Surgical approaches

手术入路
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    方法:本研究为回顾性多中心比较队列研究。
    方法:采用回顾性的成人脊柱畸形手术患者的机构数据库。包括骶骨/骨盆在内的所有>5个椎体水平的融合均符合纳入条件。修订,3柱截骨术,临床随访<2年的患者被排除在外。根据手术入路将患者分为3组:1)后路无椎间融合术(PSF),2)带椎体间的PSF(PSF-IB),和3)前后路(AP)融合(前路腰椎椎体间融合或后路螺钉固定的外侧腰椎椎体间融合)。术中,射线照相,和临床结果,以及并发症,组间比较采用方差分析和χ2检验。
    结果:纳入了118名患者进行研究(PSF,n=37;PSF-IB,n=44;AP,n=57)。术中,两组间估计的失血量相似(p=0.171).然而,与PSF(385.1)和PSF-IB(370.7)相比,AP组手术时间更长(547.5min)(p<0.001).此外,与AP(13.6)和PSF(12.9)相比,PSF-IB(11.4)的融合长度较短(p=0.004).从术前到术后2年,两组之间的对齐变化没有差异。临床结果无差异。虽然术后并发症在各组之间基本相似,与PSF(5.4%)和PSF-IB(9.1)组相比,AP组(31.6%)的手术并发症较高(p<0.001).
    结论:虽然术中结果(手术时间和融合长度)存在差异,术后临床或影像学结局无差异.AP融合与较高的手术并发症发生率相关。
    METHODS: This study was a retrospective multi-center comparative cohort study.
    METHODS: A retrospective institutional database of operative adult spinal deformity patients was utilized. All fusions > 5 vertebral levels and including the sacrum/pelvis were eligible for inclusion. Revisions, 3 column osteotomies, and patients with < 2-year clinical follow-up were excluded. Patients were separated into 3 groups based on surgical approach: 1) posterior spinal fusion without interbody (PSF), 2) PSF with interbody (PSF-IB), and 3) anteroposterior (AP) fusion (anterior lumbar interbody fusion or lateral lumbar interbody fusion with posterior screw fixation). Intraoperative, radiographic, and clinical outcomes, as well as complications, were compared between groups with ANOVA and χ2 tests.
    RESULTS: One-hundred and thirty-eight patients were included for study (PSF, n = 37; PSF-IB, n = 44; AP, n = 57). Intraoperatively, estimated blood loss was similar between groups (p = 0.171). However, the AP group had longer operative times (547.5 min) compared to PSF (385.1) and PSF-IB (370.7) (p < 0.001). Additionally, fusion length was shorter in PSF-IB (11.4) compared to AP (13.6) and PSF (12.9) (p = 0.004). There were no differences between the groups in terms of change in alignment from preoperative to 2 years postoperative. There were no differences in clinical outcomes. While postoperative complications were largely similar between groups, operative complications were higher in the AP group (31.6%) compared to the PSF (5.4%) and PSF-IB (9.1) groups (p < 0.001).
    CONCLUSIONS: While there were differences in intraoperative outcomes (operative time and fusion length), there were no differences in postoperative clinical or radiographic outcomes. AP fusion was associated with a higher rate of operative complications.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景/目标:胆脂瘤在耳鼻咽喉科中提出了重大的治疗挑战。这项研究旨在描述人口统计学和临床特征的影响,术前成像,和手术方法对胆脂瘤治疗的成功。方法:2021年1月至2022年12月在大学医院耳鼻喉科进行了横断面分析研究。它包括68例诊断为胆脂瘤的患者,重点关注三个目标:评估人口统计学和临床特征对治疗结果的影响,评估术前影像学检查结果的预测价值,并分析了手术因素的影响。结果:研究人群主要由男性(56%)和沙特(81%)患者组成,平均年龄为45岁。Logistic回归显示年龄较大(OR:1.05),男性(OR:0.63),和非沙特阿拉伯种族(OR:2.14)显着影响治疗结果。诸如严重疾病严重程度(OR:3.00)和较长症状持续时间(OR:0.96)的临床特征也影响治疗成功。在术前成像中,迷路瘘(回归系数:0.63)和硬膜外延伸(系数:0.55)是关键预测因子。显著影响结果的手术因素包括手术程度(完全切除OR:3.32)和内窥镜入路的使用(OR:1.42)。结论:这项研究强调了患者的人口统计学,临床资料,特定的术前影像学特征,和多因素的手术策略决定了胆脂瘤治疗的成功。这些发现表明,在胆脂瘤管理中需要一种量身定制的方法,加强基于综合术前评估的个体化治疗计划的重要性。
    Background/Objectives: Cholesteatoma presents significant management challenges in otolaryngology. This study aimed to delineate the influence of demographic and clinical characteristics, preoperative imaging, and surgical approaches on treatment success in cholesteatoma management. Methods: A cross-sectional analytical study was conducted at the Otolaryngology Department of the University Hospital from January 2021 to December 2022. It included 68 patients diagnosed with cholesteatoma, focusing on three objectives: assessing the impact of demographic and clinical characteristics on treatment outcomes, evaluating the predictive value of preoperative imaging findings, and analyzing the influence of surgical factors. Results: The study population predominantly consisted of male (56%) and Saudi (81%) patients, with an average age of 45 years. Logistic regression revealed that older age (OR: 1.05), male gender (OR: 0.63), and non-Saudi Arab ethnicity (OR: 2.14) significantly impacted treatment outcomes. Clinical characteristics such as severe disease severity (OR: 3.00) and longer symptom duration (OR: 0.96) also influenced treatment success. In preoperative imaging, labyrinthine fistula (Regression Coefficient: 0.63) and epidural extension (Coefficient: 0.55) emerged as key predictors. The surgical factors that significantly affected the outcomes included the extent of surgery (Complete Removal OR: 3.32) and the use of endoscopic approaches (OR: 1.42). Conclusions: This study highlights that patient demographics, clinical profiles, specific preoperative imaging features, and surgical strategies multifactorially determine cholesteatoma treatment success. These findings suggest the necessity for a tailored approach in cholesteatoma management, reinforcing the importance of individualized treatment plans based on comprehensive preoperative assessments.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:SiewertII/III型食管胃结合部腺癌(AEJ)的最佳近端边缘(PM)长度尚不清楚。本研究旨在使用腹部入路确定最佳PM长度,以指导手术决策。
    方法:一项前瞻性研究分析了2019年1月至2021年12月期间诊断为SiewertII/IIIAEJ的304例连续患者。通过腹部入路进行全胃切除术,PM长度是在固定的总标本上测量的。X-Tile软件基于无进展生存期(PFS)确定最佳PM切点。单变量分析比较了PM组的基线特征,而生存分析利用Kaplan-Meier估计和Cox比例风险回归评估边缘长度对生存的影响.进行多变量分析以调整混杂变量。
    结果:该研究包括264例AEJ病例,分类为SiewertII(71.97%)或III(28.03%)。PM总长度中位数为1.0厘米(IQR:0.5厘米-1.5厘米,范围:0厘米-6厘米)。在PFS上,PM长度≥1.2cm与PM长度0.4cm相比,疾病进展风险较低(HR=0.41,95%CI0.20-0.84,P=0.015)。此外,PM≥1.2cm改善T4或N3亚组的预后,肿瘤大小<4cm,SiewertII,和劳伦分类。
    结论:对于SiewertII/III型AEJ,近端边缘长度≥1.2cm(原位1.65cm)与结局改善相关.这些发现为SiewertII/IIIAEJ中PM长度与结果之间的关联提供了有价值的见解,为手术方法提供指导并帮助临床决策以提高患者预后。
    BACKGROUND: The optimal proximal margin (PM) length for Siewert II/III adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEJ) remains unclear. This study aimed to determine the optimal PM length using an abdominal approach to guide surgical decision-making.
    METHODS: A prospective study analyzed 304 consecutive patients diagnosed with Siewert II/III AEJ between January 2019 and December 2021. Total gastrectomy was performed via the abdominal approach, and PM length was measured on fixed gross specimens. X-Tile software determined the optimal PM cut-point based on progression-free survival (PFS). Univariate analyses compared baseline characteristics across PM groups, while survival analyses utilized Kaplan-Meier estimation and Cox proportional hazards regression for assessing the impact of margin length on survival. Multivariable analyses were conducted to adjust for confounding variables.
    RESULTS: The study included 264 AEJ cases classified as Siewert II (71.97%) or III (28.03%). The median gross PM length was 1.0 cm (IQR: 0.5 cm-1.5 cm, range: 0 cm-6 cm). PM length ≥1.2 cm was associated with a lower risk of disease progression compared to PM length 0.4 cm on PFS (HR = 0.41, 95% CI 0.20-0.84, P = 0.015). Moreover, PM ≥ 1.2 cm improved prognosis in subgroups of T4 or N3, tumor size <4 cm, Siewert II, and Lauren classification.
    CONCLUSIONS: For Siewert type II/III AEJ, a proximal margin length ≥1.2 cm (1.65 cm in situ) is associated with improved outcomes. These findings offer valuable insights into the association between PM length and outcomes in Siewert II/III AEJ, providing guidance for surgical approaches and aiding clinical decision-making to enhance patient outcomes.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:快速顺序气管切开术和手术刀探伤气管切开术是两种已发表的用于建立婴儿紧急颈前路的方法。尚不清楚这两种方法之间的性能时间和成功率是否存在差异。
    目的:这项交叉随机对照试验研究的目的是调查这两种方法在兔尸体中建立气管通路是否等效。基本假设是两种技术实现气管通路的时间相同。
    方法:在2022年5月至9月之间,30名医生(儿科麻醉师和重症医师)被随机分配使用一种然后另一种技术进行颈前入路:快速顺序气管切开术和手术刀-探床气管切开术。看完培训视频,每种技术均实施4次,然后进行最后的气管切开术,在此期间进行研究测量.根据现有数据,在整个过程中,等效裕度设置为Δ=±10s。主要结果定义为直到成功实现气管导管放置的持续时间。次要结果包括成功率,结构性损伤,和主观的参与者自我评价。
    结果:手术刀-探条气管切开术的中位时间为48s(95%CI:37-57),而快速顺序气管切开术的持续时间为59s(95%CI:49-66,p=.07)。两种方法之间的中位持续时间差异为11s(95%CI:-4.9至29)。总成功率为93.3%(95%CI:83.8%-98.2%)。手术刀-探条气管切开术导致明显更少的气管环受损,在参与者中是首选。
    结论:手术刀-探床气管切开术略快于快速顺序气管切开术,并受到参与者的青睐。气管损伤较少。因此,我们建议将手术刀-bougie气管造口术作为一种救助方法,有利于与成人方法相似的幼儿方法。为儿童和成人使用类似的设备套件促进了标准化,性能,和物流。
    背景:ClinicalTrials.gov标识符:NCT05499273。
    Rapid-sequence tracheotomy and scalpel-bougie tracheotomy are two published approaches for establishing emergency front-of-neck access in infants. It is unknown whether there is a difference in performance times and success rates between the two approaches.
    The aim of this cross-over randomized control trial study was to investigate whether the two approaches were equivalent for establishing tracheal access in rabbit cadavers. The underlying hypothesis was that the time to achieve the tracheal access is the same with both techniques.
    Between May and September 2022, thirty physicians (pediatric anesthesiologists and intensivists) were randomized to perform front-of-neck access using one and then the other technique: rapid-sequence tracheotomy and scalpel-bougie tracheotomy. After watching training videos, each technique was practiced four times followed by a final tracheotomy during which study measurements were obtained. Based on existing data, an equivalence margin was set at ∆ = ±10 s for the duration of the procedure. The primary outcome was defined as the duration until tracheal tube placement was achieved successfully. Secondary outcomes included success rate, structural injuries, and subjective participant self-evaluation.
    The median duration of the scalpel-bougie tracheotomy was 48 s (95% CI: 37-57), while the duration of the rapid-sequence tracheotomy was 59 s (95% CI: 49-66, p = .07). The difference in the median duration between the two approaches was 11 s (95% CI: -4.9 to 29). The overall success rate was 93.3% (95% CI: 83.8%-98.2%). The scalpel-bougie tracheotomy resulted in significantly fewer damaged tracheal rings and was preferred among participants.
    The scalpel-bougie tracheotomy was slightly faster than the rapid-sequence tracheotomy and favored by participants, with fewer tracheal injuries. Therefore, we propose the scalpel-bougie tracheostomy as a rescue approach favoring the similarity to the adult approach for small children. The use of a comparable equipment kit for both children and adults facilitates standardization, performance, and logistics.
    ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05499273.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:肱骨头剥脱性骨软骨炎(OCD)是年轻运动员肘部残疾的重要原因。较大且不稳定的病变有时需要使用自体骨软骨移植进行关节重建。已经描述了几种方法来暴露小脑以治疗强迫症。在该适应症中最常用的是后“anconeus-split”入路和有或没有释放外侧韧带复合体的外侧入路。通过这些方法可接近的表面尚未被广泛研究。这项研究比较了Kocher入路(无韧带释放)与后“anconeus-splipping”入路可能暴露的头小关节表面的范围。次要结果是测量外侧尺侧副韧带(LUCL)释放(Wrightington入路)可以达到的任何其他区域。
    方法:三种方法对八个成年尸体肘部进行:第一种是Kocher方法,然后Anconeus分裂方法,最后是Wrightington的方法.在完成每个入路后标记出可见的关节表面。
    结果:小脑的平均关节面为708mm2(范围为573-830mm2)。Kocher方法的平均可见关节表面占总表面的49%(范围为43%-60%),74%(范围61%-90%)的后“肛门分裂”方法和93%(范围91%-97%)的Wrightington方法。尽管Kocher方法提供了进入头颅前部的通道,“肛门裂开”入路显示足够暴露于关节面的后部四分之三,并与Kocher入路的最后部重叠。两种LUCL保留方法的组合允许进入100%的关节表面。
    结论:大多数强迫症位于头颅后部区域,因此可以通过“Anconeus分裂”方法到达。当强迫症位于前方时,没有韧带释放的Kocher方法是有效的。这两种方法的组合使得能够观察整个关节表面。
    BACKGROUND: Osteochondritis dissecans (OCD) of the humeral capitellum is an important cause of elbow disability in young athletes. Large and unstable lesions sometimes require joint reconstruction with osteochondral autograft. Several approaches have been described to expose the capitellum for the purpose of treating OCD. The posterior anconeus-splitting approach and the lateral approach with or without release of the lateral ligamentous complex are the most frequently used for this indication. The surface accessible by these approaches has not been widely studied. This study compared the extent of the articular surface of the capitellum that could be exposed with the Kocher approach (without ligament release) vs. the posterior anconeus-splitting approach. A secondary outcome was the measurement of any additional area that could be reached with lateral ulnar collateral ligament release (Wrightington approach).
    METHODS: The 3 approaches were performed on 8 adult cadaveric elbows: first, the Kocher approach; then, the anconeus-splitting approach; and finally, the Wrightington approach. The visible articular surface was marked out after completion of each approach.
    RESULTS: The mean articular surface of the capitellum was 708 mm2 (range, 573-830 mm2). The mean visible articular surface was 49% (range, 43%-60%) of the total surface with the Kocher approach, 74% (range, 61%-90%) with the posterior anconeus-splitting approach, and 93% (range, 91%-97%) with the Wrightington approach. Although the Kocher approach provided access to the anterior part of the capitellum, the anconeus-splitting approach showed adequate exposure to the posterior three-quarters of the articular surface and overlapped the most posterior part of the Kocher approach. A combination of the 2 lateral ulnar collateral ligament-preserving approaches allowed access to 100% of the joint surface.
    CONCLUSIONS: Most OCD lesions are located in the posterior area of the capitellum and can therefore be reached with the anconeus-splitting approach. When OCD lesions are located anteriorly, the Kocher approach without ligament release is efficient. A combination of these 2 approaches enabled the entirety of the joint surface to be viewed.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    SiewertII型食管胃交界处腺癌(SiewertIIAEG)可在微创条件下通过右胸腹手术入路(RTA)或经腹手术入路(TH)切除。虽然两种手术方法都能完全切除肿瘤,就手术安全性而言,前一种方法是否优于或至少不劣于后者存在争议。目前,少量的回顾性研究比较了两种手术方法,结果不确定。因此,需要一项前瞻性多中心随机对照试验来验证RTA(Ivor-Lewis)与TH相比的价值.
    计划的研究是一项前瞻性研究,多中心,随机临床试验。可以通过上述两种手术方法之一切除的SiewertIIAEG患者(n=212)将包括在该试验中,并随机分为RTA组(n=106)或TH组(n=106)。主要结果是3年无病生存期(DFS)。次要结果将包括5年总生存期(OS),术后并发症的发生率,术后死亡率,局部复发率,切除淋巴结的数量和位置,生活质量(QOL),手术Apgar评分,和操作的持续时间。手术后的前3年每3个月进行一次随访,后2年每6个月进行一次随访。
    在患有可切除肿瘤的SiewertIIAEG患者中,这是第一个前景,比较微创RTA和TH手术安全性的随机临床试验。假设RTA可以提供更好的消化道重建和纵隔淋巴结清扫,同时保持高质量的生活和良好的术后预后。此外,本试验将为SiewertIIAEG手术方式的选择提供高水平的证据.
    中国临床试验注册伦理委员会,标识符(ChiECRCT20210635);临床试验,标识符(NCT05356520)。
    UNASSIGNED: Siewert type II adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (Siewert II AEG) can be resected by the right thoracoabdominal surgical approach (RTA) or abdominal-transhiatal surgical approach (TH) under minimally invasive conditions. Although both surgical methods achieve complete tumor resection, there is a debate as to whether the former method is superior to or at least noninferior to the latter in terms of surgical safety. Currently, a small number of retrospective studies have compared the two surgical approaches, with inconclusive results. As such, a prospective multicenter randomized controlled trial is necessary to validate the value of RTA (Ivor-Lewis) compared to TH.
    UNASSIGNED: The planned study is a prospective, multicenter, randomized clinical trial. Patients (n=212) with Siewert II AEG that could be resected by either of the above two surgical approaches will be included in this trial and randomized to the RTA group (n=106) or the TH group (n=106). The primary outcome will be 3-year disease-free survival (DFS). The secondary outcomes will include 5-year overall survival (OS), incidence of postoperative complications, postoperative mortality, local recurrence rate, number and location of removed lymph nodes, quality of life (QOL), surgical Apgar score, and duration of the operation. Follow-ups are scheduled every three months for the first 3 years after the surgery and every six months for the next 2 years.
    UNASSIGNED: Among Siewert II AEG patients with resectable tumors, this is the first prospective, randomized clinical trial comparing the surgical safety of minimally invasive RTA and TH. RTA is hypothesized to provide better digestive tract reconstruction and dissection of mediastinal lymph nodes while maintaining a high quality of life and good postoperative outcome. Moreover, this trial will provide a high level of evidence for the choice of surgical procedures for Siewert II AEG.
    UNASSIGNED: Chinese Ethics Committee of Registering Clinical Trials, identifier (ChiECRCT20210635); Clinical Trial.gov, identifier (NCT05356520).
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine if uncemented acetabular polyethylene (PE) liner geometry, and lip size, influenced the risk of revision for instability or loosening.
    METHODS: A total of 202,511 primary total hip arthroplasties (THAs) with uncemented acetabular components were identified from the National Joint Registry (NJR) dataset between 2003 and 2017. The effect of liner geometry on the risk of revision for instability or loosening was investigated using competing risk regression analyses adjusting for age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, indication, side, institution type, surgeon grade, surgical approach, head size, and polyethylene crosslinking. Stratified analyses by surgical approach were performed, including pairwise comparisons of liner geometries.
    RESULTS: The distribution of liner geometries were neutral (39.4%; 79,822), 10° (34.5%; 69,894), 15° (21.6%; 43,722), offset reorientating (2.8%; 5705), offset neutral (0.9%; 1,767), and 20° (0.8%; 1,601). There were 690 (0.34%) revisions for instability. Compared to neutral liners, the adjusted subhazard ratios of revision for instability were: 10°, 0.64 (p < 0.001); 15°, 0.48 (p < 0.001); and offset reorientating, 1.6 (p = 0.010). No association was found with other geometries. 10° and 15° liners had a time-dependent lower risk of revision for instability within the first 1.2 years. In posterior approaches, 10° and 15° liners had a lower risk of revision for instability, with no significant difference between them. The protective effect of lipped over neutral liners was not observed in laterally approached THAs. There were 604 (0.3%) revisions for loosening, but no association between liner geometry and revision for loosening was found.
    CONCLUSIONS: This registry-based study confirms a lower risk of revision for instability in posterior approach THAs with 10° or 15° lipped liners compared to neutral liners, but no significant difference between these lip sizes. A higher revision risk is seen with offset reorientating liners. The benefit of lipped geometries against revision for instability was not seen in laterally approached THAs. Liner geometry does not seem to influence the risk of revision for loosening. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(12):1774-1782.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    OBJECTIVE: To determine if primary cemented acetabular component geometry (long posterior wall (LPW), hooded, or offset reorientating) influences the risk of revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) for instability or loosening.
    METHODS: The National Joint Registry (NJR) dataset was analyzed for primary THAs performed between 2003 and 2017. A cohort of 224,874 cemented acetabular components were included. The effect of acetabular component geometry on the risk of revision for instability or for loosening was investigated using log-binomial regression adjusting for age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, indication, side, institution type, operating surgeon grade, surgical approach, polyethylene crosslinking, and prosthetic head size. A competing risk survival analysis was performed with the competing risks being revision for other indications or death.
    RESULTS: The distribution of acetabular component geometries was: LPW 81.2%; hooded 18.7%; and offset reorientating 0.1%. There were 3,313 (1.5%) revision THAs performed, of which 815 (0.4%) were for instability and 838 (0.4%) were for loosening. Compared to the LPW group, the adjusted subhazard ratio of revision for instability in the hooded group was 2.31 (p < 0.001) and 4.12 (p = 0.047) in the offset reorientating group. Likewise, the subhazard ratio of revision for loosening was 2.65 (p < 0.001) in the hooded group and 13.61 (p < 0.001) in the offset reorientating group. A time-varying subhazard ratio of revision for instability (hooded vs LPW) was found, being greatest within the first three months.
    CONCLUSIONS: This registry-based study confirms a significantly higher risk of revision after cemented THA for instability and for loosening when a hooded or offset reorientating acetabular component is used, compared to a LPW component. Further research is required to clarify if certain patients benefit from the use of hooded or offset reorientating components, but we recommend caution when using such components in routine clinical practice. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(11):1669-1677.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    BACKGROUND: the right- and left-approach open esophagectomies remain the general procedures among patients with operable thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). The choice between the two approaches for elderly patients is controversial.
    METHODS: we performed a 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) analysis to compare the impact of right- and left-approach esophagectomies on survival and perioperative complications of elderly ESCC patients. Patients aged over 70 receiving esophagectomy to treat the thoracic ESCC were retrospectively retrieved.
    RESULTS: a total of 276 patients were included in the study. Among them, 75 (27.2%) patients received right-approach esophagectomy. After match, 114 patients (57 pairs) undertook right or left-approach esophagectomy displayed no difference among clinicopathological characteristics. Both the overall survival (54.6% vs. 32.6%, P=0.036) and disease-free survival (52.7% vs. 20.2%, P=0.021) were significant better in right-approach group, along with better lymph node resection, and lower incidence of recurrence. However, increased incidences of postoperative pneumonia (P=0.040), respiratory failure (P=0.028), and sub-clinical anastomotic leak (P=0.032) were found in right-approach group as well, although the perioperative mortality was similar between groups.
    CONCLUSIONS: Right-approach esophagectomy should be accepted as a preferential surgical approach for elderly patients with ESCC.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

  • 文章类型: Comparative Study
    Adequate exposure of the proximal humerus is necessary to address atypical or complex proximal humerus fractures and orthopedic tumors. Surgical management may be difficult through existing approaches due to their limited nature and the delicate neurovascular anatomy of the shoulder. The deltoid lift, a previously described extensile approach, can be incorporated into the surgeon\'s armamentarium as an alternative exposure to the proximal humerus. The objective of this study was to quantify and compare the humeral exposure achieved through the deltoid lift with the standard direct lateral deltoid-splitting, anterolateral acromial, and deltopectoral approaches in terms of surface area and exposure of key anatomic landmarks.
    Each approach was performed a minimum of 8 times on 18 cadaveric specimens. After identifying landmarks, exposure area of exposed humerus was quantified using digital images and ImageJ software.
    The deltoid lift yielded an average exposure area of 46 cm2. Comparison of the exposure area for the deltoid lift against each of the other approaches yielded statistical significance ( P < .01). The exposure provided was 2-folds greater than that of the next most extensive approach. All anatomic landmarks were directly visible through the deltoid lift as compared with the remaining approaches, through which only 1 landmark was directly visualized and only 2 of the 3 remaining were palpable through the approach.
    The deltoid lift extensile surgical exposure to the proximal humerus provides the largest humeral exposure with the greatest visibility of landmarks relative to the 3 most widely utilized standard approaches.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

公众号