No abstract

Background Most serous ovarian cancers are now understood to originate in the fallopian tubes. Removing the tubes (salpingectomy) likely reduces the risk of developing high‐grade serous ovarian cancer. Numerous gynaecological societies now recommend prophylactic (or opportunistic) salpingectomy at the time of gynaecological surgery in appropriate women, and this is widely done. Salpingectomy at the time of non‐gynaecological surgery has not been explored and may present an opportunity for primary prevention of ovarian cancer. Methods This study investigated whether prophylactic salpingectomy with the intention of reducing the risk of developing ovarian cancer would be accepted and could be accomplished at the time of elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Women aged at least 45 years scheduled for elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy were recruited. They were counselled and offered prophylactic bilateral salpingectomy at the time of cholecystectomy. Outcome measures were rate of accomplishment of salpingectomy, time and procedural steps needed for salpingectomy, and complications. Results A total of 105 patients were included in the study. The rate of acceptance of salpingectomy was approximately 60 per cent. Salpingectomy was performed in 98 of 105 laparoscopic cholecystectomies (93·3 per cent) and not accomplished because of poor visibility or adhesions in seven (6·7 per cent). Median additional operating time was 13 (range 4–45) min. There were no complications attributable to salpingectomy. One patient presented with ovarian cancer 28 months after prophylactic salpingectomy; histological re‐evaluation of the tubes showed a previously undetected, focal serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma. Conclusion Prophylactic salpingectomy can be done during elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

l " ovarian cancer l " prophylactic salpingectomy l " incidental salpingectomy l " risk-reducing salpingectomy Schlüsselwörter l " Ovarialkarzinom l " prophylaktische Salpingektomie l " inzidentelle Salpingektomie l " risikomindernde Salpingektomie

The method can be used easily and rapidly, even in obese patients. It is safer than blind puncture and reduces costs.

Fistula formation can cause a number of serious or debilitating complications ranging from disturbance of fluid and electrolyte balance to sepsis and even death. They still remain an important complication following gastrointestinal surgery.

High-grade serous ovarian carcinomas originate in the fallopian tube 1 , and salpingectomy is associated with a considerable risk reduction for ovarian cancer. 2,3 Numerous professional societies have recommended so-called opportunistic salpingectomy at the time of gynecologic surgery in appropriate women, 4,5 so nongynecologic procedures, such as laparoscopic cholecystectomy, might afford an opportunity for salpingectomy.

The results indicate that implantation of the nerve prosthesis allows for good and effective neural regeneration. This new and simple treatment option for peripheral nerve injuries can be performed in any hospital with surgical facilities as it does not involve the demanding microsurgical suture technique that can only be performed in specialized centers.

Background Peripheral nerve defects (PND) often cause lifelong physical disability, and the available treatment options are often not satisfactory. PND are usually bridged with an autologous nerve transplant or a nerve guidance conduit (NGC), when coaptation as preferred technique is not possible. The aim of this experimental study was to determine the effectiveness of a novel NGC for regeneration in the treatment of PND. Materials and methods A conduit made of gelatin with an innovative interior structure was tested for the repair of a 6-mm gap versus direct microsurgical suture repair without gap. Results We found that bridging the defect with this conduit was as effective as direct microsurgical coaptation without a defect. Conclusions This nerve conduit, effective in bridging neural defects, appears as an alternative to autologous nerve grafts, avoiding the problems related to nerve graft harvesting, host–donor differences in diameter, mismatches in number and pattern of fascicles, cross-sectional shape and area, and morbidity of the donor area.