the WSES 2016 guidelines, the role of gallbladder drainage is reduced, despite the considerable technical improvements available. Early laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ELC) should be the standard of care whenever possible, even in subgroups of patients who are considered fragile, such as the elderly; those with cardiac disease, renal disease and cirrhosis; or those who are generally at high risk for surgery. Subtotal cholecystectomy is safe and represents a valuable option in cases of difficult gallbladder removal.Conclusions, knowledge gaps and research recommendations: ELC has a central role in the management of patients with ACC. The value of surgical treatment for high-risk patients should lead to a distinction between high-risk patients and patients who are not suitable for surgery. Further evidence on the role of clinical judgement and the use of clinical scores as adjunctive tools to guide treatment of high-risk patients and patients who are not suitable for surgery is required. The development of local policies for safe laparoscopic cholecystectomy is recommended.

Abdominoplasty is one of the most frequently performed cosmetic procedures, and its combination with liposuction has become more common. Seroma is one of the most common complications in abdominoplasty. The aim of this study was to compare the rate of seroma formation in patients who underwent either abdominoplasty with or without the use of quilting sutures or lipoabdominoplasty. Fifty-eight female patients were divided into three groups and underwent one of the following procedures: group A (n=21), abdominoplasty without quilting sutures; group B (n=17), abdominoplasty with quilting sutures; and group C (n=20), lipoabdominoplasty. To investigate seroma formation, abdominal ultrasound was performed in five regions of the abdominal wall (epigastrium, umbilical, hypogastrium, right iliac fossa, and left iliac fossa) at two postoperative periods (P1, between postoperative days 11 and 14; and P2, between postoperative days 18 and 21). The rate of seroma formation at both P1 and P2 was significantly higher in group A. It was observed that in group A at P1, the regions of right iliac fossa and left iliac fossa developed larger fluid collections. In group B, there were no significant differences with respect to fluid collections among the five study regions at both P1 and P2. In group C, there were significantly larger fluid collections in the hypogastrium region at P1 and in the umbilical and hypogastrium regions at P2. Abdominoplasty with quilting sutures and lipoabdominoplasty are effective techniques for the prevention of seromas compared with abdominoplasty without quilting sutures.

Objective: To compare the rates of R0 resection in pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) for pancreatic and periampullary malignant tumors by means of standard (ST-PD) versus artery-first approach (AFA-PD). Background: Standardized histological examination of PD specimens has shown that most pancreatic resections thought to be R0 resections are R1. “Artery-first approach” is a surgical technique characterized by meticulous dissection of arterial planes and clearing of retropancreatic tissue in an attempt to achieve a higher rate of R0. To date, studies comparing AFA-PD versus ST-PD are retrospective cohort or case-control studies. Methods: A multicenter, randomized, controlled trial was conducted in 10 University Hospitals (NCT02803814, ClinicalTrials.gov). Eligible patients were those who presented with pancreatic head adenocarcinoma and periampullary tumors (ampulloma, distal cholangiocarcinoma, duodenal adenocarcinoma). Assignment to each group (ST-PD or AFA-PD) was randomized by blocks and stratified by centers. The primary end-point was the rate of tumor-free resection margins (R0); secondary end-points were postoperative complications and mortality. Results: One hundred seventy-nine patients were assessed for eligibility and 176 randomized. After exclusions, the final analysis included 75 ST-PD and 78 AFA-PD. R0 resection rates were 77.3% (95% CI: 68.4–87.4) with ST-PD and 67.9% (95% CI: 58.3–79.1) with AFA-PD, P=0.194. There were no significant differences in postoperative complication rates, overall 73.3% versus 67.9%, and perioperative mortality 4% versus 6.4%. Conclusions: Despite theoretical oncological advantages associated with AFA-PD and evidence coming from low-level studies, this multicenter, randomized, controlled trial has found no difference neither in R0 resection rates nor in postoperative complications in patients undergoing ST-PD versus AFA-PD for pancreatic head adenocarcinoma and other periampullary tumors.