Purpose: Small bowel obstruction (SBO) is a common disease that requires hospitalization. The most common cause of SBO is postoperative adhesion. Delayed timing of operations in patients who need surgical intervention results in mortality or morbidity. A number of studies on SBO have established criteria for emergency surgery. However, few objective clinical parameters are available for screening patients who need a delayed operation. Therefore, we analyzed factors that affect the clinical course of SBO to select appropriate therapeutic plans for reducing the risk of complications in these patients.Methods: We investigated the clinical characteristics of patients admitted to the surgery department of our hospital between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2016, who were diagnosed with SBO. Patients were divided into an operative treatment group (n = 12) and a conservative treatment group (n = 96). We compared clinical characteristics between the 2 groups.Results: The operative treatment group underwent more operations before SBO than the conservative treatment group (P = 0.007). Initial leukocyte counts (P = 0.004) and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels (P = 0.028) were elevated in the operative group. Body mass index (BMI) was lower in the operative group (P = 0.013).Conclusion: The number of operations before SBO, leukocyte counts, CRP levels, and BMI were useful parameters for selecting patients who needed an urgent operation for SBO.
Background: Thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA), once the standard for pain management in major abdominal operations, is associated with postoperative complications, making preperitoneal continuous wound infiltration (CWI) a promising alternative. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of CWI and TEA in managing postoperative pain after open pancreatoduodenectomy. Methods: In a single-centre, randomized, open-label non-inferiority trial, adult patients undergoing elective open pancreatoduodenectomy were assigned to either CWI or TEA for pain management. The primary outcomes were mean pain scores at rest on the first 3 postoperative days (PODs), using an 11-point numeric rating scale, with a non-inferiority margin of 1 point or less. Secondary outcomes included pain scores at rest and during coughing on PODs 1, 2, and 3; total opioid consumption; incidence of postoperative complications; quality of postoperative recovery; and duration of hospital stay. Results: Among the 134 patients analysed (CWI 70, TEA 64), CWI was non-inferior to TEA in terms of mean pain scores at rest (mean difference −0.13, 95% c.i. −0.72 to 0.47). Additionally, CWI demonstrated superior pain relief at rest and higher-quality recovery scores on POD 3. Compared with CWI, TEA was associated with significantly decreased total opioid consumption and shortened time to the first passage of flatus, but a higher incidence of postoperative hypotension. No other outcome measures showed significant differences between the two groups. Conclusion: CWI was non-inferior to TEA during the early postoperative period, and has emerged as a favourable alternative to TEA, offering better pain relief and enhanced recovery on POD 3. Registration number: NCT04375826 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).
9 September 2024 in Annals of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery
Background: R0 rates have increased as neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) has become the primary treatment for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) with venous involvement, suggesting a decrease in venous tumor infiltration. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical outcomes of preserving the portal/superior mesenteric vein (PV/SMV) during pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) in PDAC patients who underwent NAT. Material and methods: The 113 patients with resectable and borderline resectable PDAC with venous involvement who responded to NAT and underwent curative PD between 2012 and 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. Results: Among the 113 patients, PV/SMV preservation (PVP) was performed in 68 patients (60.2%), and PV/SMV resection (PVR) was performed in 45 patients (39.8%). There was no significant difference in the R0 rate, 5-year overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival between the two groups. PV/SMV stenosis within 3 months after surgery was more common in the PVR group than in the PVP group (1.5% versus 22.2%; P<0.001), and 5-year PV/SMV stenosis-free survival was significantly higher in the PVP group than in the PVR group (76.5% versus 53.4%; P=0.014). Multivariate analysis showed that gemcitabine-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy was associated with poor OS. PVR, clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula, and locoregional recurrence were independent risk factors for PV/SMV stenosis. Conclusion: The PVP group had similar oncologic outcomes and better vessel-functional outcomes than the PVR group. Therefore, if dissection is possible and there is a high likelihood of achieving R0 resection after NAT, routine PVR may be unnecessary in PDAC patients with venous involvement.