Open Repair Group Research Articles

Association of operative approach with outcomes in neonates with esophageal atresia and tracheoesophageal fistula

Purpose: We sought to evaluate the impact of thoracoscopic repair on perioperative outcomes in infants with esophageal atresia and tracheoesophageal fistula (EA/TEF).Methods: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program pediatric database from 2014 to 2018 was queried for all neonates who underwent operative repair of EA/TEF. Operative approach based on intention to treat was correlated with perioperative outcomes, including 30-day postoperative adverse events, in logistic regression models.Results: Among 855 neonates, initial thoracoscopic repair was performed in 133 (15.6%) cases. Seventy (53%) of these cases were converted to open. Those who underwent thoracoscopic repair were more likely to be full-term (p = 0.03) when compared to those in the open repair group. There were no significant differences in perioperative outcome measures based on surgical approach except for operative time (thoracoscopic: 217 min vs. open: 180 min, p<0.001). A major cardiac comorbidity (OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.2–2.1; p = 0.003) and preoperative ventilator requirement (OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.0–1.9; p = 0.034) were the only risk factors associated with adverse events.Conclusions: Thoracoscopic neonatal repair of EA/TEF continues to be used sparingly, is associated with high conversion rates, and has similar perioperative outcomes when compared to open repair.Level of evidence: III

Laparoscopic treatment of inguinal hernia in female children – national experience

Background. Although, laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair in children is gaining ground as a safe, feasible, and popular method, still many pediatric surgeons continue to debate its safety, efficacy, and cosmesis in comparison with conventional open repair. Materials and methods. This was a prospective clinical study, that elaborated 98 female children aged 1–14 with clinically diagnosed indirect inguinal hernia. Equal proportions of 49 children were treated via laparoscopic (PIRS) either conventional open repair (OR). Outpatient clinic follow up was performed regardless of the type of the intervention, on the 7th day and 6 weeks after discharge. Results. The mean age of children in PIRS vs. OR group was 5.3±2.7 vs. 5.9±3.3 years. There was no significant differences between the groups related to age (p = 0.4221), weight (p = 0.5482), family history (p = 0.5377), and residency rural/urban (p = 0.3161). The average length of unilateral vs. bilateral PIRS repair (29.5±6.8 vs. 43.6±7.2 min) was significantly shorter than OR (44±4.2 vs. 97±8.1 min) for consequently p = 0.0023 vs. p = 0.00001. The post-operative hospitalization after PIRS repair was 14.1±3.1 hours and was significantly shorter compared to OR – 44±4.2 hours (p = 0.00001). In OR group, 4 (8.2%) children had postoperative nausea compared to none in PIRS group. Significantly bigger cosmetic satisfaction was found in PIRS compared to OM group (p = 0.0001). Conclusion. With due respect to OR as a gold standard, the proven advantages of PIRS are motivation for further improvement of this technique for the purpose of treatment of inguinal hernia of female children.

The Administrative Risk Analysis Index (RAI-A) Does Not Predict Reintervention or Mortality Within 30 Days in Patients Who Undergo Elective Open or Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

ObjectiveFrailty scores are increasingly utilized to predict postoperative complications. The purpose of this study is to determine whether the administrative risk analysis index (RAI-A) can be used to predict reintervention or mortality within 30 days in patients who undergo elective open or endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. MethodsThe American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was used to query data from elective open or endovascular aortic aneurysm repairs from 2011 to 2018. The administrative risk analysis index (RAI-A) score was calculated for each patient using two approaches (conservative versus liberal) due to discrepancies in NSQIP data categorization. Multivariable regression analysis was performed to determine whether there were statistical or clinical significance for incremental increases of RAI-A for both the open and endovascular repair group. Outcome measures were re-intervention or death within 30 days. ResultsData from 4106 and 11,733 patients who underwent open and endovascular repair, respectively, were included in the analysis. The number of reinterventions within 30 days was 9.1% (375 out of 4106 patients) in the open repair group and 4.0% (463 out of 11,685 patients) in the endovascular group. Thirty-day mortality was 4.7% (192 out of 4106 patients) in the open repair group, and 0.9% (109 out of 11,685 patients) in the endovascular group.In the conservative calculation of RAI-A scores, the open and endovascular repair groups had median RAI-A scores of 7 (mean 8.31) and 9 (mean 9.51), respectively. There was no significant association between RAI-A scores and outcome measures in either group. For predicting 30 d reintervention, the C statistic was 0.535 (OR 1.02) for the open repair group and 0.532 (OR 1.02) for endovascular repair. For predicting 30-day mortality, the C statistic was 0.626 (OR 1.07) in the open repair group and 0.701 (OR 1.09) in the endovascular repair group.In the liberal calculation of RAI-A scores, the open and endovascular repair groups had median RAI-A scores of 6 (mean 6.19) and 7 (mean 7.65), respectively. There was no significant association between RAI-A scores and outcome measures in either group. For predicting 30 d reintervention, the C statistic was 0.527 (OR 1.02) for open repair and 0.529 (OR 1.02) for endovascular repair. For predicting 30-day mortality, the C statistic was 0.625 (OR 1.07) in the open repair group and 0.695 (OR 1.08) in the endovascular repair group. ConclusionsThe RAI-A is not useful in predicting 30 d reintervention or mortality in patients who undergo elective open or endovascular AAA repair.

Time-to-Event Analysis of the Impact of Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair on Chronic Renal Decline

Although randomized studies have revealed the long-term outcomes of the endovascular repair (ER) of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) compared to open repair (OR), there is controversy surrounding chronic renal decline (CRD) after ER. This study reviewed our propensity-matched cohorts of ER and OR to compare CRD rates using a time-to-event analysis. The ER groups undergoing suprarenal (SR) or infrarenal (IR) proximal fixation were also compared with the OR group. This retrospective review of infrarenal AAA repair was conducted from June 2007-December 2017. Patients with ≥1 year of follow-up were included. Cases of supra/pararenal AAAs, infectious AAAs, rupture, or severe chronic kidney disease (CKD) (estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <15 mL/min/1.73 m2 or dependence on renal replacement therapy) were excluded. CRD was defined as eGFR decline of >20% or de novo hemodialysis during follow-up. Patients treated with ER (ER group) and OR (OR group) were propensity-score matched for age, sex, comorbidities, ejection fraction, respiratory function, and baseline eGFR. Kaplan-Meier analysis compared the freedom from CRD rates of the matched cohorts (mER and mOR groups). Patients treated with SR and IR fixation devices (SR and IR groups) were also separately matched to the OR group, followed by analysis. In total, 1087 patients underwent elective AAA repair. Among them, 944 (512 ER and 432 OR) were enrolled. The ER group was older than the OR group (median age 79 vs 71; P<0.001). The ER group had significantly lower baseline eGFR and more comorbidities than the OR group. Among 187 propensity-score matched pairs (187 mER and 187 mOS patients), background characteristics, including age and baseline eGFR, were comparable, but median renal function follow-up was significantly longer in the mER group than in the mOR group (48 vs 26 months; P<0.001). CRD was observed in 57 patients in the mER group and 30 patients in the mOR group. Kaplan-Meier analysis of the freedom from CRD showed no significant difference between the matched groups (P=0.268); however, in the later follow-up of >4 years, CRD was more common in the mER group. The matched analyses between the OR group and specific fixation groups, comprising 102 OR-SR and 73 OR-IR pairs, demonstrated no significant differences in CRD. Compared to OR, there was no significant impact of ER on CRD at up to 4 years, supporting the safety of ER in terms of the mid-term renal outcome of our present clinical practice.

Comparison of the outcome between open and laparoscopic inguinal mesh repair

The primitiveness of the techniques of surgical repair of inguinal hernia which can be traced back to civilizations of ancient Egypt and Greece, were often worse than the disease itself. Considering these procedures were performed before the advent of the aseptic technique, it is safe to assume that mortality was quite high. For those that did survive the operation, recurrence of the hernia was commonplace. 60 cases of primary inguinal hernia were selected for the study. Permission of ethical committee and informed consent of each patient was taken. The minimum and maximum time taken to return to work in the open repair group were seen to be 14 and 22 days respectively with a mean of 17.37 and a SD of 2.59, whereas in the laparoscopic group the minimum was 3 days and maximum was 8 days, with a mean of 5.67 and a SD of 1.35 (p value was extremely significant at 2.57E-25).

Surgical outcomes of totally extraperitoneal repair for inguinal hernia: A retrospective multicenter propensity score-matched study.

BackgroundLaparoscopic surgical approaches, including total extraperitoneal repair (TEP), have been widely accepted for inguinal hernia repair in Japan. However, there are limited data regarding recurrence after TEP in Japan, given the limited versatility of this procedure. This study retrospectively evaluated the rates of hernia recurrence after TEP and open mesh repair at multiple Japanese centers.MethodsThis retrospective study evaluated 1917 patients who underwent inguinal hernia repair at 32 institutions in the Oita prefecture between January 2014 and December 2015. Eligible patients were grouped according to whether they underwent TEP (1011 patients) or open mesh repair (636 patients). Propensity score matching was performed 1:1 (total: 1076 patients, 538 patients from each group). The outcomes of interest were recurrence, morbidity, and postoperative recovery.ResultsThe TEP and open mesh repair groups had similar baseline characteristics. After propensity score matching, there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of recurrence rate (TEP: 0.5% vs open mesh repair: 1.0%, P = .375). However, the TEP group had significantly longer operating times (median: 70.2 min vs 65.0 min, P < .001), significantly less blood loss (0‐5.1 mL vs 0–20.4 mL, P < .001), and significantly shorter postoperative hospital stays (median: 5.0 days vs 6.4 days, P < .001). The overall incidences of morbidity were 6.2% in the TEP group and 7.2% in the open mesh repair group (P = .535).ConclusionThis multicenter retrospective study with propensity score matching revealed that the recurrence rates were similarly low for TEP and open mesh repair of inguinal hernia. Thus, a well‐trained surgical team could use TEP as a standard procedure.

Adult pectus excavatum repair: national outcomes of the Nuss and Ravitch procedures.

BackgroundNational data is limited on pectus excavatum, the most common chest wall deformity which is often repaired using the Ravitch and Nuss procedures. The purpose of the study was to describe demographics and outcomes of adult patients who underwent surgical repair of pectus excavatum via open and minimally invasive thoracoscopic methods.MethodsA retrospective analysis of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database from 2015 to 2018 was performed, capturing patients 18 years or older with pectus excavatum as the postoperative diagnosis. Patients were placed into two groups of minimally invasive (Nuss) and open (Ravitch) repair procedure code. Baseline characteristics and postoperative outcomes were analyzed.ResultsA total of 168 adult patients were captured. Most of these patients were white (84.52%) male (69.64%) and 26 years old on average. Median operative time was longer in the open repair group [250 (IQR, 173–308) versus 122 (IQR, 94–160) minutes, P<0.0001]. Median length of stay was five days (IQR, 4–6) in the open group and three days (IQR, 2–4) in the minimally invasive group (P=0.2873).ConclusionsComplications after repair of pectus excavatum occur at similar rates between open and minimally invasive repair. Though minimally invasive repair decreases operative time and may decrease length of stay, the decision of type of procedure depends upon clinical scenario and factors unique to the individual patient.

TEVAR versus open repair of blunt traumatic descending aortic injury in polytraumatic patients involved in motor vehicle accidents

BackgroundThoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is the standard-of-care for treating traumatic aortic injury (TAI). Few retrospective studies compared TEVAR to open repair in blunt traumatic aortic injury (BTAI). Our objectives were to compare the early outcomes of TEVAR for blunt traumatic descending aortic injury to open repair (OR) in polytraumatic patients involved in motor vehicle accidents (MVA).ResultsBetween February 2005 and April 2017, 71 patients with TAI due to MVA presented to our institution. All patients with descending aortic injuries were considered for open repair (n = 41) or TEVAR (n = 30) if there was no contraindication. The primary outcome was mortality, and secondary outcomes were stroke, paraplegia, intensive care unit (ICU), and hospital stay.The mean age was 28.4 ± 10.1 years in the OR group and 33.3 ± 16.6 years in TEVAR-group (P = 0.13). The injury severity scores were 41 ± 10 in the OR group and 33 ± 17 in the TEVAR group (P = 0.03). Patients in the OR group underwent emergency repair with a mean time of 0.56 ± 0.18 days from arrival. The TEVAR group had a longer time interval between arrival and procedure (2.1 ± 1.7 days, P = 0.001). The OR group had more blood transfusion (24 (58.5%) vs. 8 (27.5%), P = 0.002), renal impairment (6 (14.6%) vs. 1 (5.50%), P = 0.23), and wound infection (21 (51.2%) vs. 3 (10%), P < 0.001). Three TEVAR patients had a perioperative stroke compared to two patients in the OR group (P = 0.64). There was no difference in the mean ICU (6 ± 8.9 vs. 5.3 ± 2.9 days; P = 0.1) or hospital stay (20.1 ± 12.3 vs. 20.1 ± 18.3, P = 0.62) between the two groups. There were four deaths in the OR group and none in the TEVAR group (P = 0.13).ConclusionThe results of TEVAR were comparable with the open repair for traumatic aortic injury with good early postoperative outcomes. TEVAR repair could be associated with lower mortality, blood transfusion, and infective complications. However, the complexity of the injury and technical challenges were higher in the open group.

Outcomes of emergency endovascular versus open repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm rupture.

PurposeRuptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) is one of the most common aortic emergencies in vascular surgery and is associated with high operative mortality and morbidity rates despite recent treatment advances. We evaluated operative mortality risks for the outcomes of emergency endovascular aneurysm repair (eEVAR) vs. open repair in rAAA.MethodsTwenty patients underwent eEVAR (n = 12) or open repair (n = 8) for rAAA between 2016 and 2020. We adopted the EVAR first strategy since 2018. Primary endpoints included in-hospital mortality and 1-year survival. The outcome variables were analyzed with Fisher exact, Mann-Whitney test, and linear by linear association. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate survival.ResultsThere were 13 males (65.0%) and the median age of the study cohort was 78.0 years (range, 49–88 years). In-hospital mortality occurred in 7 patients (35.0%); 5 (50.0%) in the early period and 2 (20.0%) in the later period of this series. According to the procedure type, 4 (50.0%) and 3 (25.0%) in-hospital mortalities occurred in the open repair and eEVAR patients, respectively. In 6 patients (50.0%), eEVAR was performed on unfavorable anatomy. The 1-year survival of eEVAR vs. open repair group was 75% ± 12.5% and 50% ± 17.7%, respectively. On univariate analysis, preoperative high-risk indices, postoperative acute renal failure requiring dialysis, pulmonary complications, and prolonged mechanical ventilation were associated with higher operative mortality.ConclusionThe current data showed relatively superior outcomes with eEVAR vs. open repair for rAAA, even in some patients with unfavorable anatomy supporting the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of EVAR first strategy.

Laparoscopic vs. Open Surgical Repair of Subxiphoidal Hernia Following Median Sternotomy for Coronary Bypass - Analysis of the Herniamed Registry.

Introduction: The repair of subxiphoidal incisional hernia following median sternotomy is technically demanding due to the specific anatomic situation and the lateral distracting forces in this region. Published data are available from retrospective reports with limited number of patients only. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of subxiphoidal hernia repair comparing laparoscopic and open surgical approach.Materials and Methods: This analysis of Herniamed registry data of patients with subxiphoidal incisional hernia following sternotomy for coronary bypass assesses the perioperative and 1 year follow-up outcome of laparoscopic and open repair. Demographic data and perioperative outcomes were stratified by surgical approach (laparoscopic vs. open) and compared as unadjusted analyses using Chi square and Students t-tests.Results: Of 208 patients identified for the analysis 69 patients (33.2%) underwent laparoscopic and 139 (66.8%) patients had open repair. Concerning demographic data (gender, age, BMI, ASA score), risk factors and hernia size there were no significant differences between laparoscopic and open repair group. For intraoperative, postoperative and general complications as well as complication related re-operations no significant differences were seen between the groups. No significant advantage could be stated for laparoscopic repair regarding duration of operation and hospital stay. The recurrence rate at 1 year follow-up was higher in the laparoscopic group (7.2 vs. 2.2%; p = 0.072). No significant differences were reported in the 1 year follow-up evaluation of pain at rest, pain on exertion and pain requiring treatment.Conclusion: The repair of subxiphoidal incisional hernia is safe in both open and laparoscopic technique. With regard to the lower recurrence rate preference can be given to open repair.

Long-term outcomes of intervention between open repair and endovascular aortic repair for descending aortic pathologies: a propensity-matched analysis

BackgroundThe long-term complication rates of open repair and thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) have not yet been determined. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the long-term outcomes and aortic reintervention rates between open repair and TEVAR in patients with descending thoracic aortic pathologies.MethodsBetween January 2002 and December 2017, 230 patients with descending thoracic aortic pathologies underwent surgery. Of these, 136 patients were included in this retrospective study: 45 patients (10, 2, and 33 with dissection, penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer, and pseudoaneurysm, respectively) underwent open repair and 91 patients (27, 1, and 63 with dissection, penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer, and pseudoaneurysm, respectively) underwent TEVAR. The primary end points were in-hospital mortality, and short-term complications. The secondary end points were long-term mortality and reintervention rates. Based on the propensity score matching (PSM), 35 patients who underwent open repair were matched to 35 patients who underwent TEVAR (ratio = 1:1).ResultsThe mean follow-up period was 70.2 ± 51.9 months. Shorter intensive care unit and hospital stay were seen in the TEVAR group than in the open repair group before and after PSM (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001, respectively). However, in-hospital mortality, and spinal cord ischemia were not significantly different among the two groups (before PSM: p = 0.068 and p = 0.211, respectively; after PSM: p = 0.303 and p = 0.314, respectively). The cumulative all-cause death and aorta-related death showed no significant differences between the two groups (before PSM: p = 0.709 and p = 0.734, respectively; after PSM: p = 0.888 and p = 0.731, respectively). However, aortic reintervention rates were higher in the TEVAR group than in the open repair group before and after PSM (p = 0.006 and p = 0.013, respectively).ConclusionThe TEVAR group was superior in short-term recovery outcomes but had higher reintervention rates compared to the open repair group. However, there were no significant differences in long-term survival between the two groups.

Postoperative outcomes of ventral hernia repair in veterans

BackgroundVentral hernia repair is a common procedure with reported 15% to 37% morbidity and 0.3% to 1.4% mortality rates. This study examines the 30-day morbidity and mortality of open and laparoscopic ventral hernia repair in veterans, along with the impact of body mass index on these outcomes. MethodsThe Veterans Affairs Surgical Quality Improvement Program was queried for all ventral hernia repairs during the period 2008 to 2015. In this retrospective analysis, we compared outcomes of open ventral hernia repair versus laparoscopic ventral hernia repair and among different body mass index classes. ResultsA total of 19,883 patients were identified (92.6% male, mean age 59.7, 53.1% obese, and 71.6% with American Society of Anesthesiologists class ≥III). There were 95 (0.5%) mortalities, and complications occurred in 1,289 (6.5%) patients. Open ventral hernia repair was performed in 60.2%; 14.5% were recurrent, and 3.3% were performed as an emergency operation. When compared with open ventral hernia repair, the laparoscopic ventral hernia repair group had higher mean body mass index, less patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists class ≥III, fewer emergency operations, longer operative time, less complications, decreased mortality, and shorter duration of stay. Body mass index 35.00 to 49.99 was predictive of overall complications in the open ventral hernia repair group. ConclusionVentral hernia repair can be performed in the veteran population with outcomes comparable to those in the private sector. Morbid obesity has a negative impact on ventral hernia repair outcomes that is most prominent following open surgery. Laparoscopic ventral hernia repair may offer superior outcomes when compared to open ventral hernia repair and may be considered.

Laparoscopy: A Better Approach for Perforated Duodenal Ulcer.

BackgroundLaparoscopic surgery is becoming the gold standard for most abdominal surgeries in recent times. Laparoscopic repair of perforated duodenal ulcer (PDU), however, is still an area of debate. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic repair of PDU versus open repair.MethodsIn this cross-sectional study, patients were consecutively sampled. Out of 101 patients with clinically diagnosed PDU, 36 patients underwent laparoscopic Graham patch repair and 65 underwent open Graham patch repair in a tertiary care academic hospital. Open repair was via upper midline incision, and laparoscopic repair by the three-port technique. The following stages were calculated: operative time, duration of postoperative analgesia, time taken to mobilize, and patient length of stay after the operation.ResultsThe mean operative time was somewhat longer in the laparoscopy group compared to the open repair group (74.01 vs 56.17 minutes, respectively). Mean postoperative analgesia requirement, time taken to mobilize, and hospital stay were significantly shorter after laparoscopy than after open repair (1.21 days, 9.32 hours, and 3.12 days vs 3.83 days, 16.20 hours, and 4.85 days, respectively). Three patients (8%) in the laparoscopy group and 35 (54%) in the open repair group had postoperative complications.ConclusionsLaparoscopic repair of PDU is a safe approach and better than open repair in terms of operative time with the right level of expertise only, postoperative analgesia requirement, mobilization, duration of hospital stay, and incidence of postoperative respiratory and wound complications.

A Comparison of Clinical Outcomes and Complication Rates in Open Versus Minimally Invasive Achilles Tendon Repair Using PROMIS Scores

Category:SportsIntroduction/Purpose:While there is no current consensus on whether to use an open or minimally invasive (MIS) approach for Achilles tendon repair after acute rupture, there is a recent trend towards decreasing complication rates for both procedures as well as favorable clinical outcomes. While many studies have compared complication rates between these procedures, no study has examined differences in clinical outcomes using PROMIS scores with a large cohort of patients. PROMIS has been validated for use in assessing outcomes following Achilles repair and allows for evaluation of surgical outcomes compared to population means. We hypothesized that patients in both open and MIS groups would have improved PROMIS scores postoperatively, but that there would be minimal differences in PROMIS scores and complication rates between surgical techniques.Methods:228 patients were identified who underwent surgery for acute unilateral Achilles tendon repair between January 2016 and December 2018. Nine surgeons were represented. The open repair group was defined by a larger incision (>4 cm) and no use of a commercially available minimally invasive device. The minimally invasive group was defined by a smaller incision (<3.5 cm) and use of the device. Postoperative protocols were similar between groups. Preoperative and postoperative PROMIS scores were collected prospectively through our institution’s registry; all domains have a population mean of 50. 147 patients completed PROMIS at minimum 1 year postoperatively, 50 in the open repair group and 97 in the MIS group. PROMIS scores were compared between procedures using t-tests with a significance level of 0.05. A chi-square test of independence was also performed to analyze the relationship between complications and procedure type.Results:No significant differences in postoperative PROMIS scores were observed between the open and MIS repair groups. Average postoperative PROMIS scores included: Physical Function (54.92 MIS, 57.25 Open, p=0.123); Pain Interference (45.00 MIS, 45.63 Open, p=0.600); and Pain Intensity (34.97 MIS, 35.21 Open, p=0.812). There were also no significant differences in complication rates between groups. 20.6% of patients in the MIS group had at least one postoperative complication (9.3% DVT, 4.1% rerupture, 2% sural nerve injury, 2% infection), compared to 18.0% in the open group (8% DVT, 2% rerupture, 2% sural nerve injury, 0% infection) (p=0.705).Conclusion:Patients undergoing minimally invasive and open Achilles tendon repair after acute rupture have similar clinical outcomes and complication rates. Though this study did not consider outcomes such as postoperative pain levels and level of sport or return to sport, it demonstrates that patients undergoing Achilles tendon rupture regardless of technique have very favorable PROMIS scores compared to population means. This information is important for surgeons choosing which procedure to use as both are safe and effective techniques for repairing the Achilles tendon.

Comparison of Open Syndesmotic Repair and Trans-syndesmotic Screw Fixation: A Biomechanical Study

Category:Trauma; AnkleIntroduction/Purpose:We hypothesized that open syndesmotic repair for ankle syndesmotic injury would provide adequate strength. The purpose of this study was to compare the biomechanical properties of open syndesmotic repair with those of screw fixation.Methods:Ten matched pairs of human cadaver specimens were subjected to open syndesmotic repair or screw fixation. Each specimen underwent initial intact physiologic loading, consisting of 10 cycles of external torsional loading with a peak torque of 7.5 Nm at 0.05 Hz. Post-fixation cyclic loading consisted of 50 cycles of combined axial and external rotation loading with peak torques of 750 N and 7.5 Nm at a rate of 0.05 Hz. After post-fixation loading, each specimen underwent failure loading by external rotation at 0.25 degrees/second. Failure was defined as a sudden decrease in the torque-degree curve. Failure torque and failure angle were measured. The paired t-test and Wilcoxon signed-rank test were used to analyze the data.Results:Mean failure torques were 95.63 Nm in the open syndesmotic repair group and 108.61 Nm in the screw group. Mean failure angles were 34.93 degrees in the open syndesmotic repair group and 43.55 degrees in the screw group. These data were not statistically significantly different between the two groups (p = 0.7682 and 0.4133, respectively).Conclusion:Open syndesmotic repair for ankle syndesmotic injury provides similar torsional strength to that of screw fixation. Therefore, this technique can be considered as an alternative treatment option for syndesmosis injury.

Hematologic Expression After Shoulder Surgery: Normalization Curve of Serum Inflammatory Markers

To determine the normalization curves of the serologic markers including white blood cell (WBC) count, WBC differential for segmented neutrophil (WBC seg.), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and C-reactive protein (CRP) after elective shoulder surgery and to investigate the hematologic differences among different shoulder surgeries. Seventy-seven patients underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (RCR, group A), 44 patients had open rotator cuff repair (group B), and 84 patients had shoulder arthroplasty (group C). Peak and normalization times of markers were determined at preoperatively, postoperative day (POD) 1 and 2 days, 1 and 2 weeks, 1, 2, 3, 6 months, and 1 year after surgery. The normal ranges of serologic markers were set to WBC 4000 to10,000/μL, WBC seg. 40% to 60%, ESR 0 to 20 mm/h, and CRP 0 to 0.8 mg/dL. Groups reached peak mean WBC count and WBC seg. on POD 1; mean WBC count started decreasing on POD 2 but was within normal value afterwards. Mean WBC seg. decreased to normal value at 1 month postoperatively in group A and B and at 2 months postoperatively in group C. Mean ESR peaked at 2 weeks postoperatively and normalized after 1 month in groups A and B and 3 months in group C. Mean CRP levels peaked on POD 2 in all groups and normalized within 2 weeks postoperatively in groups A and B and 1 month postoperatively in Group C. Normalized values of WBC count, WBC seg., and ESR varied widely. In contrast, CRP showed a consistent undetectable median, upper and lower quartile values less than 0.5 after normalization. Mean serum ESR and CRP values at peak time were significantly greater in group C than in the other groups (P= .001). The mean CRP levels were normalized at 2 weeks after rotator cuff repair and at 1 month after arthroplasties. Unlike the other serologic markers, CRP had consistent normalized values of median, upper and lower quartile afterwards. The peak levels of the inflammatory markers were greater and therefore normalized slower following more invasive surgery. Level III, case control study.

Open heart surgery or echocardiographic transthoracic or percutaneous closure in secundum atrial septal defect: a developing approach in one Chinese hospital

BackgroundTo study the clinical manifestations and advantages of open-heart surgery and echocardiographic transthoracic or percutaneous closure with secundum atrial septal defect (ASD). The surgeon’s learning curve was also analyzed.MethodsIn all, 115 consecutive patients with ASD from May 2013 to May 2019 were enrolled. According to the operative procedure, patients were divided into three groups: group one (open repair group) (n = 24), where patients underwent ASD repair (ASDR) under cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB); group two (closed surgical device closure group) (n = 69), where patients (six patients ≤1 y and sixteen ≤10 kg) underwent transthoracic ASD occlusion under transesophageal echocardiographic (TEE) guidance; and group three (transcatheter occlusion group) (n = 22), where patients underwent percutaneous ASD occlusion under echocardiography. The clinical features and results of each group were analyzed. All patients were telephonically followed-up after 3 months.ResultsAll the three methods treating ASD were successfully performed in our hospital. It was also a typical developing history of congenital heart disease (CHD) surgery in China. One patient in the group two was transferred to emergency surgery for occluder retrieval and CPB-ASDR. Eight patients experienced failed transthoracic or percutaneous occlusion, two of whom underwent unsuccessful percutaneous closure at another hospital. Two patients each in the groups two and three were intraoperatively converted to CPB-ASDR. Two patient in the group three was converted to transthoracic occlusion surgery. All patients were discharged without any residual shunt. The three-month follow-up also did not show any residual shunt and occluder displacement.ConclusionIn low-weight, infants, or huge ASDs with suitable rim for device occlusion, transthoracic ASD closure was successfully performed. Based on knowledge of ASD anatomy and skilled transthoracic occlusion of ASD, surgeons can perform percutaneous occlusion of ASD under echocardiographic guidance.

Inverse probability of treatment analysis of open vs endovascular repair in ruptured infrarenal aortic aneurysm – Cohort study

To compare open repair (OR) with EVAR for the management of ruptured infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (RAAA) in a cohort study over a time period of 15 years with inverse probability of treatment weights. From 2000/01 through 2015/12136 patients were treated for RAAA, 98 (72.1%) underwent OR, 38 (27.9%) were treated with EVAR. Thirty-day and long-term mortality (survival) were analyzed in this IRB-approved retrospective cohort study. Treatment modalities were compared using inverse probability of treatment weights to adjust for imbalances in demographic data and risk factors. EVAR patients were older (75.11±7.17 vs 69.79±10.24; p=0.001). There was no statistical difference in gender, hypertension, COPD, CAD, or diabetes. GFR was significantly higher in OR patients (71.4±31.09 vs. 53.68±25.73). Postoperative dialysis was required more frequently in EVAR patients: 11% vs. 2% (p=0.099). In the OR group, adjusted cumulative survival was 70.4% (61.1, 81.1) at 30 days, 47.0% (37.1, 59.6) at one year and 38.3% (28.6, 51.3) at 5 years. In the EVAR group the corresponding numbers were 77.0% (67.7, 87.5), 67.5% (57.0, 80.0) and 41.7% (30.4, 57.4), respectively. There is evidence for EVAR patients exhibiting a benefit in one-year survival, while patients treated with OR may have more favorable long-term survival given they survive for at least one year. Herein we provide a statistically rigorous comparison of OR and EVAR in short and long-term outcomes with up to 15 years of follow-up.

Laparoscopic versus open mesh repair for the treatment of recurrent inguinal hernia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Inguinal hernia repair is a common surgical procedure; however, the effects of laparoscopic and open mesh repair in the treatment of recurrent inguinal hernia are unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of laparoscopic and open mesh repair in the treatment of recurrent inguinal hernia by conducting a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). A comprehensive, meta-analysis of RCTs on the effects of laparoscopic and open mesh repair in the treatment of recurrent inguinal hernia was performed. English- and Chinese-language studies published up to December 30, 2017 were identified via a systematic search of the PubMed, Embase, Science Direct, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wanfang databases. Summary odd ratios or weighted mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were adopted to calculate each outcome using a fixed or random effects model. Ten RCTs involving a total of 1,017 patients were included. There was no statistically significant difference in the rate of recurrence (P=0.23; OR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.45-1.21), hematoma (P=0.47; OR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.28-1.79), urinary retention (P=0.94; OR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.46-2.07) and acute pain (P=0.71; OR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.14-3.76) between the laparoscopic and open mesh repair groups. The incision infection rate (P=0.02; OR: 0.28, 95% CI: 0.10-0.81) of the laparoscopic group was lower and the length of hospital stay (P<0.0001; MD: -3.65, 95% CI: -4.76 to -2.53) was significantly shorter than those of the open repair group. However, the laparoscopic group had a longer operative time (P=0.0002; MD: 20.30, 95% CI: 9.60-31.01). The laparoscopic approach is superior to the open mesh approach for the repair of recurrent inguinal hernia in some aspects, including the incision infection rate and length of hospital stay. However, more high-quality studies on the effects of laparoscopic and open mesh repair for the treatment of recurrent inguinal hernia are warranted.

Comparison Between Surgical and Endovascular Repair of Infra-renal Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm

Background: Elective open repair (OR) and endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) are the 2 methods of infra-renal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. Aim of study was to compare both methods.Patients and methods: Prospective study was conducted at vascular surgery departments, Zagazig University Hospitals, Egypt and Alnoor Specialist Hospital, Makkah, Saudi Arabia from February 2015 to January 2020. Included patients were with asymptomatic AAA with diameter ≥5.5cm or symptomatic. Patients underwent computerized tomographic angiography, echocardiogram, cardiac and chest consultation.Results: 14 patients underwent OR and 9 underwent EVAR. No statistically significant difference between both groups regarding demographics or aneurysm characteristics. In OR group mean age was 65.54±4.44 years and mean aneurysm maximum diameter was 6.92±0.55 cm, while in EVAR group mean age was 67.03±5.31years and mean aneurysm maximum diameter was 7.1±0.3cm. EVAR group had statistically significant less duration of procedure (p