S. C. S. Chung

A prospective randomized trial comparing R1 subtotal gastrectomy with R3 total gastrectomy for antral cancer.

ObjectiveThe authors determined if more radical surgery with extended lymphadenectomy improves the results of gastrectomy in patients with adenocarcinoma of the gastric antrum. Summary Background DataThe overall survival in patients with gastric cancer is disappointing. Improved survival has been reported by Japanese authors. Whether this is because of a higher number of early gastric cancers in the Japanese series, different biologic behavior in Asians, or the adoption of radical surgery with lymphadenectomy remains unclear. MethodsR1 subtotal gastrectomy with omentectomy and R3 total gastrectomy (omentectomy, splenectomy, distal pancreatectomy, lymphatic clearance of the celiac axis, and skeletonization of vessels in the porta hepatis) were evaluated in a prospective, randomized comparison. ResultsFifty-five patients were randomized—25 to the R1 group and 30 to the R3 group. The two groups were comparable for age, sex, tumor size, TNM stage, and length of follow-up. The R3 group had a longer operating time (140 vs. 260 min; p < 0.05), a greater transfusion requirement (0 vs. 2 units, p < 0.05) and a longer hospital stay (8 vs. 16 days; p < 0.05) (medians; Mann-Whitney U test). The only postoperative death was in the R3 group and was caused by intra-abdominal sepsis. Fourteen patients in the R3 group developed left subphrenic abscesses. There were no major complications in the R1 group. Overall survival was significantly better in the R1 group (median survival estimated by Kaplan-Meier method, 1511 vs. 922 days, p < 0.05, log-rank test). ConclusionsR3 total gastrectomy can be performed with a low mortality, but it has a high morbidity because of intra-abdominal sepsis. The data do not support the routine use of R3 total gastrectomy for treatment of patients with antral cancer.

Duodenal ulcer healing by eradication of Helicobacter pylori without anti-acid treatment: randomised controlled trial

Randomised trials have shown that duodenal ulcers treated by H2 blockers heal faster if Helicobacter pylori is eradicated concurrently. It remains unknown whether eradication of H pylori without suppression of acid-secretion, is sufficient to allow healing. 153 patients with H pylori infection and duodenal ulcer were randomised to receive either a 1-week course of bismuth subcitrate, tetracycline, and metronidazole (76), or omeprazole for 4 weeks with the same three-drug regimen for the first week (77). Endoscopy and antral biopsies were done at entry and 4 weeks after treatment. 132 patients were suitable for analysis. Duodenal ulcers healed in 60 (92%; 95% CI 86-100%) patients taking bismuth, tetracycline, and metronidazole compared with 63 (95%; 88-100%) taking omeprazole in addition to the three other drugs. H pylori was eradicated in 61 (94%; 88-100%) who received only three drugs compared with 66 (98%; 96-100%) who received omeprazole as well. Symptoms were reduced more effectively during the first week in patients who received omeprazole (p = 0.003). We conclude that a 1-week regimen of bismuth, tetracycline, and metronidazole for patients with H pylori and duodenal ulcer eradicates the organism and heals the ulcer in most patients. Concurrent administration of omeprazole reduces ulcer pain more rapidly but has no effect on ulcer healing.

A randomized study comparing laparoscopic versus open repair of perforated peptic ulcer using suture or sutureless technique.

OBJECTIVE This study compares laparoscopic versus open repair and suture versus sutureless repair of perforated duodenal and juxtapyloric ulcers. BACKGROUND DATA The place of laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer followed by peritoneal toilet of the peritoneal cavity has been established. Whether repair of the perforated peptic ulcer by the laparoscopic approach is better than conventional open repair and whether sutured repair is better than sutureless repair are both undetermined. METHODS One hundred three patients were randomly allocated to laparoscopic suture repair, laparoscopic sutureless repair, open suture repair, and open sutureless repair. RESULTS Laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer (groups 1 and 2) took significantly longer than open repair (groups 3 and 4; 94.3 +/ 40.3 vs. 53.7 +/ 42.6 minutes: Students test, p < 0.001), but the amount of analgesic required after laparoscopic repair was significantly less than in open surgery (median 1 dose vs. 3 doses) (Mann-Whitney U test, p = 0.03). There was no significant difference in the four groups of patients in terms of duration of nasogastric aspiration, duration of intravenous drip, total hospital stay, time to resume normal diet, visual analogue scale score for pain in the first 24 hours after surgery, morbidity, reoperation, and mortality rates. CONCLUSIONS Laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer is a viable option. Sutureless repair is as safe as suture repair and it takes less time to perform.

Octreotide infusion or emergency sclerotherapy for variceal haemorrhage

To compare octreotide with injection sclerotherapy in the treatment of acute variceal haemorrhage, patients admitted with gastrointestinal bleeding and oesophageal varices confirmed by endoscopy were randomised to receive either emergency sclerotherapy with 3% sodium tetradecyl sulphate or octreotide (50 micrograms intravenous bolus plus 50 micrograms per h intravenous infusion for 48 h). At the end of the study period (48 h), the octreotide group also had sclerotherapy to obliterate the varices. 100 patients were recruited. Demographic features including the aetiology of portal hypertension and the Child-Pughs grading of the two groups were similar. Bleeding was initially controlled in 90% of patients by emergency sclerotherapy and in 84% by octreotide infusion (95% confidence interval 0-19.5, p = 0.55). There were no significant differences between the two groups in early (within 48 h of randomisation) rebleeding (16% vs 14%), blood transfusion (3 units vs 3.5), hospital stay (5 days vs 6 days), or hospital mortality (27% vs 20%). No notable side-effects were associated with octreotide. We conclude that octreotide infusion and emergency sclerotherapy are equally effective in controlling variceal haemorrhage.

Laparoscopic versus open appendicectomy: prospective randomised trial

Randomised assessment of new laparoscopic surgical techniques is difficult. Surgeons need time to become experienced with the methods and tend, when they have experience, to favour one or other approach. We have carried out a prospective randomised comparison of laparoscopic and conventional appendicectomy done by surgeons of comparable experience in patients with suspected acute appendicitis. Postoperative management decisions were made by surgeons other than the operating surgeon. 140 patients were randomly assigned to open (OA) or laparoscopic (LA) appendicectomy (70 each). The age, sex ratio, duration of symptoms, and proportion of patients with histologically confirmed appendicitis was similar in the two groups. Operating time was longer for LA than for OA (mean 70.3 [SD 21.9] vs 46.5 [25.9] min; p < 0.001). There were no major intraoperative complications in either group. 14 (20%) patients in the LA group required conversion to an open operation. No significant differences between the groups were found postoperatively for pain score, analgesic requirement, time to reintroduction of diet, or hospital stay. 46 LA patients and 42 OA patients attended follow-up 3 weeks after surgery. Similar proportions had returned to work (36 [79%] vs 31 [74%]). The frequency of wound complications and wound pain after leaving hospital was lower after LA but not significantly so. We conclude that the postoperative course after LA and conventional OA does not differ significantly.

Endoscopic injection of adrenaline for actively bleeding ulcers: a randomised trial.

A prospective randomised trial was performed to assess the efficacy of endoscopic injection of adrenaline for actively bleeding ulcers. Emergency endoscopy in 961 patients admitted for upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage identified 68 patients with actively bleeding ulcers. These 68 patients were randomised to receive either endoscopic injection of adrenaline or no endoscopic treatment. After endoscopy both groups were managed in an identical manner, and strict criteria for emergency operation were adhered to in both groups. Bleeding was initially controlled in all 34 patients assigned to the treatment group. Significantly fewer patients in the treatment group than in the control group needed emergency operations (five v 14, respectively). In addition, in the treatment group the median transfusion requirement was significantly less (three v five units of blood) and the median hospital stay shorter (six v eight days). No complications were observed with the injection of adrenaline, and the rate of healing of ulcers in those attending for endoscopy six weeks after discharge was similar in both groups (81% (17 out of 21 patients) in the treatment group v 79% (11 out of 14) in the control group). Injection of adrenaline is effective in stopping bleeding from actively bleeding ulcers.

Prospective randomised study of effect of octreotide on rebleeding from oesophageal varices after endoscopic ligation

Up to a third of patients have early rebleeding from oesophageal varices after endoscopic variceal ligation. Octreotide infusion is effective for control of variceal bleeding. We investigated the efficacy of octreotide infusion as an adjunct to endoscopic variceal ligation to prevent early rebleeding from varices. 100 consecutive patients admitted with endoscopically confirmed oesophageal varices and active bleeding or signs of recent haemorrhage were randomly assigned endoscopic variceal ligation alone or octreotide (50 micrograms intravenous bolus injection followed by intravenous infusion at 50 micrograms per h for 5 days) plus endoscopic variceal ligation. Three patients in each group were excluded. Bleeding was controlled in 44 of 47 patients who received variceal ligation alone and in 45 of 47 who received combined treatment (p = 1.0). Recurrent bleeding was documented in 18 (38% [24-52]) patients who received variceal ligation alone and in four (9% [3-21] who received combined treatment (p = 0.0007). The relative risk of rebleeding was lower (0.22 [0.08-0.60]) in the combined therapy group. Ten patients in the variceal ligation group and one in the combined therapy group required balloon tamponade for massive haematesis and haemodynamic instability (p = 0.0039). The in-hospital and 30-day mortality rates were higher in the variceal ligation group than in the combined therapy group (19 vs 9% and 23 vs 11%), but the differences did not reach significance. The relative risks of in-hospital (0.5 [0.04=5.3]) and 30-day (0.45 [0.17-1.2]) mortality were lower in the combined therapy group. Octreotide significantly reduces recurrent bleeding and the need for balloon tamponade in patients with variceal haemorrhage treated by endoscopic variceal ligation.

Comparison of two-dimensional vs three-dimensional camera systems in laparoscopic surgery

AbstractBackground: The lack of depth perception and spatial orientation in video vision are the drawbacks of laparoscopic surgery. The advent of a three-dimensional camera system enables surgeons to regain binocular vision and may be advantageous in complex laparoscopic procedures. Methods: We prospectively studied two groups of surgeons (with and without experiences in laparoscopic surgery) who performed a designated standardized laparoscopic task using a two-dimensional camera system (Olympus OTV-S4) vs a three-dimensional camera system (Baxter-V. Mueller VS7700) and compared their time performances. Results: The results suggested that only experience in laparoscopic surgery had significant effect on individuals performance. We could not demonstrate any superiority of the 3D system over the 2D system. However, two-thirds of the surgeons commented that the depth perception did improve. Conclusions: With further refinement of the technology, the 3D system may improve its potential in laparoscopic surgery.

Multicenter prospective randomized trial comparing standard esophagectomy with chemoradiotherapy for treatment of squamous esophageal cancer: early results from the Chinese University Research Group for Esophageal Cancer (CURE).

We conducted a prospective randomized trial to compare the efficacy and survival outcome by chemoradiation with that by esophagectomy as a curative treatment. From July 2000 to December 2004, 80 patients with potentially resectable squamous cell carcinoma of the mid or lower thoracic esophagus were randomized to esophagectomy or chemoradiotherapy. A two-or three-stage esophagectomy with two-field dissection was performed. Patients treated with chemoradiotherapy received continuous 5-.uorouracil infusion (200 mg/m2/day) from day 1 to 42 and cisplatin (60 mg/m2) on days 1 and 22. The tumor and regional lymphatics were concomitantly irradiated to a total of 50–60 Gy.Tumor response was assessed by endoscopy, endoscopic ultrasonography, and computed tomography scan. Salvage esophagectomy was performed for incomplete response or recurrence. Forty-four patients received standard esophagectomy, whereas 36 were treated with chemoradiotherapy. Median follow-up was 16.9 months. The operative mortality was 6.8%. The incidence of postoperative complications was 38.6%. No difference in the early cumulative survival was found between the two groups (RR = 0.89; 95% confidence interval, 0.37-2.17; log-rank test P =0.45). There was no difference in the disease-free survival. Patients treated with surgery had a slightly higher proportion of recurrence in the mediastinum, whereas those treated with chemoradiation sustained a higher proportion of recurrence in the cervical or abdominal regions. Standard esophagectomy or chemoradiotherapy offered similar early clinical outcome and survival for patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus. The challenge lies in the detection of residue disease after chemoradiotherapy.

Injection or heat probe for bleeding ulcer

A prospective randomized trial was performed to compare the efficacy of endoscopic epinephrine injection and heat probe treatment in actively bleeding peptic ulcers. Emergency endoscopy in 1758 patients over an 18-month period identified 132 patients with active ulcer bleeding. They were randomized to receive either endoscopic epinephrine injection or heat probe treatment. After endoscopy, the patients were transferred to the surgical gastroenterology ward and were managed by surgeons unaware of the treatment option. Bleeding was initially controlled in 96% by epinephrine injection and in 83% by heat probe (P less than 0.05). There was no significant difference in outcome as measured by transfusion requirement (4.5 units vs. 3.8 units), emergency surgery (20% vs. 22%), hospital stay (8 days vs. 7 days), and mortality (2 vs. 4) between the injection group and the heat probe group. Two patients in the heat probe group experienced perforation. We conclude that both endoscopic epinephrine injection and heat probe treatment are effective in stopping bleeding from actively bleeding ulcers. Epinephrine injection is technically easier to perform and has a higher initial success rate.