Search

Unequivocal international guidelines regarding the diagnosis and management of patients with acute appendicitis are lacking. The aim of the consensus meeting 2015 of the EAES was to generate a European guideline based on best available evidence and expert opinions of a panel of EAES members. After a systematic review of the literature by an international group of surgical research fellows, an expert panel with extensive clinical experience in the management of appendicitis discussed statements and recommendations. Statements and recommendations with more than 70 % agreement by the experts were selected for a web survey and the consensus meeting of the EAES in Bucharest in June 2015. EAES members and attendees at the EAES meeting in Bucharest could vote on these statements and recommendations. In the case of more than 70 % agreement, the statement or recommendation was defined as supported by the scientific community. Results from both the web survey and the consensus meeting in Bucharest are presented as percentages. In total, 46 statements and recommendations were selected for the web survey and consensus meeting. More than 232 members and attendees voted on them. In 41 of 46 statements and recommendations, more than 70 % agreement was reached. All 46 statements and recommendations are presented in this paper. They comprise topics regarding the diagnostic work-up, treatment indications, procedural aspects and post-operative care. The consensus meeting produced 46 statements and recommendations on the diagnostic work-up and management of appendicitis. The majority of the EAES members supported these statements. These consensus proceedings provide additional guidance to surgeons and surgical residents providing care to patients with appendicitis.

Abstract: Before neoadjuvant therapy was widely applied, the prognosis of oesophageal cancer had been considered dependent on the location of the tumor, i.e. upper third cancers had had the worst prognosis. The aim of this retrolective study was to prove the efficiency of the neoadjuvant treatment, and to compare the response of esophageal cancer in different locations. Between January 1998 and September 2005, 102 patients with locally advanced squamous cell oesophageal cancer received preoperative chemo-radiotherapy. In 40 cases the tumor was located in the upper third and in 62 cases in the middle third of the oesophagus. After a four-week-long treatment free period restaging was carried out and patients considered resectable were submitted to surgery. From 40 patients with upper third oesophageal cancer 28 underwent oesophageal resection or pharyngo-laryngectomy. Thiry-five percent a complete histopathological remission was observed. From 62 patients with middle third oesophageal cancer 43 underwent oesophageal resection. Histological examination of the resected specimens documented complete response only in three patients. The median survival and the R0 resection rate were similar in the two groups. Although the resection rate, perioperative morbidity, mortality and the median survival were similar in the two groups, a significantly higher rate of complete response (p < 0,05) was observed in patients with upper third oesophageal cancer compared to patients with middle third oesophageal cancer. It seems that upper third oesophageal cancer has superior sensitivity to multimodal treatment therefore our results may support that upper third location is not an unfavorable prognostic factor any more.

Our aims were to measure the posture and movement of the scrub nurse very accurately, without using any markers, during a minimally invasive surgical procedure.