A systematic review of the safety and efficacy of non-operative management in patients with high grade liver injury

IntroductionThe liver is the most frequently damaged organ in blunt abdominal trauma. It is widely accepted that hemodynamically stable patients with low-grade liver trauma should be treated with non-operative management, however there is controversy surrounding its safety and efficacy in high-grade trauma. The purpose of this review is to investigate the role of non-operative management in patients with high-grade liver trauma.MethodsPubMed and reference lists of PubMed articles were searched to find studies that examined the efficacy of non-operative management in high-grade liver injury patients, and compare it to operative management. Non-operative management was considered successful if rescue surgery was avoided. Outcomes considered were success, mortality, and complication rates.ResultsThe electronic search revealed 2662 records, 8 of which met the inclusion criteria. All 8 studies contained results suggesting that non-operative management was safe and effective in hemodynamically stable patients with high-grade liver trauma. By combining the outcomes of the different studies, non-operative management had a high success rate of 92.4% (194/210) in high-grade liver trauma patients, which was near the overall 95.0% non-operative management success rate. Non-operative management also had mortality and complication rates of 4.6% (9/194) and 9.7% (7/72) in high-grade injury patients, respectively, compared to operative management's 17.6% (26/148) and 45.5% (5/11).ConclusionNon-operative management of liver trauma is safe and effective in hemodynamically stable patients with high-grade liver injury. It is associated with significantly lower mortality compared with operative management. More studies are required to evaluate complications of non-operative management in high-grade liver injury.     

经Ⅰ期造瘘口单部位腹腔镜辅助Martin-Duhamel术在全结肠型巨结肠症治疗中的应用

目的探讨经Ⅰ期造瘘口单部位腹腔镜辅助Martin-Duhamel术在先天性全结肠型巨结肠症患儿治疗中的应用价值,并对患儿术后排便功能进行评价。方法回顾性分析2014年6月至2017年6月间河北医科大学第二医院小儿外科收治的15例先天性全结肠型巨结肠症患儿的诊治及术后随访资料,其中男11例,女4例,月龄(5.11±2.67)个月,所有患儿Ⅰ期行回肠末端造瘘术,Ⅱ期行腹腔镜辅助Martin-Duhamel手术。术后随访2年,采用李正肛门功能临床评分法进行排便功能评分。定期肛管直肠测压,记录和比较患儿排便频率、性状及近远期并发症情况。结果15例均顺利完成手术,无中转开腹和死亡病例。手术时间(184.43±30.46)min,出血量(27.57±10.63)mL,肠功能恢复时间(3.29±0.91)d,术后住院时间(7.86±1.77)d。术后1~3个月排便频率为8~20次/日,术后6~9个月排便频率为4~8次/日,术后1~2年排便频率为2~4次/日(接近正常水平)。术后3个月和术后6个月排便评分无显著性差异(P=0.115),术后6个月和术后1年排便评分有显著性差异(P=0.040),术后1年和术后2年排便评分无显著性差异(P=0.542)。肛管直肠测压从术后6个月开始逐渐恢复至正常范围,与术前比较有显著性差异(肛管反射舒张压P=0.027;肛管静息压P=0.010;直肠静息压P=0.034)。术后6个月内因排便次数多致肛周湿疹、皮肤破溃6例,予以造口粉、氧化锌或芦荟软膏涂抹后恢复;小肠结肠炎1例,经保守治疗后缓解;无便秘等其他并发症发生。结论经Ⅰ期造瘘口单部位腹腔镜辅助Martin-Duhamel术治疗全结肠型巨结肠症患儿安全可行;排便功能可在术后6个月至1年逐渐恢复至接近正常儿童的水平。     

老年人股骨粗隆间骨折手术时机对预后影响的临床研究

目的：探讨老年股骨粗隆间骨折手术时机对临床预后结局的影响。方法整群选取2015年1月—2016年1月该院收治的老年股骨粗隆间骨折患者68例为研究对象。根据患者手术时间将其分为A组与B组, A组32例,B组36例,观察两组患者不同年龄术后30 d、1年的死亡情况。结果两组患者术后30d、1年死亡率比较差异无统计学意义,P>0.05；但A组、B组患者中超过80岁的患者术后1年死亡率明显低于80岁以下年龄患者,P<0.05,差异具有统计学意义。结论年龄超过80岁的老年股骨粗隆间骨折患者术后1年死亡率相对较高。     

上位肾分肾功能<10%重复肾患者保留或不保留上肾手术的预后比较-单中心回顾性队列研究

目的比较上位肾分肾功能<10%的重复肾患者行保留或不保留上肾单位手术的预后情况。方法回顾性分析中国医科大学附属盛京医院2008年1月至2017年6月收治的49例上位肾分肾功能<10%的重复肾畸形患者临床资料,依据不同治疗方案分为保留上肾单位组(n=22)和不保留上肾单位组(n=27),对两组术后并发症发生率和再手术率进行统计学分析。结果与不保留上肾单位组相比,保留上肾单位组术后并发症发生率(22.7%vs.3.7%)和再手术率(9.1%vs.0.0%)更高,但差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。与不保留上肾单位组相比,保留上肾单位组患者中位手术年龄更小(16.5个月vs.33.0个月),差异有统计学意义(P=0.006)。而两组间性别、侧别、术前是否存在输尿管末端膨出/异位、术前上位肾分肾功能和术前患侧上肾输尿管直径差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论上位肾分肾功能<10%重复肾患者如需手术治疗,初次手术方式可根据医生和患者家长意愿,选择较为简单的手术方式。     

老年人桡骨远端C型骨折的手术治疗与非手术治疗的疗效对比

目的：探讨老年人桡骨远端C型骨折的手术治疗与非手术治疗的疗效差异，评价两种方法的优缺点。方法回顾性分析2009-12—2011-12收治的老年桡骨远端C型骨折68例，按照治疗方法分为A组(手术组)及B组(非手术组)，统计分析两组患者的临床资料。结果 A组33例， B组35例，平均随访21.5个月。两组患者的年龄、骨折类型均无差异(P＞0.05)；术后影像学指标A组优于B组，骨折愈合时间B组优于A组，治疗成本A组大于B组(P＜0.05)；Cooney评分早期A组优于B组，1年后两组无差异，两组的并发症无差异(P＞0.05)。结论老年人桡骨远端C型骨折手术治疗较非手术治疗可获得更好的复位及早期功能，但远期功能恢复无差异。     

Is it necessary to place screws in the intervening vertebrae in two-level anterior cervical discectomy with fusion and plating?

ObjectiveThe clinical outcomes, radiological parameters, complication rate and the cost of implants in two-level ACDF with and without screws in the intervening segment were compared.MethodsA retrospective study of 68 patients who underwent 2-level ACDF from January 2014 to June 2016 was performed. The patients were divided into two groups: ACDF with screws in the intervening vertebra and those without screws in the intervening vertebra. Perioperative factors, clinical outcomes, postoperative complications, radiological parameters, and cost of the implants were evaluated in both groups.ResultsNo statistical differences in clinical outcomes, operative blood loss, hospital stay, restoration of cervical lordosis or segment height, postoperative complications, and fusion rate were found between the ACDF (middle vertebra with screw) and ACDF (middle vertebra without screw) groups (P > 0.05). But the operative time of added screw placement and cost of implants in the ACDF (middle vertebra without screw) group were significantly less than the ACDF (middle vertebra with screw) group (P < 0.05).ConclusionTwo kinds of screw placement with ACDF were found to be similar in terms of clinical outcomes. However, ACDF (middle vertebra without screw) was found to be superior to ACDF (middle vertebra with screw) in terms of the screw placement time and cost of implants.     

Our Timing to Remove Peritoneal Catheter Dialysis After Kidney Transplant

Background

Patients on peritoneal dialysis treatment represent 15% of the global dialysis population. The major complication of peritoneal dialysis is catheter and peritoneal infection. Peritoneal dialysis patients who receive kidney transplants are at increased risk of infection because of immunosuppressive therapy.