Diabetic foot problems are common throughout the world, resulting in major economic consequences for the patients, their families, and society. Our aim is “To formulate a risk scoring system that can predict the risk of amputation in a patient with an infected diabetic foot”. Previously published studies aimed at identifying independent risk factors for lower-extremity amputation in patients with a DFI have noted an association with older age, the presence of fever, elevated acute-phase reactants, higher HbA1c levels, and renal insufciency. In the current study, we have identied that Age, Duration of diabetes, History of amputations, Ulcer depth, Ankle-brachial index, Severity of infection, and Peripheral neuropathy, Peripheral arterial diseases are signicantly associated with Lower Extremity amputation. Peripheral vascular disease and infection were the most powerful predictors, as 65% of patients who underwent amputations in our study belonged to Rutherford grade 3 and grade 4. We developed a New Risk score for predicting amputation in diabetic patients with an infected foot ulcer, which can be readily used in daily clinical practice without the necessity of extensive lab investigations. Patients with a score of >16.5 are at increased risk of lower extremity amputation. 66.6% of our follow up cases who underwent reamputations belonged to the group with a score of >16.5. Risk of amputation increases as the score increases

Background: Hemorrhoidectomy is the treatment of choice for patients with third-degree or fourth-degree hemorrhoids. This prospective randomized clinical study compared the outcome of surgical haemorrhoidectomy by open and closed techniques in terms of postoperative pain, postoperative complications, and wound healing. Patients and Methods: This study included 60 patients who underwent haemorrhoidectomy at Surgery Department of KATURI MEDICAL COLLEGE & HOSPITAL. The participants were divided into two groups: Group 1: Open haemorrhoidectomy, Group 2: Closed haemorrhoidectomy. In bot Results: h close & open procedures, no patient was pain free. However, Post-operative pain scores were signicantly low in the closed Group than open Group during rst 24 hours. In terms of postoperative complications, there was no statistical difference between the two procedures. Length of hospital stay, and faster wound healing time were better in closed group. Both the open and closed approaches are Conclusion: less expensive, safe, simple to use, and yield positive outcomes. We discovered that Ferguson's closed approach had signicant advantages over Morgan's open approach

In this modern surgery era, laparoscopic surgery has gained paramount importance due to its minimally invasive technique, decreased hospital stay, and better cosmesis. Hence the emphasis is on reducing hospital stay and postoperative morbidity with matter to cosmesis. Even though 1 laparoscopic repair has become more popular for long-term outcomes, it needs further evaluation . The present study compares the paraumbilical 2,3 hernia repair in adults by an open and laparoscopic method in view of hospital stay, postoperative complications, and return to normal activities