Search

Background Laparoscopic surgery has progressively replaced open colonic surgery in recent decades owing to favorable short-term outcomes, such as less pain, reduced blood loss, and improved recovery time. The current study was designed to compare laparoscopic surgery with open surgery in patients with rectal cancer by incorporating clinical endpoints and detailed pathological analysis of all resected samples. Methods A prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted to compare laparoscopic surgery with open surgery for rectal cancer patients. The primary endpoint was postoperative clinical outcome in terms of morbidity and mortality. Secondary endpoints were adequacy of surgical margins and number of lymph nodes harvested for rectal cancer cases. Results Sixty patients underwent 40 laparoscopic and 20 open rectal resections between January 2014 and January 2016. There was no mortality, and there were significantly improved short-term surgical outcomes (less blood loss, less use of epidural analgesia, earlier restoration of bowel function, and reduction of the hospital stay) in the laparoscopic group. There were similar rates of intraoperative complications as open surgery, and the incidence of anastomotic leakage was similar between the two techniques. The conversion rate in the laparoscopic group was 12.5%. The short-term outcomes of the current study showed that the radicality of laparoscopic resection (as assessed by pathology report) in patients with rectal cancer is no different from that of open surgery; the median number of lymph nodes harvested for malignancies was 14 in the laparoscopic group and 13 in the open surgery group. Conclusion Laparoscopic surgery in patients with rectal cancer may confer clinical benefits in terms of faster recovery, smaller incisions, and a shorter hospital stay. The procedure can be technically difficult and time consuming. Laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer provided oncological radicality, using the pathology report as a proxy, similar to open surgery. Long-term follow-up to assess local recurrence and survival is necessary to ascertain oncological safety of laparoscopic resection in patients with rectal cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The relationship between laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is intricate. Hiatal hernia repair or gastropexy can have an impact on postoperative GERD., Aim: To assess the effect of the repair of an accidentally discovered HH and/or gastropexy on the development of de novo postoperative GERD symptoms after LSG., Methods: This retrospective study included all obese patients who underwent LSG at our hospital from January 2018 to June 2022. The data retrieved from patients' files comprised demographic and clinical data, including BMI, GERD symptoms, and comorbidities. Hiatal hernias, surgical technique, gastropexy, duration, and intraoperative complications were recorded. Postoperative data included early and late postoperative complications, weight loss, de novo GERD, and medication use., Results: The study included 253 patients, 89 males (35.2%) and 164 females (64.8%), with a mean age of 33.3±10.04 years. De novo GERD was detected in 94 individuals (37.15%). HH was accidentally found and repaired in 29 patients (11.5%). Only 10.3% of LSG and HH repair patients had de novo GERD symptoms, compared to 40.6% of non-HH patients. 149 patients (58.9%) had gastropexy with LSG. Postoperative de novo GERD symptoms were comparable for LSG with gastropexy (40.5%) and LSG alone (40.9%)., Conclusion: After one year, concurrent hiatal hernia repair and LSG seem to be safe and beneficial in lowering postoperative de novo GERD symptoms. The inclusion of gastropexy with LSG had no significant impact on postoperative de novo GERD. Both HH repair and gastropexy lengthened the operation but did not increase its complications., Competing Interests: All authors declare no conflicts of interest in this work., (© 2024 Dalboh et al.)