This study aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of percutaneous needle aspiration (PERCUTANEOUS NEEDLE ASPIRATION) and percutaneous catheter drainage (PER CUTANEOUS DRAINAGE  ) in the treatment of liver abscess. Methods: A prospective randomized study was conducted in patients presenting to Department of Surgery, GMERS Medical College, Vadodara between July 2019 and May 2022. 50 patients with liver abscess were randomized into two groups A and B. Complete history, presenting symptoms, medications were noted. The effectiveness of either treatment was measured in terms of duration of intravenous antibiotic, clinical improvement, reduction in the size of cavity, treatment success rate, duration of hospital stay including long-term outcomes such as sonographic resolution of cavity and recurrence rate at 6 months post-treatment. Results: Per Cutaneous Drainage group had statistically significant rate of duration of antibiotics need, days for clinical improvement and time for 50% reduction in abscess cavity and treatment success rate with comparable long-term outcomes. Conclusion: Per Cutaneous Drainage is more efficient than Percutaneous Needle Aspiration and can be used primarily in the treatment of both amoebic and pyogenic liver abscesses along with systemic antibiotics. However, Percutaneous Needle Aspiration can serve as a safe alternative when Per Cutaneous Drainage is not available.

Introduction: The harvest of a split thickness skin graft causes a partial thickness injury and an outflow of blood and protein rich exudate from the donor site wound. Conventionally, closed dressings are employed using petroleum jelly impregnated gauge which are permeable to bacteria and wound exudate soaks through. This may lead to pain and infection of the donor site. Biological dressings create the most physiological interface between the wound surfaces and the environment and also dressings are natural, non immunogenic, non pyrogenic and hypo allergenic. Collagen sheet is one such dressing material used. Aim: To compare the conventional dressing using petroleum jelly impregnated gauze versus biological dressing with collagen sheets in terms of pain, infection and healing at skin graft site. Materials and Methods: It was a prospective interventional study conducted in Department of Surgery, SSG Hospital and Medical College, Baroda, Gujarat, India over a period of November 2012 to November 2017 on 220 participants. Randomisation was done by choosing an envelope containing cards marked ‘A’ or ‘B’. The group A (110) was a study group with collagen sheet dressing while group B (110) was the control group with conventional vaseline gauze dressing. Both group patients were examined at six hours postoperatively and then two times a day at 8:00 am and 8:00 pm daily. They were evaluated for pain with Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score, infection, haematoma formation, healing at donor site and allergic reaction to collagen. Results: Mean VAS score for pain showed that it decreased over a period of time in both the groups. The group with collagen sheet dressing shows decreasing means VAS score from 4.34 on 1st day to 0.29 on 3rd day (p<0.0001). Similarly, the vaseline gauze dressing shows decreasing mean VAS score from 5.64 on 1st day to 1.39 on 3rd day (p<0.0001). Conclusion: Collagen sheet dressing are easy to apply, with advantage of less pain at donor site and lower infection rate. Also healing time required is less than the vaseline gauze dressing. collagen sheet dressing is clinically more efficient overall.

Introduction: Till recently Milligan – Morgan haemorrhoidectomy i.e. conventional or open haemorrhoidectomy is the most popular surgical treatment for haemorrhoids. With the advent of minimal invasive surgery, the scenario has changed. More recently, stapler haemorrhoidectomy is becoming popular as a day care procedure with minimal post-operative pain and early return to work. The present study is designed to compare make a comparative assessment of the Stapled haemorrhoidectomy against Conventional haemorrhoidectomy in the surgical treatment of haemorrhoids. Material & Methods: A hospital based Non-randomised comparative study was conducted in Dept. of Surgery of at a tertiary care hospital. A total of 50 eligible cases scheduled for haemorrhoidectomy in our hospital were included in the study.  These 50 patients were then divided into two groups i.e. 25 for stapled procedure and other 25 patients for conventional procedureData was analyzed using statistical software SPSS ver. 21. Results: Mean operative time was significantly less in stapler group (39.12 vs 45.75 mins; p<0.01) while mean hospital stay was significantly longer in conventional surgery group (7.02 vs 3.01 days; p<0.01). Post-op complain of pain, immediately after surgery (6 hrs.) and at day 1 and day 3 was significantly less in stapler group (p<0.01).