RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Currently, inguinal hernias are highly prevalent in the Brazilian population, accounting for 75% of all abdominal wall hernias. The recommended treatment to correct them is inguinal herniorrhaphy, which can be performed through open surgery, mainly using the Lichtenstein technique, or laparoscopically, primarily through Transabdominal Preperitoneal Repair (TAPP) or Total Extraperitoneal Repair (TEP) approaches. Like any surgery, these procedures have post-operative complications, with pain being the most common and debilitating. Currently, in European and Brazilian guidelines, the open Lichtenstein and endoscopic inguinal hernia techniques are recommended as best evidence-based options for repair of a primary unilateral hernia providing the surgeon is sufficiently experienced in the specific procedure. In that matter, the surgeon should make a choice based on assessment of the benefits and risks of performing each of them, and practice shared making decision with it patient. Therefore, the objective of this review was to assess the incidence of chronic postoperative pain by comparing the aforementioned surgical approaches to evaluate which procedure causes less disability to the patient. METHODS: The search conducted until May 2024 was performed on Medline (PubMed), Cochrane (CENTRAL), and Lilacs databases. The selection was limited to randomized clinical trials, nonrandomized clinical trials and cohort studies comparing TAPP or TEP to LC, evaluating the incidence of chronic postoperative pain published between 2017 and 2023. Evidence certainty was assessed using the GRADE Pro tool, and bias risk was evaluated with the RoB 2.0 tool and ROBINS I tool. Thirteen studies were included.  RESULTS: The meta-analysis showed a significant difference between the groups in both techniques, favoring the laparoscopic approach, which had a lower occurrence of postoperative inguinodynia with a relative risk of 0.49 (95% CI = 0.32, 0.75; I2 = 66% (P = 0.001); Z = 3.28 (P = 0.001) with low certainty of evidence. CONCLUSION: The presence of chronic postoperative pain was lower in laparoscopic TEP/TAPP techniques when compared to the open Lichtenstein technique, meaning that the former can bring more benefits to patients who requires inguinal herniorrhaphy. Nevertheless, further randomized clinical trials are needed to optimize the analysis, minimizing the bias.

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) associated with tacrolimus (TAC) in patients undergoing kidney-pancreas and kidney transplants, in comparison with cyclosporine (CyA), azathioprine (AZA), everolimus (EVL), sirolimus (SRL), manitimus (MAN), mizoribine (MZR), and enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium (ECMPS) in combination or monotherapy. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials was performed. The outcomes comprised acute rejection, graft loss, and adverse events. RESULTS: Thirty studies were included. The main adverse events related to the TAC+MMF scheme were infection (36%; 95%CI: 26%-46%), including cytomegalovirus (CMV) (14%; 95%CI: 8%-20%); anemia (20%; 95%CI: 2%-37%); leukopenia (18%; 95%CI: 3%-33%); nausea (20%; 95%CI: 1%-39%); and diarrhea (26%; 95%CI:13%-40%). TAC+MMF was compared to the schemes AZA+TAC, CyA+AZA, CyA+MMF, CyA+SRL, ECMPS, EVL, MAN+TAC, MMF+SRL, MZR, TAC+AZA, TAC+EVR, TAC+MZR, TAC +SRL and TAC. TAC+MMF was associated with a lower risk of rejection than MMF monotherapy (RD: -0.24; 95%CI -0.46; -0.02). Comparing TAC+MMF with the other regimens, no significant difference was found for graft loss. TAC+MMF was associated with a higher risk of infections than MZR (RD: 0.174; 95%CI: 0.25; 0.323) and TAC monotherapy (RD: 0.07; 95%CI 0.003; 0.138). CONCLUSION: Gastrointestinal and hematological adverse events and infections are the most common with TAC+MMF for kidney-pancreas and kidney. TAC+MMF effectively prevents acute cellular rejection, and alternatives with AZA, CyA, SRL, ECMPS, EVL, MAN, and MSR have similar efficacy and safety profiles. TAC monotherapy and MZR may be associated with a lower risk of infections.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Currently, gastric cancer is the sixth most prevalent cancer in the world. The recommended treatment for advanced disease is gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy. However, there is no consensus regarding the performance of an omentectomy as part of the treatment. The procedure is considered by some authors to be essential for the elimination of a micrometastasis since cells in the peritoneum prefer growing in milky spots in the omentum. On the other hand, retrospective studies demonstrated that there is the possibility that omentum preservation may not impact patients' overall survival. Therefore, the objective of this review was to quantify the effect of performing an omentectomy to determine whether it is necessary. Medline (PubMed), Embase, Cochrane, ClinicalTrials.gov and LILACS were searched up to September 2022. Selection was restricted to comparative studies in patients with advanced GC (≥T2). The certainty of evidence was assessed with GRADEPro and the risk of bias with ROBINS-I and RoB 2.0. Five cohort studies, and one randomized controlled trial (RCT) were included. The meta-analysis found that there were no significant differences between the procedures for overall survival, relapse-free survival, and peritoneal recurrence. Furthermore, in perioperative outcomes, a significant difference was only found in intraoperative bleeding, which was lower in patients who had their omentum preserved. Therefore, omentum preservation in patients with advanced gastric cancer has been shown to have no inferior results than resection in long-term outcomes.

Asunto(s)