Search

Objective To compare clinical and operative results between laparoscopic primary repair (LPR) alone and LPR with highly selective vagotomy (LPR-HSV) in patients with duodenal ulcer perforation. Methods Clinical data from patients who underwent either LPR or LPR-HSV by resecting both sides of the neurovascular bundle using an ultrasonic or bipolar electrosurgical device for duodenal ulcer perforations, between 2010 and 2020, were retrospectively collected. Between-group differences in continuous and categorical variables were statistically analysed. Results Data from 184 patients (mean age, 49.6 years), who underwent either LPR ( n = 132) or LPR-HSV ( n = 52) were included. The mean operation time was significantly longer in the LPR-HSV group (116.5 ± 39.8 min) than in the LPR group (91.2 ± 33.3 min). Hospital stay was significantly shorter in the LPR-HSV group (8.6 ± 2.6 days) versus the LPR group (11.3 ± 7.1 days). The mean postoperative day of starting soft fluid diet was also significantly shorter in the LPR-HSV group (4.5 ± 1.4 days) than in the LPR group (5.6 ± 4 days). No between-group difference in morbidity rate was observed. The learning curve of the HSV procedure showed a stable procedure time after 10 operations. Conclusions LPR with HSV may be a safe and feasible procedure for selective cases who are at high risk for ulcer recurrence.

A 46-year-old woman demonstrated refractory Kounis syndrome (KS) after induction of anesthesia. Despite conventional management of anaphylaxis and advanced cardiac life support, her cardiovascular function continued to deteriorate until she had a cardiac arrest, and after extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) therapy, electrical cardiac activity reappeared. A large number of patients with KS—“allergic angina syndrome”—has been known to recover well with vasodilators; however, this patient showed antibiotics-induced refractory KS during general anesthesia. Severe bronchospasms with desaturation appeared as initial anaphylactic features; however, these did not respond to conventional treatment for anaphylaxis. Patient’s hemodynamic signs eventually worsened, leading to cardiac arrest despite ephedrine administration and chest compressions. During cardiopulmonary cerebral resuscitation, the central line was secured, and epinephrine, atropine, as well as sodium bicarbonate were administered repeatedly; nevertheless, cardiac arrest was sustained. After initiation of veno-arterial ECMO, atrial fibrillation was observed, which was later converted to sinus tachycardia by electrical cardioversions and amiodarone. Coronary angiography was performed before the patient was admitted to the intensive care unit; there were no indications of an impending cardiac arrest. The patient was discharged uneventfully owing to early use of ECMO despite the emergence of KS symptoms that were initially masked by anesthesia but later worsened abruptly.