Zentralblatt fur Chirurgie最新文献

Trauma surgical care in Germany faces major challenges. The increasing number of cases due to demographic change, combined with reduced bed capacity, requires a rethink in many areas. In order to continue to ensure basic and standard care at a high level and across the board in the future, economic incentives must be created to maintain sufficient locations for trauma care. At the same time, there is a shortage of skilled workers that will worsen in the coming years if appropriate measures are not taken to counteract it. Structural changes will also be needed to improve cross-sector networking between outpatient and inpatient care. With the increase in outpatient care, future shortages of both bed capacity and staff shortages may be buffered.

Since the approval of neoadjuvant chemo-immunotherapy in Europe, treatment options for resectable stage II-III NSCLC have also significantly improved in clinical routine. Surgical excision of the tumour by anatomic lung resection still remains the most essential component of multimodal therapy. However, with the increasing use of the new treatment concepts in clinical routine, questions also arise regarding safety, adverse events and technical resectability following neoadjuvant chemo-immunotherapy. This review summarises the current data on perioperative safety following neoadjuvant chemo-immunotherapy and discusses aspects of surgical technique, the extent of resection and intraoperative challenges illustrated by clinical case reports.

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is characterized by high recurrence rates in the early stages. In a German cohort, recurrence-free survival after 5 years was 62% (stage IA1), 40.7% (stage IIA) and 28% (stage IIIA). In addition to the perioperative use of immune checkpoint inhibitors, targeted tumor therapy is also making inroads as an innovation from the palliative setting into the early stages. Of particular relevance is the use of the EGFR inhibitor osimertinib, which has been shown to improve overall survival in the adjuvant setting. In this practice-oriented review, we briefly describe the current status of adjuvant targeted therapy and the associated testing and provide an outlook on further developments.

The most common organs affected by abdominal trauma are the spleen and the liver, often in combination. Pancreatic injuries are rare. In the case of blunt abdominal trauma, which is much more common, a clinical and laboratory examination as well as sonography should be performed. In the initial assessment, the circulatory situation must be screened. If there is haemodynamic instability and presentation of free fluid, an emergency laparotomy is indicated. If the situation is stable or stabilised and a pathological sonography is present, it is essential to perform triphasic contrast enhanced computed tomography, which is also mandatory in polytraumatised patients. If a renal injury is suspected, a late venous phase should be attached. In addition to the classification of the injury, attention should be paid to possible vascular injury or active bleeding. In this case, angiography with the possibility of intervention should be performed. Endoscopic treatment is possible for injuries of the pancreatic duct. If the imaging does not reveal any intervention target and a circulation is stable, a conservative approach is possible with continuous monitoring using clinical, laboratory and sonographic controls. Most injuries can be successfully treated by non-operative management (NOM).There are various surgical options for treating the injury, such as local and resecting procedures. There is also the option of "damage control surgery" with acute bleeding control and second look. Complex surgical procedures should be performed at centres. Postoperative complications arise out of elective surgery.In the less common case of penetrating abdominal trauma, the actual extent of the injury cannot be estimated from the visible wound. Here again, the circulatory situation determines the next steps. An emergency laparotomy should be carried out in case of instability. If the condition is stable, further diagnostics should be performed using contrast enhanced computed tomography. If penetration through the peritoneum cannot be clearly excluded, diagnostic laparoscopy should be performed.

The current war in Ukraine has drawn public attention to the treatment of war injuries. Follow-up treatment in Germany is portrayed the clover leaf of the TraumaNetzwerke DGU, is largely based on the demands of the Federal Ministries for Defence and Health and is intended to enhance resilience in war.The present article presents the special features of the care of severely injured patients during hostilities and should provide insights into the expected results of treatment and the actual procedures. We emphasise the unpredictability of the care of the severely injured during hostilities.On the basis of a search of the literature for the deployment of the German Army in Afghanistan and for the current war in Ukraine, we present the challenges and the typical patterns of injuries. We discuss the factors that can influence the procedures and the quality of the results during hostilities and how these may differ from civil polytrauma care in Germany - which is well established and standardised.Even during deployment of the Federal Army or (as planned) NATO, care of the severely injured is under standardised conditions, as based on the algorithmic ATLS care and which is concentrated on bleeding control. The corresponding equipment and personnel are well established, well prepared and well trained.However, there may be special local conditions or special deployments that make it inevitable that emergency medical care will be more delayed than in the civil system in Germany and can only take place after protracted transport. The objective is always that soldiers in combat should be able to receive medical care that is equivalent to that received by all accident victims in Germany, whatever the time and site of the accident.

Background: This retrospective propensity score matched study presents the perioperative mortality and long-term survival up to 9 years after endovascular (EVAR) and open (OAR) repair of patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) in Germany using health insurance data.

Materials and methods: 2170 patients treated between January 1st, 2010 and December 31st, 2016, for rAAA within 24 hours of hospital admission and receiving blood transfusions were enrolled in the study and tracked until December 31st, 2018. For better comparability of EVAR and OAR, a 1:1 propensity score matching with 624 pairs according to patient age, sex and comorbidities was carried out using the R program (Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria).

Results: In the unadjusted groups, 29.1% (631/2170) of the patients were treated with EVAR and 70.9% (1539/2170) with OAR. EVAR patients had a significantly higher overall rate of comorbidities. After adjustment, EVAR patients showed significantly better perioperative survival (EVAR 35.7%, OAR 51.0%, p = 0.000). Perioperative complications occurred in 80.4% of EVAR patients and 80.3% of OAR patients (p = 1.000). At the end of follow-up, Kaplan-Meier estimated that 15.2% of patients survived after EVAR vs. 19.5% after OAR (p = 0.027). In the multivariate Cox regression analysis, OAR, age ≥ 80 years, diabetes mellitus type 2 and renal failure stages 3 to 5 had a negative impact on overall survival. Patients treated on weekdays had a significantly lower perioperative mortality than patients treated during the weekend (perioperative mortality on weekdays 40.6% vs. 53.4% during the weekend; p = 0.000) and a better overall survival as estimated by Kaplan-Meier.

Conclusion: Significantly better perioperative and overall survival was observed with EVAR than with OAR in patients with rAAA. The perioperative survival benefit of EVAR was also found in patients older than 80 years. Female gender had no significant influence on perioperative mortality and overall survival. Patients treated on weekends had a significantly poorer perioperative survival than patients treated on weekdays, and this lasted through the end of follow-up. The extent to which this was dependent on hospital structure was unclear.