Background: Abdominal operations may lead to post-operative bowel dysfunction, while administration of probiotics, prebiotics and synbiotics may limit its manifestation. Τhe study aimed to assess the efficacy of probiotics, prebiotics and synbiotics in patients who undergone abdominal operation, in terms of bowel function post-operatively. Methods: PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Central), Embase, US Registry of clinical trials, and sources of grey literature were searched. The relative effect sizes were estimated, and we obtained the relative ranking of the interventions using cumulative ranking curves. Results: In total, 30 studies were included in the analysis. For the outcome of post-operative ileus, probiotics was superior to placebo/no intervention (relative risk, RR: 0.38; 95%CI: 0.14–0.98) with the highest SUCRA (surface under the cumulative ranking) value (92.1%). For time to first flatus, probiotics (MD: −0.47; 95%CI: −0.78 to −0.17) and synbiotics (MD: −0.53; 95%CI: −0.96 to −0.09) were superior to placebo/no intervention. For time to first defecation and for post-operative abdominal distension probiotics were superior to placebo/no intervention. For post-operative hospitalization days, synbiotics were superior to placebo/no intervention (MD: −3.07; 95%CI: −4.80 to −1.34). Conclusions: Administration of probiotics in patients who had undergone abdominal surgery reduced the prevalence of post-operative ileus, time to first flatus, time to first defecation, and prevalence of post-operative abdominal distension. Synbiotics reduce time to first flatus and post-operative hospitalization days.

Mesh-augmented hernia repair is the gold standard in abdominal wall and hiatal/diaphragmatic hernia management and ranks among the most common procedures performed by general surgeons. However, it is associated with a series of drawbacks, including recurrence, mesh infection, and adhesion formation. To address these weaknesses, numerous biomaterials have been investigated for mesh coating. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is an autologous agent that promotes tissue healing through numerous cytokines and growth factors. In addition, many reports highlight its contribution to better integration of different types of coated meshes, compared to conventional uncoated meshes. The use of PRP-coated meshes for hernia repair has been reported in the literature, but a review of technical aspects and outcomes is missing. The aim of this comprehensive review is to report the experimental studies investigating the synergistic use of PRP and mesh implants in hernia animal models. A comprehensive literature search was conducted across PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, and Scopus without chronological constraints. In total, fourteen experimental and three clinical studies have been included. Among experimental trials, synthetic, biologic, and composite meshes were used in four, nine, and one study, respectively. In synthetic meshes, PRP-coating leads to increased antioxidant levels and collaged deposition, reduced oxidative stress, and improved inflammatory response, while studies on biological meshes revealed increased neovascularization and tissue integration, reduced inflammation, adhesion severity, and mechanical failure rates. Finally, PRP-coating of composite meshes results in reduced adhesions and improved mechanical strength. Despite the abundance of preclinical data, there is a scarcity of clinical studies, mainly due to the absence of an established protocol regarding PRP preparation and application. To this point in time, PRP has been used as a coating agent for the repair of abdominal and diaphragmatic hernias, as well as for mesh fixation. Clinical application of conclusions drawn from experimental studies may lead to improved results in hernia repair.

Background: Rectal prolapse (RP) predominantly affects women over the age of 50 and presents as mucosal, internal, or full thickness prolapse. Strangulated rectal prolapse requires immediate medical intervention, and surgical treatment options include both abdominal and perineal approaches. We aim to present a case series of perineal rectosigmoidectomy performed urgently due to strangulation and argue that Altemeier’s procedure is the preferred method for treating strangulated rectal prolapse. Methods: Perineal rectosigmoidectomy, particularly Altemeier’s procedure, is effective for incarcerated cases. Altemeier’s procedure with diverting ileostomy was used in all three patients. Results: All patients were successfully treated, with no recurrence of prolapse and stool incontinence. Conclusions: Altemeier’s procedure is ideal for the treatment of strangulated rectal prolapse.

Background and Objectives: Vascular access in cancer patients with limited mobility remains a persistent clinical challenge, although both devices and insertion methods have improved considerably. We present our clinical experience with at-home PICC placement, supported by real-world data from routine practice, in oncology patients unable to attend hospital care, exploring its feasibility, safety, and practical applicability. Materials and Methods: All PICC insertions were performed at patients’ bedside by a trained surgeon using sterile technique. A single- or double-lumen PICC catheter was inserted under ultrasound guidance, magnetic tracking, and intracavitary ECG confirmation to secure optimal venous entry and accurate tip positioning. Results: A total of 28 PICC lines were successfully inserted in 26 oncologic patients. Two patients required catheter re-insertion, one following accidental removal and one due to infection. In 26 of 28 cases (92.9%), insertions were completed on the first attempt, while two cases required a second attempt. Insertion in the Green Zone per the ZIM classification was achieved in 26 of 28 cases (92.9%), and only two required insertions in the Yellow Zone. The basilic vein was chosen in 75% of patients. A total of 23 single-lumen and five double-lumen catheters were inserted. In terms of complications, four cases of systemic infection occurred more than 15 days after insertion and were not considered insertion-related; two patients developed localized edema requiring anticoagulation, and four catheter occlusions were managed conservatively. Conclusions: At-home PICC placement appears to be a feasible and clinically applicable approach when performed by qualified and credentialed professionals. These observations, derived from real-world clinical experience, suggest a potential role for this model in selected patient populations. Using proper sterile technique and real-time tip confirmation tools, this intervention may contribute to improved continuity of care and reduced hospital visits in selected patients. These observations suggest a potential role for expanding outpatient vascular access programs in selected patient populations.