The Experts below are selected from a list of 210 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Leonardo Solaini - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the use of intra Abdominal Drain in minimally invasive right colectomy a propensity score matched analysis on postoperative outcomes
International Journal of Colorectal Disease, 2019Co-Authors: Leonardo Solaini, Davide Cavaliere, Francesca Pecchini, Federico Perna, Andrea Avanzolini, Giulia Vitali, Fouzia Mecheri, Paolo Checcacci, Alessandro CucchettiAbstract:Purpose No evidences supporting or not the use of intra-Abdominal Drain (AD) in minimally invasive right colectomies have been published. This study aims to assess the outcomes on its use after robotic or laparoscopic right colectomies.
Alessandro Cucchetti - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the use of intra Abdominal Drain in minimally invasive right colectomy a propensity score matched analysis on postoperative outcomes
International Journal of Colorectal Disease, 2019Co-Authors: Leonardo Solaini, Davide Cavaliere, Francesca Pecchini, Federico Perna, Andrea Avanzolini, Giulia Vitali, Fouzia Mecheri, Paolo Checcacci, Alessandro CucchettiAbstract:Purpose No evidences supporting or not the use of intra-Abdominal Drain (AD) in minimally invasive right colectomies have been published. This study aims to assess the outcomes on its use after robotic or laparoscopic right colectomies.
J E Krige - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
a new approach to the management of malignant ascites a permanently implanted Abdominal Drain
Ejso, 1990Co-Authors: M A Belfort, P J Stevens, K Dehaek, R Soeters, J E KrigeAbstract:A new approach to the problem of intractable malignant ascites in preterminal Abdominal carcinoma is presented. Seventeen patients treated with a new implantable silastic Drain are described. Symptomatic relief was excellent in all patients for as long as the Drain was patent. Complications included Abdominal wall cellulitis in two instances and one case of peritonitis, but did not preclude continued Drain function in 15 of the 17 cases. In eight of the 17 cases organisms were cultured from the ascitic fluid while the catheter was in situ. Drainage of ascitic fluid in this way appears to be a practical management for intractable malignant ascites.
Jagdeep S Chana - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
deep inferior epigastric perforator diep flap impact of Drain free donor Abdominal site on long term patient outcomes and duration of inpatient stay
Journal of Plastic Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, 2018Co-Authors: Amitabh Thacoor, Muholan Kanapathy, Jana Torresgrau, Jagdeep S ChanaAbstract:Abstract Background The deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap is widely regarded as the Gold Standard in autologous breast reconstruction. Although Drain-free abdominoplasty is performed in many centres, there is a paucity of evidence comparing outcomes when applied to DIEP breast reconstruction. Method A retrospective review of patients who underwent DIEP breast reconstruction without Abdominal Drain insertion at Royal Free Hospital between Jan 2012-Nov 2016 was undertaken. Results were compared to previously published data from our centre on patients undergoing DIEP breast reconstruction with Abdominal Drains between Jan 2011-Jul 2012. Results Thirty-five patients underwent Abdominal Drain-free reconstruction (GroupA). Of 74 patients who previously underwent reconstruction with Abdominal Drains, 33 patients underwent Drain removal by postoperative day (POD)3 regardless of output (GroupB) and 41 underwent Drain removal after POD3 following instructions on Drainage volume/24 h (GroupC). There was no significant difference in the length of stay between patients in Group A and B (3.6 vs. 3.9 days; p = 0.204). Length of stay in Group C was significantly higher than Group A and B (p = 0.001, p = 0.001). There were no statistically significant differences in total (11.43% vs. 12.12% vs 17.07%, p = 0.780) or specific complications: Seroma: 2.86% vs. 0% vs. 4.88% (p = 0.774); Wound dehiscence: 8.57% vs. 9.09% vs. 4.88% (p = 0.728); Haematoma: 0% vs. 3.00% vs. 7.32% (p = 0.316) between Groups A, B and C, respectively. Conclusion Our data suggests that Drain-free Abdominal closure in DIEP reconstruction can be safely achieved without increased postoperative complications. These conclusions support existing evidence on the use of a Drain-free approach in cosmetic abdominoplasty.
-
the Drain game Abdominal Drains for deep inferior epigastric perforator breast reconstruction
Journal of Plastic Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, 2014Co-Authors: B H Miranda, K Amin, Jagdeep S ChanaAbstract:Summary Introduction The deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap is often preferred for breast reconstruction as it allows for autologous reconstruction with less donor site morbidity versus transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) flap reconstruction. Our group has presented and published data for the duration of donor site back Drain use in latissimus dorsi (LD) flap breast reconstruction due to insufficient evidence and a requirement for further investigation in the literature; this evidence is still lacking for DIEP reconstruction. Aim To compare inpatient hospital stay, Drainage parameters and donor-site complications associated with closed suction Abdominal Drain removal by post-operative day (POD) 3 regardless of output (early group), with removal after POD 3 where instructions were by Drainage volume/24 h ± output consistency (late group), in post-mastectomy DIEP reconstruction donor sites. Method A retrospective review of DIEP breast reconstructions, between January 2011 and July 2012, was undertaken to facilitate 1 year minimum follow-up per patient. Results Of 78 patients who underwent DIEP breast reconstructions, 74 hospital records contained complete documentation. There were 41 patients in the late, and 33 in the early removal group; both groups were matched for age and number of donor site Drains (2 per patient). Mean Drain removal day (4.32 ± 0.10 days vs. 2.87 ± 0.06 days, p p p = 0.46), seroma (4.88% (2/41) vs. 0% (0/33); p = 0.20), dehiscence (4.88% (2/41) vs. 9.09% (3/33); p = 0.47) or haematoma (7.32% (3/41) vs. 3.0% (1/33); p = 0.42) rates between the late and early groups. Discussion These data suggest significant advantages for patients who have Abdominal Drains removed early by POD 3, without increased post-operative complications including seroma rates; these data are in keeping with our LD data. We recommend Drain removal and patient discharge by POD 3.
Rudolf Buxhoeveden - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Usefulness of Abdominal Drain in Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques, 2020Co-Authors: María E. Peña, Francisco Schlottmann, Francisco Laxague, Emmanuel E. Sadava, Rudolf BuxhoevedenAbstract:Background: Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is one of the most common procedures to treat morbid obesity. Abdominal Drains are often placed during the operation to detect complications earlier. The aim of this study was to assess the benefit of routine Drain placement during laparoscopic RYGB. Materials and Methods: A consecutive series of patients undergoing laparoscopic RYGB between 2017 and 2018 was analyzed. The sample was randomized before the procedure into two groups: with Abdominal Drain (G1) and without Abdominal Drain placement (G2). Patients with intraoperative complications were excluded from the randomization. Postoperative complications and pain (visual analogue scale) were compared between groups. Results: A total of 84 patients were included; 45 belonged to G1 and 39 to G2. Mean age (G1 44 years versus G2 48 years) and body mass index (G1 43 kg/m2 versus G2 44 kg/m2) were similar in both groups. There were no significant differences between groups in preoperative comorbidities. Mean operative time was 92 minutes in both groups. Mean pain score at postoperative day 0 was similar in both groups (G1 3.2 versus G2 3.5, P = .58), but was higher in G1 at postoperative day 1 (G1 3.1, G2 1.1, P = .02). Postoperative Clavien-Dindo I-II complications were similar in both groups (G1 9% versus G2 1%, P = .37). No major complications, reoperations, or 30-day mortality occurred in the entire cohort. Conclusions: Drain placement in laparoscopic RYGB was associated with greater postoperative pain and did not show benefits in early detection of postoperative complications. Routine placement of Abdominal Drain in laparoscopic RYGB might not be recommended.
-
usefulness of Abdominal Drain in laparoscopic roux en y gastric bypass a randomized controlled trial
Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques, 2020Co-Authors: María E. Peña, Francisco Schlottmann, Francisco Laxague, Emmanuel E. Sadava, Rudolf BuxhoevedenAbstract:Background: Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is one of the most common procedures to treat morbid obesity. Abdominal Drains are often placed during the operation to detect complications...
