The Experts below are selected from a list of 180 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

H Becker - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • ultracision or high frequency knife in transanal endoscopic microSurgery tem advantages of a new procedure
    Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques, 2001
    Co-Authors: C Langer, T Markus, Torsten Liersch, Laszlo Fuzesi, H Becker
    Abstract:

    The potential advantages of ultrasound dissection using UltraCision (UC), an ultrasonically activated scalpel, rather than conventional electroSurgery (ES) were investigated retrospectively in 63 patients following transanal endoscopic microSurgery (TEM) in 22 cases of rectal carcinoma (16 pT1, four pT2, two pT3), 40 cases of rectal adenoma>2 cm, and one neurinoma. In all, 21 patients (13 adenomas, seven carcinomas, and one neurinoma) were operated with UltraCision (Ethicon, Norderstedt, Germany), whereas 42 patients (27 adenomas, 15 carcinomas) were treated with conventional electrocautery. All tumors were completely excised (RO) in both groups. We encountered a total of nine complications, seven after ES and two after UC use. Surgical reintervention was necessary in three cases (4.7%), exclusively following resection by ES. There were five cases of tumor recurrence (7.9%), once again only in the ES group. The advantages of ultrasound dissection are magnified under the particular conditions of minimally invasive endoscopic Rectum Surgery by means of TEM. In principle, all the known risks associated with the application of electric current can be avoided by using ultrasound technology.

  • UltraCision or high-frequency knife in transanal endoscopic microSurgery (TEM)? Advantages of a new procedure.
    Surgical endoscopy, 2001
    Co-Authors: C Langer, T Markus, Torsten Liersch, Laszlo Fuzesi, H Becker
    Abstract:

    The potential advantages of ultrasound dissection using UltraCision (UC), an ultrasonically activated scalpel, rather than conventional electroSurgery (ES) were investigated retrospectively in 63 patients following transanal endoscopic microSurgery (TEM) in 22 cases of rectal carcinoma (16 pT1, four pT2, two pT3), 40 cases of rectal adenoma>2 cm, and one neurinoma. In all, 21 patients (13 adenomas, seven carcinomas, and one neurinoma) were operated with UltraCision (Ethicon, Norderstedt, Germany), whereas 42 patients (27 adenomas, 15 carcinomas) were treated with conventional electrocautery. All tumors were completely excised (RO) in both groups. We encountered a total of nine complications, seven after ES and two after UC use. Surgical reintervention was necessary in three cases (4.7%), exclusively following resection by ES. There were five cases of tumor recurrence (7.9%), once again only in the ES group. The advantages of ultrasound dissection are magnified under the particular conditions of minimally invasive endoscopic Rectum Surgery by means of TEM. In principle, all the known risks associated with the application of electric current can be avoided by using ultrasound technology.

Narimantas Evaldas Samalavicius - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Treatment possibilities for low anterior resection syndrome: a review of the literature
    International Journal of Colorectal Disease, 2018
    Co-Authors: Audrius Dulskas, Edgaras Smolskas, Inga Kildusiene, Narimantas Evaldas Samalavicius
    Abstract:

    AimUp to 80% of patients after low anterior resection, experience (low) anterior resection syndrome (ARS/LARS). However, there is no standard treatment option currently available. This systemic review aims to summarize treatment possibilities for LARS after surgical treatment of rectal cancer in the medical literature.MethodsEmbase, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library were searched using the terms anterior resection syndrome, low anterior resection, colorectal/rectal/Rectum, Surgery/operation, pelvic floor rehabilitation, biofeedback, transanal irrigation, sacral nerve stimulation, and tibial nerve stimulation. All English language articles presenting original patient data regarding treatment and outcome of LARS were included. We focused on the effects of different treatment modalities for LARS. The Jadad score was used to assess the methodological quality of trials. The quality scale ranges from 0 to 5 points, with a score ≤ 2 indicating a low quality report, and a score of ≥ 3 indicating a high quality report.ResultsTwenty-one of 160 studies met the inclusion criteria, of which 8 were reporting sacral nerve stimulation, 6 were designed to determine pelvic floor rehabilitation, 3 studies evaluated the effect of transanal irrigation, 2—percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation, and the rest of the studies assessed probiotics and 5-HT_3 receptor antagonists for LARS in patients who had undergone rectal resection. All except one study were poor quality reports according to the Jadad score.ConclusionsLARS treatment still carries difficulties because of a lack of well-conducted, randomized multicenter trials. Well-performed randomized controlled trials are needed.

  • Treatment possibilities for low anterior resection syndrome: a review of the literature.
    International journal of colorectal disease, 2018
    Co-Authors: Audrius Dulskas, Edgaras Smolskas, Inga Kildusiene, Narimantas Evaldas Samalavicius
    Abstract:

    Up to 80% of patients after low anterior resection, experience (low) anterior resection syndrome (ARS/LARS). However, there is no standard treatment option currently available. This systemic review aims to summarize treatment possibilities for LARS after surgical treatment of rectal cancer in the medical literature. Embase, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library were searched using the terms anterior resection syndrome, low anterior resection, colorectal/rectal/Rectum, Surgery/operation, pelvic floor rehabilitation, biofeedback, transanal irrigation, sacral nerve stimulation, and tibial nerve stimulation. All English language articles presenting original patient data regarding treatment and outcome of LARS were included. We focused on the effects of different treatment modalities for LARS. The Jadad score was used to assess the methodological quality of trials. The quality scale ranges from 0 to 5 points, with a score ≤ 2 indicating a low quality report, and a score of ≥ 3 indicating a high quality report. Twenty-one of 160 studies met the inclusion criteria, of which 8 were reporting sacral nerve stimulation, 6 were designed to determine pelvic floor rehabilitation, 3 studies evaluated the effect of transanal irrigation, 2—percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation, and the rest of the studies assessed probiotics and 5-HT3 receptor antagonists for LARS in patients who had undergone rectal resection. All except one study were poor quality reports according to the Jadad score. LARS treatment still carries difficulties because of a lack of well-conducted, randomized multicenter trials. Well-performed randomized controlled trials are needed.

C Langer - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • ultracision or high frequency knife in transanal endoscopic microSurgery tem advantages of a new procedure
    Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques, 2001
    Co-Authors: C Langer, T Markus, Torsten Liersch, Laszlo Fuzesi, H Becker
    Abstract:

    The potential advantages of ultrasound dissection using UltraCision (UC), an ultrasonically activated scalpel, rather than conventional electroSurgery (ES) were investigated retrospectively in 63 patients following transanal endoscopic microSurgery (TEM) in 22 cases of rectal carcinoma (16 pT1, four pT2, two pT3), 40 cases of rectal adenoma>2 cm, and one neurinoma. In all, 21 patients (13 adenomas, seven carcinomas, and one neurinoma) were operated with UltraCision (Ethicon, Norderstedt, Germany), whereas 42 patients (27 adenomas, 15 carcinomas) were treated with conventional electrocautery. All tumors were completely excised (RO) in both groups. We encountered a total of nine complications, seven after ES and two after UC use. Surgical reintervention was necessary in three cases (4.7%), exclusively following resection by ES. There were five cases of tumor recurrence (7.9%), once again only in the ES group. The advantages of ultrasound dissection are magnified under the particular conditions of minimally invasive endoscopic Rectum Surgery by means of TEM. In principle, all the known risks associated with the application of electric current can be avoided by using ultrasound technology.

  • UltraCision or high-frequency knife in transanal endoscopic microSurgery (TEM)? Advantages of a new procedure.
    Surgical endoscopy, 2001
    Co-Authors: C Langer, T Markus, Torsten Liersch, Laszlo Fuzesi, H Becker
    Abstract:

    The potential advantages of ultrasound dissection using UltraCision (UC), an ultrasonically activated scalpel, rather than conventional electroSurgery (ES) were investigated retrospectively in 63 patients following transanal endoscopic microSurgery (TEM) in 22 cases of rectal carcinoma (16 pT1, four pT2, two pT3), 40 cases of rectal adenoma>2 cm, and one neurinoma. In all, 21 patients (13 adenomas, seven carcinomas, and one neurinoma) were operated with UltraCision (Ethicon, Norderstedt, Germany), whereas 42 patients (27 adenomas, 15 carcinomas) were treated with conventional electrocautery. All tumors were completely excised (RO) in both groups. We encountered a total of nine complications, seven after ES and two after UC use. Surgical reintervention was necessary in three cases (4.7%), exclusively following resection by ES. There were five cases of tumor recurrence (7.9%), once again only in the ES group. The advantages of ultrasound dissection are magnified under the particular conditions of minimally invasive endoscopic Rectum Surgery by means of TEM. In principle, all the known risks associated with the application of electric current can be avoided by using ultrasound technology.

Audrius Dulskas - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Treatment possibilities for low anterior resection syndrome: a review of the literature
    International Journal of Colorectal Disease, 2018
    Co-Authors: Audrius Dulskas, Edgaras Smolskas, Inga Kildusiene, Narimantas Evaldas Samalavicius
    Abstract:

    AimUp to 80% of patients after low anterior resection, experience (low) anterior resection syndrome (ARS/LARS). However, there is no standard treatment option currently available. This systemic review aims to summarize treatment possibilities for LARS after surgical treatment of rectal cancer in the medical literature.MethodsEmbase, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library were searched using the terms anterior resection syndrome, low anterior resection, colorectal/rectal/Rectum, Surgery/operation, pelvic floor rehabilitation, biofeedback, transanal irrigation, sacral nerve stimulation, and tibial nerve stimulation. All English language articles presenting original patient data regarding treatment and outcome of LARS were included. We focused on the effects of different treatment modalities for LARS. The Jadad score was used to assess the methodological quality of trials. The quality scale ranges from 0 to 5 points, with a score ≤ 2 indicating a low quality report, and a score of ≥ 3 indicating a high quality report.ResultsTwenty-one of 160 studies met the inclusion criteria, of which 8 were reporting sacral nerve stimulation, 6 were designed to determine pelvic floor rehabilitation, 3 studies evaluated the effect of transanal irrigation, 2—percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation, and the rest of the studies assessed probiotics and 5-HT_3 receptor antagonists for LARS in patients who had undergone rectal resection. All except one study were poor quality reports according to the Jadad score.ConclusionsLARS treatment still carries difficulties because of a lack of well-conducted, randomized multicenter trials. Well-performed randomized controlled trials are needed.

  • Treatment possibilities for low anterior resection syndrome: a review of the literature.
    International journal of colorectal disease, 2018
    Co-Authors: Audrius Dulskas, Edgaras Smolskas, Inga Kildusiene, Narimantas Evaldas Samalavicius
    Abstract:

    Up to 80% of patients after low anterior resection, experience (low) anterior resection syndrome (ARS/LARS). However, there is no standard treatment option currently available. This systemic review aims to summarize treatment possibilities for LARS after surgical treatment of rectal cancer in the medical literature. Embase, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library were searched using the terms anterior resection syndrome, low anterior resection, colorectal/rectal/Rectum, Surgery/operation, pelvic floor rehabilitation, biofeedback, transanal irrigation, sacral nerve stimulation, and tibial nerve stimulation. All English language articles presenting original patient data regarding treatment and outcome of LARS were included. We focused on the effects of different treatment modalities for LARS. The Jadad score was used to assess the methodological quality of trials. The quality scale ranges from 0 to 5 points, with a score ≤ 2 indicating a low quality report, and a score of ≥ 3 indicating a high quality report. Twenty-one of 160 studies met the inclusion criteria, of which 8 were reporting sacral nerve stimulation, 6 were designed to determine pelvic floor rehabilitation, 3 studies evaluated the effect of transanal irrigation, 2—percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation, and the rest of the studies assessed probiotics and 5-HT3 receptor antagonists for LARS in patients who had undergone rectal resection. All except one study were poor quality reports according to the Jadad score. LARS treatment still carries difficulties because of a lack of well-conducted, randomized multicenter trials. Well-performed randomized controlled trials are needed.

Laszlo Fuzesi - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • ultracision or high frequency knife in transanal endoscopic microSurgery tem advantages of a new procedure
    Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques, 2001
    Co-Authors: C Langer, T Markus, Torsten Liersch, Laszlo Fuzesi, H Becker
    Abstract:

    The potential advantages of ultrasound dissection using UltraCision (UC), an ultrasonically activated scalpel, rather than conventional electroSurgery (ES) were investigated retrospectively in 63 patients following transanal endoscopic microSurgery (TEM) in 22 cases of rectal carcinoma (16 pT1, four pT2, two pT3), 40 cases of rectal adenoma>2 cm, and one neurinoma. In all, 21 patients (13 adenomas, seven carcinomas, and one neurinoma) were operated with UltraCision (Ethicon, Norderstedt, Germany), whereas 42 patients (27 adenomas, 15 carcinomas) were treated with conventional electrocautery. All tumors were completely excised (RO) in both groups. We encountered a total of nine complications, seven after ES and two after UC use. Surgical reintervention was necessary in three cases (4.7%), exclusively following resection by ES. There were five cases of tumor recurrence (7.9%), once again only in the ES group. The advantages of ultrasound dissection are magnified under the particular conditions of minimally invasive endoscopic Rectum Surgery by means of TEM. In principle, all the known risks associated with the application of electric current can be avoided by using ultrasound technology.

  • UltraCision or high-frequency knife in transanal endoscopic microSurgery (TEM)? Advantages of a new procedure.
    Surgical endoscopy, 2001
    Co-Authors: C Langer, T Markus, Torsten Liersch, Laszlo Fuzesi, H Becker
    Abstract:

    The potential advantages of ultrasound dissection using UltraCision (UC), an ultrasonically activated scalpel, rather than conventional electroSurgery (ES) were investigated retrospectively in 63 patients following transanal endoscopic microSurgery (TEM) in 22 cases of rectal carcinoma (16 pT1, four pT2, two pT3), 40 cases of rectal adenoma>2 cm, and one neurinoma. In all, 21 patients (13 adenomas, seven carcinomas, and one neurinoma) were operated with UltraCision (Ethicon, Norderstedt, Germany), whereas 42 patients (27 adenomas, 15 carcinomas) were treated with conventional electrocautery. All tumors were completely excised (RO) in both groups. We encountered a total of nine complications, seven after ES and two after UC use. Surgical reintervention was necessary in three cases (4.7%), exclusively following resection by ES. There were five cases of tumor recurrence (7.9%), once again only in the ES group. The advantages of ultrasound dissection are magnified under the particular conditions of minimally invasive endoscopic Rectum Surgery by means of TEM. In principle, all the known risks associated with the application of electric current can be avoided by using ultrasound technology.