Search

Introduction: Proctologic issues entail a frequent reason for consultation in the emergency department (ED). We aim to analyze how the SARS-COV-2 pandemic has impacted in the demand for proctological consultations., Material and Method: Descriptive comparative retrospective study of cross-sectional cohorts of patients attending the ED for proctological complaints from March to April in 2020 and 2019. Demographic variables, comorbidities, reasons for consultation and diagnosis, treatment and readmission were included. Four periods were analyzed according to the different stages of the pandemic derived limitations., Results: A total of 191 patients were reviewed, 58 in 2020 and 133 in 2019 with an average age of 48 years (SD 20.1) and 112 (58.6%) males. The average number of daily consultations was 2.18 patients in 2019 versus 0.95 in 2020 (p=0.025) meaning a 56% reduction in consultations for proctological reasons. This difference in average consultations was significant in both periods of lockout (p=0.001) and previous de-escalation (p=0.014). The diagnosis distribution was similar between both periods; however, perianal abscesses doubled their rate in 2020, 22.4% versus 11.3% (p=0.045). There was an increasing need for surgery, 31% vs 15% (p=0.011) with no difference in outpatients regimen after emergency surgery (12.5% vs 7.5%, p=0.201). Three patients in 2020 required readmission to the ED (5.2% vs 12.9%, p=0.086)., Conclusion: There was a decrease of a 56% in proctologic emergency consultation, however, the need for surgery was twice more frequent during the study period. Reflection on the use of emergencies for proctological reasons is warranted., (Copyright © 2020 AEC. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Proctologic issues entail a frequent reason for consultation in the emergency department (ED). We aim to analyze how the SARS-COV-2 pandemic has impacted in the demand for proctological consultations., Material and Method: Descriptive comparative retrospective study of cross-sectional cohorts of patients attending the ED for proctological complaints from March to April in 2020 and 2019. Demographic variables, comorbidities, reasons for consultation and diagnosis, treatment and readmission were included. Four periods were analyzed according to the different stages of the pandemic derived limitations., Results: A total of 191 patients were reviewed, 58 in 2020 and 133 in 2019 with an average age of 48 years (SD 20.1) and 112 (58.6%) males. The average number of daily consultations was 2.18 patients in 2019 versus 0.95 in 2020 (p=0.025) meaning a 56% reduction in consultations for proctological reasons. This difference in average consultations was significant in both periods of lockout (p=0.001) and previous de-escalation (p=0.014). The diagnosis distribution was similar between both periods; however, perianal abscesses doubled their rate in 2020, 22.4% versus 11.3% (p=0.045). There was an increasing need for surgery, 31% vs 15% (p=0.011) with no difference in outpatients regimen after emergency surgery (12.5% vs 7.5%, p=0.201). Three patients in 2020 required readmission to the ED (5.2% vs 12.9%, p=0.086)., Conclusion: There was a decrease of a 56% in proctologic emergency consultation, however, the need for surgery was twice more frequent during the study period. Reflection on the use of emergencies for proctological reasons is warranted., (Copyright © 2020 AEC. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The aim of this study is to analyze the impact of hepatic artery lymph node (HALN) involvement on the survival of patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PA)., Methods: A single-center retrospective study analyzing patients who underwent PD for PA. Patients were included if, during PD, the HALN was submitted for pathologic evaluation. Patients were stratified by node status: PPLN- (peripancreatic lymph node)/HALN-, PPLN+/HALN- and PPLN+/HALN+. Survival analysis was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method, and Cox regression was used for risk factors analyses., Results: Out of the 118 patients who underwent PD for PA, HALN status was analyzed in 64 patients. The median follow-up was 20months (r: 1-159months). HALN and PPLN were negative in 12patients (PPLN-/HALN-, 19%), PPLN was positive and HALN negative in 40patients (PPLN+/HALN-, 62%), PPLN and HALN were positive in 12 patients (PPLN+/HALN+, 19%) and PPLN was negative and HALN positive in 0 patients (PPLN-/HALN+, 0%). The overall 1, 3 and 5-year survival rates were statistically better in the PPLN-/HALN- group (82%, 72%, 54%) than in the PPLN+/HALN- group (68%, 29%, 21%) and the PPLN+/HALN+ group (72%, 9%, 9%, respectively) (P=.001 vs P=.007). The 1, 3 and 5-year probabilities of cumulative recurrence were also statistically better in the PPLN-/HALN- group (18%, 46%, 55%) than in the PPLN+/HALN- group (57%, 80%, 89%) and the PPLN+/HALN+ group (46%, 91%, 100%, respectively) (P=.006 vs P=.021). In the multivariate model, the main risk factor for overall survival and recurrence was lymphatic invasion, regardless of HALN status., Conclusions: In pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients with lymph node disease, survival after PD is comparable regardless of HALN status., (Copyright © 2019 AEC. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The benefit of pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) with superior mesenteric-portal vein resection (PVR) for pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PA) is still controversial in terms of morbidity, mortality and survival. We conducted a retrospective study to analyze outcomes of PD with PVR in a Spanish tertiary centre., Methods: Between 2002 and 2012, 10 patients underwent PVR (PVR+ group) and 68 standard PD (PVR- group). Morbidity, mortality, overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were compared between PVR+ and PVR- group. Prognostic factors were identified by a Cox regression model., Results: Postoperative mortality was 5% (4/78), all patients in PVR- group. Morbidity was higher in the PVR- group compared to PVR+ (63 vs. 30%, P=.004). OS at 3 and 5 years was 43 and 43% in PVR+ group, 35 and 29% in PVR- group (P=.07). DFS at 3 and 5 years DFS were 28 and 15% in PVR+ group, 25 and 20% in PVR- group (P=.84). Median survival was 23.1 months in PVR- group, and 22.8 months in PVR+ group (P=.73). Factors related with OS were absence of adjuvant treatment (OR 2.9, 95%IC: 1.39-6.14, P=.003), R1 resection (OR 2.3, 95%IC: 1.2-4.43, P=.006), preoperative CA 19.9 level ≥ 170 UI/mL (OR 2.3, 95%IC: 1.22-4.32, P=.01). DFS risk factors were R1 resection (OR 2.6, 95%IC: 1.41-4.95, P=.002); moderate or poor tumor differentiation grade (OR 2.7, 95%IC: 1.23-6.17, P=.01); N1 lymph node status (OR 1.8, 95%IC: 1.02-3.19, P=.04); CA 19.9 level ≥ 170 UI/mL (OR 2.4, 95%IC: 1.30-4.54, P=.005)., Conclusions: PVR for PA can be performed safely. Patients with PVR have a comparable survival to patients undergoing standard PD if disease-free margins can be obtained., (Copyright © 2015 AEC. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)