Andrea Balla

Dr. Andrea Balla

General Surgery Unit, San Paolo Hospital, Largo Donatori del Sangue 1, 00053 Civitavecchia, Rome, Italy
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

15Years (2012-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 September 2020 in Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
FBFrancesco Baratta
Francesco Baratta
Daniele PastoriDaniele Pastori
Daniele Pastori
FAFrancesco Angelico
Francesco Angelico
Andrea BallaAndrea Balla
Andrea Balla
APAlessandro Maria Paganini
Alessandro Maria Paganini
MBMaria Del Ben
Maria Del Ben

19 September 2023 in British Journal of Surgery
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
DSDavid L Sanders
David L Sanders
MPMaciej M Pawlak
Maciej M Pawlak
MSMaarten P Simons
Maarten P Simons
TATheo Aufenacker
Theo Aufenacker
Andrea BallaAndrea Balla
Andrea Balla
CSCesare Stabilini
Cesare Stabilini
Since the introduction of anaesthesia by Morton in 1846, and as survivable abdominal surgery became more common, so did the incidence of incisional hernias. Since then, more than 4000 peer-reviewed articles have been published on the topic, many of which have tried to reduce the incidence or introduce techniques to improve outcomes from surgical repair. Despite this, the incidence of incisional hernias and the recurrence rates after repair remain high. A wide range of incisional hernia rates are reported1–5. A meta-analysis including over 14 000 patients reported a weighted incidence of 12.8 per cent 2 years after a midline incision, and that one-third of patients with an incisional hernia undergo surgical repair6. Recurrence rates after repair of incisional hernia range between 23 and 50 per cent, with increasing rates of complications and re-recurrence after each subsequent failed repair7. Arguably, no other benign disease has seen so little improvement in terms of surgical outcome.

18 April 2022 in Surgical Endoscopy
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MOMonica Ortenzi
Monica Ortenzi
GMGiulia Montori
Giulia Montori
ASAlberto Sartori
Alberto Sartori
Andrea BallaAndrea Balla
Andrea Balla
EBEmanuele Botteri
Emanuele Botteri
FAFerdinando Agresta
Ferdinando Agresta
Introduction: It has been previously demonstrated that the rise of intra-abdominal pressures and prolonged exposure to such pressures can produce changes in the cardiovascular and pulmonary dynamic which, though potentially well tolerated in the majority of healthy patients with adequate cardiopulmonary reserve, may be less well tolerated when cardiopulmonary reserve is poor. Nevertheless, theoretically lowering intra-abdominal pressure could reduce the impact of pneumoperitoneum on the blood circulation of intra-abdominal organs as well as cardiopulmonary function. However, the evidence remains weak, and as such, the debate remains unresolved. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to demonstrate the current knowledge around the effect of pneumoperitoneum at different pressures levels during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Materials and methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis were reported according to the recommendations of the 2020 updated Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, and the Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Results: This systematic review and meta-analysis included 44 randomized controlled trials that compared different pressures of pneumoperitoneum in the setting of elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Length of hospital, conversion rate, and complications rate were not significantly different, whereas statistically significant differences were observed in post-operative pain and analgesic consumption. According to the GRADE criteria, overall quality of evidence was high for intra-operative bile spillage (critical outcome), overall complications (critical outcome), shoulder pain (critical outcome), and overall post-operative pain (critical outcome). Overall quality of evidence was moderate for conversion to open surgery (critical outcome), post-operative pain at 1 day (critical outcome), post-operative pain at 3 days (important outcome), and bleeding (critical outcome). Overall quality of evidence was low for operative time (important outcome), length of hospital stay (important outcome), post-operative pain at 12 h (critical outcome), and was very low for post-operative pain at 1 h (critical outcome), post-operative pain at 4 h (critical outcome), post-operative pain at 8 h (critical outcome), and post-operative pain at 2 days (critical outcome). Conclusions: This review allowed us to draw conclusive results from the use of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum with an adequate quality of evidence.


15 May 2017 in Techniques in Coloproctology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
Andrea BallaAndrea Balla
Andrea Balla
GRG. Batista Rodríguez
G. Batista Rodríguez
NBN. Buonomo
N. Buonomo
CMC. Martinez
C. Martinez
PHP. Hernández
P. Hernández
ETE. M. Targarona
E. M. Targarona

7 October 2019 in Surgical Endoscopy
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
VAVincent Agnus
Vincent Agnus
APAntonio Pesce
Antonio Pesce
LBLuigi Boni
Luigi Boni
JBJacqueline Van Den Bos
Jacqueline Van Den Bos
SMSalvador Morales-Conde
Salvador Morales-Conde
Michele DianaMichele Diana
Michele Diana