Background. Numerous studies have evaluated the use of autologous abdominal tissue for breast reconstruction; nevertheless, complications and donor site morbidity rates vary significantly. The study aims to compare the literature regarding morbidity of the donor site and complication rates of breast reconstruction with autologous abdominal flaps. Methods. The databases of MEDLINE, EBSCO, Scopus, Wiley Library, and Web of Sciences were searched for studies that compared different flaps in terms of complications and donor site morbidity. The procedures studied included pedicled transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap (pTRAM), free TRAM (fTRAM), deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP), and superficial inferior epigastric artery perforator (SIEA) flaps. A total of 34 studies were included. Of these, 28 were retrospective studies and 9 were prospective cohort studies. Results. When compared to DIEP, fTRAM flaps were found to have a decreased incidence of flap fat necrosis, hematoma, and total thrombotic events, yet a higher risk of donor site hernia/bulging. pTRAM flaps were also associated with an increased risk of hernia/bulging at the donor site, as well as wound infection, yet flap hematoma was less common. On the other hand, SIEA flaps showed the lowest risk of donor site hernia/bulging while still having a high risk of wound infection. Conclusion. fTRAM procedures comparatively had the least complications. However, regarding flap choice, patients would benefit most from a case-by-case analysis, taking into consideration individual risk factors and preferences.

Rationale: Gastrointestinal (GI) motility disorders represent a set of variable presentations caused by an abnormal functioning enteric neuromusculature. Any part of the GI tract can be affected, and depending on the organ involved, the patient presentation will differ. Patient concerns: A 26-years old female who had a history of laparoscopic Heller myotomy 15 years ago for progressive dysphagia. She presented with peritonitis and sigmoid colon perforation secondary to severe chronic constipation. Later after undergoing Hartman procedure, she continued to have significant constipation. In addition, she reported progressive dysphagia and regurgitation to both solids and liquids. Diagnosis: An esophageal manometry revealed Achalasia type 3, and stomach motility nuclear study showed mild delay in gastric emptying. Interventions: Initially, Hartmann procedure was performed. Afterward, we performed a reversal of Hartman, robotic redo of Heller myotomy, and Dor fundoplication was performed. Outcomes: The patient had an uneventful postoperative course and was discharged in good condition. Lessons: Our case highlights an unusual presentation of GI motility disorder resulting in peritonitis from sigmoid colon perforation. Early recognition and prompt treatment of GI motility disorders are essential to avoid severe complications.

Summary: Glomus tumors are painful, benign tumors that develop from the glomus bodies. They account for less than 1% of tumors in hand, and less than 10% present in the pulp of the digits. Cold hypersensitivity, increased pinprick sensitivity, and paroxysmal pain are common glomus tumor symptoms. We describe a 27-year-old man who came with pain in the right little digit, confined to the pulp for 10 years. The tip of the finger was extremely sensitive to touch, and the pain worsened in a cold atmosphere. Upon palpation, no mass was recognized. There was pinpoint tenderness within the distal volar pulp of the little finger. MRI with a contrast of the right little digit showed a 2-mm enhancing lesion in the tip of the little finger. An incision was done over the volar plane of the little finger, removing the tumor bluntly. The tumor was found to be a glomus tumor after histologic evaluation. Glomus tumors of the volar pulp are notoriously hard to detect. Hence, the presence of localized pain in the volar tip for the finger should raise suspicion of the diagnosis of a glomus tumor, and surgical removal should be offered to relieve symptoms and avoid recurrence.

Background: In this study, we aimed to identify the oncological outcomes in colon cancer patients who underwent elective versus emergency curative resection. Methods: All patients who underwent curative resection for colon cancer between July 2015 and December 2019 were retrospectively reviewed and analyzed. Patients were divided into two groups based on the presentation into elective and emergency groups. Results: A total of 215 patients with colon cancer were admitted and underwent curative surgical resection. Of those, 145 patients (67.4%) were elective cases, and 70 (32.5%) were emergency cases. Family history of malignancy was positive in 44 patients (20.5%) and significantly more common in the emergency group (P = 0.016). The emergency group had higher T and TNM stages (P = 0.001). The 3-year survival rate was 60.9% and significantly less in the emergency group (P = 0.026). The mean duration from surgery to recurrence, 3-year disease-free survival, and overall survival were 1.19, 2.81, and 3.11, respectively. Conclusion: Elective group was associated with better 3-year survival, longer overall, and 3-year disease-free survival compared to the emergency group. The disease recurrence rate was comparable in both groups, mainly in the first two years after curative resection.