Combined bowel preparation with mechanical cleansing and oral antibiotics results in a significantly lower incidence of incisional surgical site infection, anastomotic leakage, and hospital readmission when compared to no preoperative bowel preparation.
In recent years, convolutional neural networks (CNNs) have shown great performance in various fields such as image classification, pattern recognition, and multi-media compression. Two of the feature properties, local connectivity and weight sharing, can reduce the number of parameters and increase processing speed during training and inference. However, as the dimension of data becomes higher and the CNN architecture becomes more complicated, the endto-end approach or the combined manner of CNN is computationally intensive, which becomes limitation to CNN's further implementation. Therefore, it is necessary and urgent to implement CNN in a faster way. In this paper, we first summarize the acceleration methods that contribute to but not limited to CNN by reviewing a broad variety of research papers. We propose a taxonomy in terms of three levels, i.e. structure level, algorithm level, and implementation level, for acceleration methods. We also analyze the acceleration methods in terms of CNN architecture compression, algorithm optimization, and hardware-based improvement. At last, we give a discussion on different perspectives of these acceleration and optimization methods within each level. The discussion shows that the methods in each level still have large exploration space. By incorporating such a wide range of disciplines, we expect to provide a comprehensive reference for researchers who are interested in CNN acceleration.
Background Previous studies have raised concerns that video-assisted thoracoscopic (VATS) lobectomy may compromise nodal evaluation. The advantages or limitations of robotic lobectomy have not been thoroughly evaluated. Methods Perioperative outcomes and survival of patients who underwent open versus minimally-invasive surgery (MIS [VATS and robotic]) lobectomy and VATS versus robotic lobectomy for clinical T1-2, N0 non-small cell lung cancer from 2010 to 2012 in the National Cancer Data Base were evaluated using propensity score matching. Results Of 30,040 lobectomies, 7,824 were VATS and 2,025 were robotic. After propensity score matching, when compared with the open approach (n = 9,390), MIS (n = 9,390) was found to have increased 30-day readmission rates (5% versus 4%, p < 0.01), shorter median hospital length of stay (5 versus 6 days, p < 0.01), and improved 2-year survival (87% versus 86%, p = 0.04). There were no significant differences in nodal upstaging and 30-day mortality between the two groups. After propensity score matching, when compared with the robotic group (n = 1,938), VATS (n = 1,938) was not significantly different from robotics with regard to nodal upstaging, 30-day mortality, and 2-year survival. Conclusions In this population-based analysis, MIS (VATS and robotic) lobectomy was used in the minority of patients for stage I non-small cell lung cancer. MIS lobectomy was associated with shorter length of hospital stay and was not associated with increased perioperative mortality, compromised nodal evaluation, or reduced short-term survival when compared with the open approach. These results suggest the need for broader implementation of MIS techniques.
Symptomatic hemorrhoid disease is one of the most prevalent ailments associated with significant impact on quality of life. Management options for hemorrhoid disease are diverse, ranging from conservative measures to a variety of office and operating-room procedures. In this review, the authors will discuss the anatomy, pathophysiology, clinical presentation, and management of hemorrhoid disease.
Background The objective of this study was to evaluate outcomes of minimally invasive approaches to esophagectomy using population-level data. Methods Multivariable regression modeling was used to determine predictors associated with the use of minimally invasive approaches for patients in the National Cancer Data Base who underwent resection of middle and distal clinical T13N03M0 esophageal cancers from 2010 to 2012. Perioperative outcomes and 3-year survival were compared between propensity-matched groups of patients with esophageal cancer who underwent minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) or open esophagectomy (OE). A subgroup analysis was performed to evaluate the impact of using robotic-assisted operations as part of the minimally invasive approach. Results Among 4,266 patients included, 1,308 (30.6%) underwent MIE. It was more likely to be used in patients treated at academic (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 10.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.2–33.1) or comprehensive cancer facilities (adjusted OR, 6.4; 95% CI, 2.6–21.1). Compared with propensity-matched patients who underwent OE, patients who underwent MIE had significantly more lymph nodes examined (15 versus 13; p = 0.016) and shorter hospital lengths of stay (10 days versus 11 days; p = 0.046) but similar resection margin positivity, readmission, and 30-day mortality (all p > 0.05). Survival was similar between the matched groups at 3 years for both adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma (p > 0.05). Compared with MIE without robotic assistance, use of a robotic approach was not associated with any significant differences in perioperative outcomes (p > 0.05). Conclusions The use of minimally invasive techniques to perform esophagectomy for esophageal cancer is associated with modestly improved perioperative outcomes without compromising survival.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.