To determine the effect of timing of surgical intervention for necrotizing pancreatitis. Design: Retrospective study of 53 patients and a systematic review. Setting: A tertiary referral center. Main Outcome Measure: Mortality. Results: Median timing of the intervention was 28 days. Eighty-three percent of patients had infected necrosis and 55% had preoperative organ failure. The mortality rate was 36%. Sixteen patients were operated on within 14 days of initial admission, 11 patients from day 15 to 29, and 26 patients on day 30 or later. This latter group received preoperative antibiotics for a longer period (PϽ.001), and Candida species and antibiotic-resistant organisms were more often cultured from the pancreatic or peripancreatic necrosis in these patients (P=.02). The 30-day group also had the lowest mortality (8% vs 75% in the 1 to 14-days group and 45% in the 15 to 29days group, PϽ.001); this difference persisted when outcome was stratified for preoperative organ failure. During the second half of the study, necrosectomy was further postponed (43 vs 20 days, P = .06) and mortality decreased (22% vs 47%, P=.09). We also reviewed 11 studies with a total of 1136 patients. Median surgical patient volume was 8.3 patients per year (range, 5.3-15.6), median timing of surgical intervention was 26 days (range, 3-31), and median mortality was 25% (range, 6%-56%). We observed a significant correlation between timing of intervention and mortality (R=−0.603; 95% confidence interval, −2.10 to −0.02; P =.05). Conclusion: Postponing necrosectomy until 30 days after initial hospital admission is associated with decreased mortality, prolonged use of antibiotics, and increased incidence of Candida species and antibioticresistant organisms.

BackgroundPersistent, activity-limiting pain after laparoscopic ventral or incisional hernia repair (LVIHR) appears to be related to fixation of the implanted mesh. A randomized study comparing commonly used fixation techniques with respect to postoperative pain and quality of life has not previously been reported.MethodsA total of 199 patients undergoing non-urgent LVIHR in our unit between August 2005 and July 2008 were randomly assigned to one of three mesh-fixation groups: absorbable sutures (AS) with tacks; double crown (DC), which involved two circles of tacks and no sutures; and nonabsorbable sutures (NS) with tacks. All operations were performed by one of two experienced surgeons, who used a standardized technique and the same type of mesh and mesh-fixation materials. The severity of the patients’ pain was assessed preoperatively and at 2 weeks, 6 weeks and 3 months postoperatively by using a visual analogue scale (VAS). Quality of life (QoL) was evaluated by administering a standard health survey before and 3 months after surgery. Results in the three groups were compared.ResultsThe AS, DC, and NS mesh-fixation groups had similar patient demographic, hernia and operative characteristics. There were no significant differences among the groups in VAS scores at any assessment time or in the change in VAS score from preoperative to postoperative evaluations. The QoL survey data showed a significant difference among groups for only two of the eight health areas analyzed.ConclusionIn this trial, the three mesh-fixation methods were associated with similar postoperative pain and QoL findings. These results suggest that none of the techniques can be considered to have a pain-reduction advantage over the others. Development of new methods for securing the mesh may be required to decrease the rate or severity of pain after LVIHR.

Background The COVID-19 pandemic (officially declared on the 11th of March, 2020), and the resulting measures, are impacting daily life and medical management of breast cancer patients and survivors. We evaluated to what extent these changes have affected quality of life, physical and psychosocial wellbeing of patients (being) treated for breast cancer. Methods This study was conducted within a prospective, multicentre cohort of breast cancer patients and survivors (UMBRELLA). Shortly after the implementation of COVID-19 measures, an extra survey was sent to 1,595 participants, including validated EORTC QLQ-C30/BR23 and HADS questionnaires. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were compared to the most recent PROs collected within UMBRELLA pre-COVID-19. The impact of COVID-19 on PROs was assessed using mixed model analysis, adjusting for potential confounders. Results 1,051 patients and survivors (65.9%) completed the survey; 31.1% (n = 327) reported a higher threshold to contact their general practitioner amid the COVID-19 pandemic. A statistically significant deterioration in emotional functioning was observed (82.6 [SD = 18.7] to 77.9 [SD = 17.3], p < .001), and 505 (48.0%, 95%CI = 45.0 to 51.1%) reported moderate to severe loneliness. Small improvements were observed in QoL, physical-, social- and role functioning. In the subgroup of 51 patients under active treatment, social functioning strongly deteriorated (77.3 [95%CI = 69.4 to 85.2] to 61.3 [95%CI = 52.6 to 70.1], p = .002). Conclusion During the COVID-19 pandemic, breast cancer patients and survivors were less likely to contact physicians and experienced a deterioration in their emotional functioning. Patients undergoing active treatment reported a substantial drop in social functioning. One in two reported loneliness that was moderate or severe. Online interventions supporting mental health and social interaction are needed during times of social distancing and lockdowns.

Although not a hernia recurrence, symptomatic bulging after laparoscopic ventral hernia repair requires a new repair.

This study showed significant differences in baseline characteristics and operative findings between patients undergoing PVH repair and those undergoing IVH repair. Continued pooling of data on LR of IVH and PVH combined, commonly found in the current literature, seems incorrect.