METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed data of all adult patients with intussusception admitted to our hospital between 2007 and 2017. The patients' characteristics, presentation, operation details, postoperative outcomes and pathology were analyzed. Comparisons were made between the laparoscopic and open surgery procedures performed during the study period.
RESULTS: Seventeen open and 20 laparoscopic-assisted resections were performed. No significant differences were found between the two groups for the following parameters: age (45.3 ± 16.8 vs. 54.9 ± 19.1, p = 0.160); gender (41 vs. 60% males, p = 0.330); American Society of Anesthesiologists score (p = 0.609); history of cardiovascular disease (5.9% vs. 5.6%, p = 0.950), COPD/asthma (0% vs. 5.6%, p = 0.950), diabetes (11.8% vs. 11.1%, p = 0.950), and renal impairment (5.9% vs. 0%, p = 0.486); body mass index (20.6 vs. 21.9, p = 0.433); timing of presentation (p = 1.000); type of intussusception (p = 0.658); type of procedures (p = 0.446); operative time (173.7 ± 45.4 vs. 191.5 ± 43.9, p = 0.329); and length of postoperative stay (6.7 ± 5.4 vs. 4.5 ± 1.1 days, p = 0.153). However, the open surgery group had fewer patients with hypertension (17.6% vs. 61.1%, p = 0.009) and demonstrated a delayed oral intake (4.0 ± 1.7 days vs. 2.5 ± 0.7 days, p = 0.010) and a higher comprehensive complication index (11.5 ± 27.1 vs. 0, p = 0.038).
CONCLUSIONS: The laparoscopic approach was associated with earlier oral intake and a lower comprehensive complication index. It is a safe and feasible technique that confers the advantages of minimally invasive surgery. It can be considered the preferred surgical option when the surgical expertise is available.
METHODS: Data of seven patients undergoing laparoscopic transgastric resection were identified and retrospectively reviewed with regard to procedural steps and patient outcomes.
RESULTS: Seven patients (4 men; mean age 64.1 ± 14.6 years) with gastric GISTs underwent laparoscopic transgastric resection from January 2010 to May 2015. Three of the seven GISTs were located near the gastroesophageal junction and the rest were found in the posterior wall of the stomach. All seven patients underwent successful laparoscopic resection without any conversions. There were no mortalities and no significant postoperative complications. Intraoperative endoscopy was performed for all patients. The mean operative time was 164.0 ± 59.1 minutes. Regular diet was resumed within 3 days on average and mean postoperative stay was 3.6 ± 1.3 days. All patients achieved complete R0 resection with a mean tumor size of 5.5 ± 1.1 cm. At a mean follow-up of 48.0 ± 13.4 months, all patients were recurrence free.
CONCLUSIONS: GISTs of the posterior wall and in close proximity to the gastroesophageal junction can be safely resected laparoscopically using such an approach. Standard technique is required to achieve good oncological outcomes.
METHODS: The medical records of all patients who underwent laparoscopic feeding jejunostomy following staging laparoscopy for UGI malignancies between January 2010 and July 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. The data included patient demographics, operative technique and clinical outcomes.
RESULTS: Fifteen patients (11 males) had feeding jejunostomy done when staging laparoscopy showed unresectable UGI maligancy. Eight (53.3%) had gastric carcinoma, four (26.7%) had oesophageal carcinoma and three (20%) had cardio-oesophageal junction carcinoma. The mean age was 63.3 ± 7.3 years. Mean operative time was 66.0 ± 7.4 min. Mean postoperative stay was 5.6 ± 2.2 days. Laparoscopic feeding jejunostomy was performed without intra-operative complications. There were no major complications requiring reoperation but four patients had excoriation at the T-tube site and three patients had tube dislodgement which required bedside replacement of the feeding tube. The mean duration of feeding tube was 127.3 ± 99.6 days.
CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic feeding jejunostomy is an important adjunct to staging laparoscopy that can be performed safely with low morbidity. Meticulous attention to surgical techniques is the cornerstone of success.
Methods: A total of 150 CKD patients and 64 non-CKD patients were enrolled. The type 2 diabetic patients in the recruited study participants were categorised based on their glycaemic control; poor glycaemic control (GC) with haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) > 7% and good GC with HbA1c ≤ 7%. The levels or activities of GPx, SOD and sRAGE in plasma were measured. These biochemical parameters were analysed using Mann-WhitneyUtest and two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA).
Results: The activities of GPx and SOD as well as plasma level of sRAGE were not significantly different among the CKD patients with varying glycaemic control status. Irrespective of diabetes status and glycaemic control status, CKD patients also exhibited lower plasma SOD activities compared with non-CKD patients. Among the non-CKD patients, SOD activities were significantly higher in diabetic patients with good GC than diabetic patients with poor GC. Two-way ANOVA revealed that both CKD status and glycaemic control had an interaction effect on SOD activities in diabetic subjects with and without CKD. Follow-up analysis showed that SOD activities were significantly higher in non-CKD patients with good GC. There were no overall significant differences in GPx activities among the study participants. Furthermore, plasma sRAGE levels were higher in diabetic patients with CKD than those without CKD, regardless of glycaemic control status. There were no interaction effects between CKD status and glycaemic control status on GPx and sRAGE. Instead, CKD status showed significant main effects on these parameters, indicating significant differences between diabetic subjects with CKD and diabetic subjects without CKD.
Conclusion: Glycaemic control did not quantitatively alter GPx, SOD and sRAGE in diabetic CKD patients. Despite the advantages of good glycaemic control, a well-controlled diabetes in CKD did not modulate the activities of enzymatic antioxidants and sRAGE levels, therefore may not be the primary mechanism to handle oxidative stress.
METHODS: We conducted 30 semi-structured in-depth interviews with self-identifying GBMSM between the ages of 18-39 in Singapore following a purposive sampling strategy. Interview topics included participants' perceptions of drug use among GBMSM in Singapore, perceptions towards chemsex, reasons for drug use and chemsex, and recommendations to address the harms associated with chemsex in Singapore. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, coded, and analysed using thematic analysis.
RESULTS: Participants reported that it was common to encounter chemsex among GBMSM in Singapore as it could be easily accessed or initiated using social networking phone apps. Enhancement and prolongation of sexual experiences, fear of rejection from sexual partners and peers, and its use as a means of coping with societal rejection were three main reasons cited for engaging in chemsex. The impact of punitive drug laws on disclosure and stigmatisation of GBMSM who use drugs were reported to be key barriers towards addressing chemsex. Participants suggested using gay-specific commercial venues as avenues for awareness and educational campaigns, and social media to reach out to younger GBMSM.
CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the complexities behind chemsex use among GBMSM in Singapore, and the range of individual to institutional factors to be addressed. We recommend that community-based organisations and policy-makers find ways to destigmatise discussion of chemsex and provide safe spaces to seek help for drug use.