Pancreatic cancer (PC) is a highly malignant and aggressive tumor. Despite medical advancement, the silent nature of PC results in only 20% of all cases considered resectable at the time of diagnosis. It is projected to become the second leading cause in 2030. Most pancreatic cancer cases are diagnosed in the advanced stages. Such cases are typically unresectable and are associated with a 5-year survival of less than 10%. Although there is no guideline consensus regarding recommendations for screening for pancreatic cancer, early detection has been associated with better outcomes. In addition to continued utilization of imaging and conventional tumor markers, clinicians should be aware of novel testing modalities that may be effective for early detection of pancreatic cancer in individuals with high-risk factors. The pathogenesis of PC is not well understood; however, various modifiable and non-modifiable factors have been implicated in pancreatic oncogenesis. PC detection in the earlier stages is associated with better outcomes; nevertheless, most oncological societies do not recommend universal screening as it may result in a high false-positive rate. Therefore, targeted screening for high-risk individuals represents a reasonable option. In this review, we aimed to summarize the pathogenesis, genetic risk factors, high-risk population, and screening modalities for PC.

Background: Limited evidence is available regarding the management of small bowel obstruction in the virgin abdomen (SBO-VA), with most studies excluding this entity. This study aims to assess the available data on the treatment outcomes and predictors of surgical intervention in SBO-VA. Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted between 2015 and 2021, including all diagnosed and managed cases of SBO-VA at Al-Nasar Hospital. Patients were divided according to the treatment approach into surgical or conservative groups. Preoperative laboratory and radiologic data were gathered and compared between groups. Results: During the study period, 67 cases, primarily males (58.2%), with an average age of 52.2± 14.4 years were assessed. Common comorbidities included diabetes (20.9%) and hypertension (16.4%). Key symptoms were rebound tenderness (82.1%) and abdominal tenderness (70.1%). The predominant etiology was adhesions (23.9%). About 46.2% received conservative treatment, 53.8% underwent urgent surgery. Conservative treatment failed in 9.4% of cases, and complications arose in 23.9%, with most being fever (17.9%). Factors necessitating surgical management included older age (58.8 ± 11.7 vs 44.9 ± 13.8 years, p< 0.001), previous hospital admission (p< 0.001), presence of abdominal tenderness (p=0.030), longer abdominal pain duration (4.0 ± 0.9 vs 2.1 ± 0.6 days, p< 0.001), higher C- reactive protein (p= 0.033), higher white blood cell (p= 0.006), longer time to hospital presentation (75.3 ± 17.2 vs 39.0 ± 22.8 days, p= < 0.001), small bowel thickness ≥ 3 cm (p=0.009), and reduced bowel enhancement (p < 0.001) on computed tomography imaging. In surgical group, the need for ICU admission was higher and hospital stays were shorter than in conservative group and were statistically significant (p< 0.05). Conclusion: The main etiology of SBO-VA in our study was adhesions. Older age, previous hospital admission, longer abdominal pain duration, abdominal tenderness, increased inflammatory markers, and alarm signs on CT scans are the main factors for determining the need for urgent surgical exploration in patients with SBO-VA. To achieve prompt identification and intervention, it is crucial to maintain a high level of vigilance and awareness, even in individuals with no prior surgical history. Plain Language Summary: here is limited evidence available regarding the management of small bowel obstruction in the virgin abdomen (SBO-VA), with most studies excluding this entity especially in resource-limited settings. In this study, we investigated the factors associated with the need for surgical interventions in 67 cases diagnosed with SBO-VA. Our result showed that the predominant etiology was adhesion. While 46.2% received conservative treatment, 53.8% underwent urgent surgery. Conservative treatment failed in 9.4% of cases. Factors associated with need for surgical management included older age, previous hospital admission, presence of abdominal tenderness, longer abdominal pain duration, higher C-reactive protein (CRP), higher white blood cell (WBC), longer time to hospital presentation, small bowel thickness ≥ 3 cm and reduced bowel enhancement on computed tomography imaging. In surgical group, the need for ICU admission was higher and hospital stays were shorter than in conservative group.

Background: Acute appendicitis is a complex diagnosis that often requires both clinical and radiological evaluation. Significant variations in diagnostic approaches are evident among clinicians and healthcare institutions. While certain guidelines advocate for risk stratification based on clinical characteristics, others emphasize the importance of pre-operative imaging. This study seeks to explore the accuracy of the Alvarado Score and abdominal ultrasound (AUS) in diagnosing acute appendicitis. Methods: Suspected cases of appendicitis admitted to Al-Thora Hospital in Ibb, Yemen, from Jan 2021 to July 2022 were evaluated. The demographics, clinical, and laboratory data were collected and analyzed. This study assessed Alvarado scores (calculated based on clinical evaluation and laboratory data) and pre-operative AUS findings, correlating them with post-operative and histopathology findings. The Alvarado scores and AUS sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were assessed using the ROC curve. Results: Out of 1021 cases of acute abdomen, 171 patients were suspected of appendicitis. Using AUS along with the Alvarado score, appendicitis was presumed in 137 patients who underwent appendectomy. 130 (94.9%) patients had positive intraoperative and histopathology findings while 7 (5.1%) had negative findings. The Alvarado Score had a sensitivity and specificity of 94.62% and 87.80% at cutoffs of 6, respectively [Area under the curve (AUC): 0.985; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.954 to 0.998; p < 0.0001]. Abdominal US showed a sensitivity of 98.46% and specificity of 82.93% (AUC:0.907; 95% CI, 0.853 to 0.946; p < 0.0001). Conclusion: Alvarado’s score and AUS exhibited high sensitivity and specificity in diagnosing acute appendicitis. The substantial accuracy and efficacy of both the Alvarado score and AUS support their utilization as primary investigative tools in resource-limited settings. This approach can help avoid unnecessary appendectomies and minimize the financial burden on patients. Plain Language Summary: Acute appendicitis poses a diagnostic challenge, with a high rate of false-positive cases identified post-operatively. Computed tomography has been recommended by several surgical societies; however, it is limited by unaffordability and unavailability. Herein, we utilized the Alvarado score along with abdominal ultrasound as an alternative accurate, and cost-effective diagnostic approach. In this study, the negative appendectomy rate was 5.1%. The sensitivity of abdominal ultrasound in detecting appendicitis was 98.5%, with a specificity of 82.9%. The positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy were determined to be 94.8%, 94.4%, and 94.7%, respectively. The mean Alvarado score was 6.9± 2.4, with a sensitivity and specificity of 97.81% and 97.06% at cutoffs of 6, respectively. The area under the curve values of the ROC curve for Alvarado’s and abdominal ultrasound were 0.985 (95% CI, 0.954 to 0.998) and (AUC:0.907; 95% CI, 0.853 to 0.946), which was statistically significant (p < 0.0001).

Background: This article aims to share our experiences with microsurgical finger replantation in a resource-limited setting. Methods: This multi-institutional, retrospective study included 21 cases of finger amputation that underwent microsurgical replantation, within 7 years period. Patient demographics, preoperative assessments, surgical approaches, and outcomes were documented and analyzed. A univariate analysis was performed to obtain factors associated with digit reimplantation failure. Results: Out of 21 cases included, 8 (38.1%) had complete amputations and 13 (61.9%) had incomplete amputations. Crush injuries accounted for the majority (71.4%). On average, 2.2 ± 1.1 digits were affected, with the ring finger being the most commonly injured (71.4%). The mean operative time was 121.5 ± 26.8 minutes. The success rate of digit replantation was 76.2%. During a mean follow-up of 14.3 ± 3.7 months, 85.7% of successfully replanted digits considered their replantation results satisfactory. The majority of replanted digits demonstrated active and effective holding and grasping abilities without pain or instability (76.2%). Replantation failure was associated with a higher number of affected digits (p < 0.001), longer operative time (p = 0.004), complete avulsion (p = 0.003), current smoking (p = 0.025), diabetes (p = 0.006), hypertension (p = 0.047), procedure difficulty score (p= 0.004), and occurrence of complications (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Microsurgical finger replantation can yield favorable outcomes and acceptable survival rates, even within resource-limited settings. However, this procedure requires specialized equipment and personnel that may not be available at all institutions. Influential factors in digit replantation failure, include an increased number of damaged digits, extended operative duration, complete avulsion, current smoking, diabetes, hypertension, procedure difficulty score, and postoperative complications occurrence.

Background: External fixation is one of the most often utilized treatment options for complicated tibial diaphyseal fractures (TDF). The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy of unilateral external fixators as primary and definitive therapy for complex TDF in a resource-limited setting. Materials and Methods: A retrospective study between June 2016 and March 2021 included 110 subjects with TDF who were treated with an external fixator as definitive fixation in hospitals affiliated with Ibb University. The patient’s demographic characteristics, complications, and outcomes were gathered and analyzed. Factors associated with pin site infection were also investigated. Results: The mean age was 42.1 ± 10.1 years, with 92.7% being male. Rural residents accounted for 22.7%. Smoking and diabetes mellitus were present in 27.3% and 30.0%, respectively. General complications occurred in 12.0%, with pulmonary embolism being the most common at 4.5%. Orthopedic complications included pin-track infections in 27.3% (30) and osteomyelitis in 1.8% (2). Pin site infections required medical treatment in 21 cases and external fixator changes in five. Two cases each needed several debridements for osteomyelitis and soft tissue. Full union occurred in 79.1% (87) over 23.1 ± 3.2 weeks and final alignment in 97.3% (107) over 34.8 ± 4.8 weeks. Malunions occurred in 1.8% (2), and one case had hypertrophic nonunion. Factors like rural residency, smoking, diabetes, open fractures, worst fracture grade (Gustilo and Anderson type C), and general complications occurrence significantly correlated with pin site infection (all p-values < 0.05). Conclusion: A unilateral external fixator as a primary and definitive treatment is a viable, simple, and effective option for TDF with a high success rate even in a resource-limited setting. In this study, residents in rural areas, smoking, diabetes, open fracture, worst fracture grade, and general complication occurrence were associated with pin site infection occurrence.

Background: Iatrogenic vascular injuries (IVIs) due to diagnostic and therapeutic interventions are known but rare or probably under-reported. We present our four-year findings on patients with IVIs after catheterization or surgery who underwent vascular surgical repairs in a resource-limited setting. Methods: A retrospective case series study between Jun 2018 and Sep 2022 of 35 patients diagnosed with IVIs and treated surgically at our hospital was included. The data on IVIs including patient characteristics, causes and type of injury, treatment, and outcomes were collected and analyzed. Results: The mean age was 37.12± 17.0 years, and most patients (65.7%) were male. Of the 35 IVIs, 21 were caused by percutaneous procedures, while 14 occurred intraoperatively and affected various arteries and veins. The main injured vessels were the femoral artery (20%) and direct blood vessel puncture made by non-qualified specialists (42.9%) during dialysis cannulation was the main cause. The intraoperative IVI affected the inferior vena cava in three patients, the aorta in two patients, the external iliac artery in four, the tibial and popliteal arteries in four, and the internal carotid artery in one. The following types of repairs were recorded: direct suture of the vessel with or without endarterectomy (71.4%), synthetic patch placement (25.7%), ligation (8.6%), bypass or interposition graft (14.3%), and thromboembolectomy (5.7%). Vascular repair was successful in 32 (91.4%) patients while three patients (8.6%) were expired. Complications occurred in 7 (20%) patients, of which superficial wound infections were the common complication (11.6%) and were treated with proper antibiotic therapy. Conclusion: Prompt identification of IVIs, as well as proper triage for future treatment, can enhance patient outcomes. Our data showed that non-qualified specialists seem to be responsible for the majority of IVIs. For that, we emphasize the importance of performing vascular procedures by a qualified specialist with adequate training.