Purpose: To investigate the incidence of inguinal hernia following radical prostatectomy we compared the incidence after open retropubic radical prostatectomy with the incidence after the laparoscopic and robot-assisted radical prostatectomies, and using control groups. Materials and Methods: We included all original articles on studies providing data on inguinal hernia incidence in patients treated with radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer. PubMedÒ and EMBASEÒ were searched on February 28, 2018. A meta-analysis was done as a weighted and pooled estimate of the incidence of inguinal hernia. The bias risk was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohort studies and the Cochrane Collaboration tool for randomized clinical trials. Results: We included 54 studies with a total of 101,687 patients. The estimated incidence of inguinal hernia was 13.7% (95% CI 12.0e15.4) after open retropubic radical prostatectomy, 7.5% (95% CI 5.2e9.8) after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and 7.9% (95% CI 5.0e10.9) after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. In studies comparing the incidence of inguinal hernia after open prostatectomy vs no treatment the incidence was significantly higher in the radical prostatectomy group (11.7%, 95% CI 9.2e14.2 vs 3.3%, 95% CI 2.0e4.6). Two of 3 studies showed a significantly higher incidence after laparoscopic and robot-assisted radical prostatectomies compared with a control group. Most studies of intraoperative inguinal hernia prevention techniques demonstrated a significantly lower inguinal hernia incidence in the experimental group. Inguinal hernias that developed after radical prostatectomy were primarily indirect (81.9%, 95% CI 75.3e88.4). Conclusions: We found a high incidence of inguinal hernia following radical prostatectomy and hernias were primarily of the indirect type. The highest incidence of inguinal hernia was noted after open radical prostatectomy, followed by laparoscopic and robot-assisted radical prostatectomies. There was no significant difference between the laparoscopic and robot-assisted groups. The incidence of inguinal hernia was significantly higher after open radical prostatectomy than in control groups with some evidence to support the same finding for the laparoscopic and robot-assisted approaches. Promising results have been reported in studies of intraoperative prophylactic surgical techniques to reduce the postoperative incidence of inguinal hernia.

Introduction: We aimed to investigate the pharmacokinetic properties and safety of melatonin administered by alternative routes of administration. Methods: This study employed a cross-over design in healthy female volunteers. Twenty-five milligrams of melatonin was administered intravenously, intravesically, rectally, transdermally, and vaginally. Blood samples were collected at specified time points up to 24 h following intravenous, intravesical, rectal, and vaginal administration, and up to 48 h following transdermal administration. Plasma melatonin concentrations were determined by radioimmunoassay. Sedation was evaluated by a simple reactiontime test, and sleepiness was assessed by the Karolinska Sleepiness Scale. Adverse events were registered for each route of administration. Results: Ten participants were included. We documented a mean (SD) time to maximal concentration of 51 (29) min for intravesical, 24 (20) min for rectal, 21 (8) h for transdermal, and 147 (56) min for vaginal administration. The mean (SD) elimination half-life was 47 (6) min for intravenous, 58 (7) min for intravesical, 60 (18) min for rectal, 14.6 (11.1) h for transdermal, and 129 (17) min for vaginal administration. The mean (SD) bioavailability was 3.6 (1.9)% for intravesical, 36.0 (28.6)% for rectal, 10.0 (5.7)% for transdermal, and 97.8 (31.7)% for vaginal administration. No significant changes in reaction times were observed following administration of melatonin by any of the administration routes. Increased tiredness was documented following transdermal administration only. No serious adverse effects were documented. Conclusion: Rectally and vaginally administered melatonin may serve as relevant alternatives to standard oral melatonin therapy. Transdermal delivery of melatonin displayed an extended absorption and can be applied if prolonged effects are intended. Intravesical administration displayed, as expected, a very limited bioavailability. Melatonin administered by these routes of administration was safe.

Background: We aimed to investigate the difference in the total length of hospital stay (LOS) after intraperitoneal vs. intravenous antibiotic treatment in patients with complicated appendicitis. Methods: We conducted a quasi-randomized prospective clinical trial. The intervention group received 4 g fosfomycin, 1 g metronidazole, and 50 µg recombinant human granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor intraperitoneally, which was left in the abdominal cavity, immediately after laparoscopic appendectomy. Postoperatively, this group received antibiotics orally. The control group received intravenous antibiotics both during surgery and postoperatively. We primarily evaluated total LOS within 30 days. Furthermore, we evaluated harms and adverse events, Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index, postoperative complications, and convalescence. Participants were followed for 30 days postoperatively. Results: A total of 12 participants concluded the trial. The total LOS was significantly shorter in the intervention group (six participants, median 13 h; range 2-21 h) than in the control group (six participants, median 84 h; range 67-169 h), p = 0.017. Comparable harms and Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index scores were found in the two groups. The time to return to normal activities was median 6 and 10 days for the intervention and the control group, respectively. There were no serious adverse events related to the trial nor any complications in the intervention group. In the control group, two patients developed intraabdominal abscesses. Conclusions: The intervention group had a significantly shorter total LOS. The study was not powered to assess differences in complications, but the results indicate that Fonnes et al. Short LOS for Complicated Appendicitis the intervention seems to be a safe regimen, which can be investigated further to treat patients with complicated appendicitis.