Search

Background: Routine performance of a prophylactic postoperative drainage after abdominal surgeries was done to prevent and manage postoperative intra-abdominal complications. Sure evidence to avoid routine performance of prophylactic drainage after surgery in gastric cancer (GC) patients and its role in reducing postoperative morbidity was not reached yet. Aim: The aim of the present study was to compare between patients who underwent prophylactic drainage and patients who did not undergo prophylactic drainage following total laparoscopic gastrectomy in patients diagnosed with distal GC. Patients and methods: We included 150 patients who underwent totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for surgical management of histopathologically confirmed GCs. We divided patients into two groups, the first group included 100 patients and underwent totally laparoscopic gastrectomy with prophylactic drainage, and the other group included 50 patients underwent totally laparoscopic gastrectomy without performing drainage. We compare between both included groups regarding short-term and long-term outcomes. Results: Operative times in the group of patients who have drain group were longer than that in those with no drain. We showed that in the group of patients with drain, the number of days from time of surgery to time of soft diet initiation and time to first flatus was more than that in the no drain group. Conclusion: Avoiding prophylactic drain insertion in some patients after performing totally laparoscopic gastrectomy for management of gastric cancer could be feasible. It increases patients comfort without increasing the risk of postoperative complications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The clinical presentations of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) exhibit significant variation, ranging from asymptomatic cases to mortality resulting from severe pneumonia. Host genetics can partially explain this variation. Objective: This study evaluated possible associations between severity and outcome of COVID-19 and single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) rs2285666 in the ACE2 gene and SNP rs2070788 in the TMPRSS2 gene. Methods: The study included a sample of 100 consecutive adult patients admitted to the COVID-19 Isolation and Intensive Care Units of the Zagazig University Hospitals, Zagazig, Egypt from July 2021 to November 2021. For rs2285666, polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism was carried out. For rs2070788, real-time polymerase chain reaction was performed. Results: For rs2285666, the GA genotype was the most frequent among female patients (39% [16/41]) and the A genotype was more prevalent among male patients (54.2% [32/59]). For rs2070788, the AA genotype was the most frequent among all patients (46% [46/100]). No rs2285666 or rs2070788 genotypes or allele frequencies had significant associations with either severity or outcomes of patients. Conclusion: This study found no significant associations of COVID-19 severity or outcomes of patients with genotypes or allele frequencies of the rs2285666 SNP in the ACE2 gene or the rs2070788 SNP of the TMPRSS2 gene. The search for other genetic associations with COVID-19 infection is still required. What this study adds: The study reveals that host genetics explain the variation observed in the disease. Specific genetic variants can confer either increased susceptibility or resistance to the disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Using minimally invasive surgeries (MISs) in non-elective and urgent cases was assessed by many previous studies and found to be nearly similar to and even better than open surgeries. There was no sufficient data regarding long-term, follow-up, tumor recurrence, or survival data of studied patients in those studies. Aim of our study is to compare performing MIS and open colectomy in patients undergoing urgent (nonemergency, non-elective) colectomies, regarding primary outcomes of 30-day morbidity and mortality, secondary short-term outcomes, long-term and follow-up findings of included patients. Patients and methods: A total of 200 patients were included, and we divided them into two groups according to the performed surgical approach: The first group included 100 patients who underwent MISs and the second group underwent open surgery and included 100 patients. We evaluated the primary patients' outcome which was 30-day postoperative morbidity and mortality. Secondary evaluated patients' outcomes included; ICU admissions, surgical reintervention, wound infection or dehiscence, postoperative ileus, postoperative leakage at an anastomotic site, and occurrence of intra-abdominal infections. Long-term evaluated patients' outcomes included the occurrence of incisional hernias and oncological outcomes as overall survival rates and recurrence rates. Results: Regarding demographic and baseline data, patients who underwent open surgery were older (65 years vs 58 years, p < 0.001). More females underwent open surgery (54% vs 50%, p = 0.002). Overweight and obese patients were more likely to have MIS colectomy (p < 0. 001). There is a statistically significant relation between approach and all histopathological types (24.2% within the laparoscopic approach vs 11.6% within the open approach had mucoid carcinoma), N stage (82.8% within the laparoscopic approach vs 43.8% within open the approach had N stage 0), American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage (63.8% within laparoscopic approach vs 20.8% within open approach had AJCC stage II) Open colectomy were liable to be diagnosed with acute diverticulitis and volvulus (p < 0.001). Operative time is longer in MIS patients in comparison to open colectomy patients the median time to complete an MIS colectomy was 21 minutes longer (p < 0.001). Postoperative mortality is less in MIS patients than the open surgery patients. On univariable analysis, 30-day postoperative mortality following MIS colectomy was lower than that after open surgery (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Using MIS in urgent colectomy is associated with less postoperative, morbidity, mortality, short-term complications, and longterm complications than open colectomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]