No abstract

An evidence-based approach to the diagnosis and management of parastomal hernias reveals the lack of evidence on several topics, which need to be addressed by multicenter trials. Parastomal hernia prevention using a prophylactic mesh for end colostomies reduces parastomal herniation. Clinical outcomes should be audited and adverse events must be reported.

Purpose A classification of parastomal hernias (PH) is needed to compare different populations described in various trials and cohort studies, complete the previous inguinal and ventral hernia classifications of the European Hernia Society (EHS) and will be integrated into the EuraHS database (European Registry of Abdominal Wall Hernias).MethodsSeveral members of the EHS board and invited experts gathered for 2 days to discuss the development of an EHS classification of PH. The discussions were based on a literature review and critical appraisal of existing classifications.ResultsThe classification proposal is based on the PH defect size (small is ≤5 cm) and the presence of a concomitant incisional hernia (cIH). Four types were defined: Type I, small PH without cIH; Type II, small PH with cIH; Type III, large PH without cIH; and Type IV, large PH with cIH. In addition, the classification grid includes details about whether the hernia recurs after a previous PH repair or whether it is a primary PH. Clinical validation is needed in the future to assess if the classification allows us to differentiate the treatment strategy and if the classification impacts outcome in these different subgroups.ConclusionA classification of PH divided into subgroups according to size and cIH was formulated with the aim of improving the ability to compare different studies and their results.

An increased interest in gastro-entero-pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP NENs) has recently been observed. These are rare neoplasms and their detection in recent years has improved. Over 50% of GEP NENs are carcinoids, and they are usually found incidentally during surgery in the small intestine and appendix and at diagnosis in distant metastases, mainly to the liver. There is a need for co-operation between specialists in various disciplines of medicine in order to work out the diagnostic and therapeutic guidelines. In this publication, we present general recommendations of the Polish Network of Neuroendocrine Tumours for the management of patients with GEP NENs, developed at the Consensus Conference which took place in Kamień Śląski in April 2013. Members of the guidelines working groups were assigned sections of the 2008 guidance to update. In the subsequent parts of this publication, we present the rules of diagnostic and therapeutic management of: -neuroendocrine neoplasms of the stomach and duodenum (including gastrinoma); -pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms; -neuroendocrine neoplasms of the small intestine and the appendix; -colorectal neuroendocrine neoplasms. The proposed recommendations by Polish and foreign experts representing different fields of medicine (endocrinology, gastroenterology, surgery, oncology, nuclear medicine and pathology) will be helpful in the diagnosis and treatment of GEP NENs patients.

No abstract

No abstract

Progress in the diagnostics and therapy of gastro-entero-pancreatic (GEP) neuroendocrine neoplasms (NEN), the published results of new randomised clinical trials, and the new guidelines issued by the European Neuroendocrine Tumour Society (ENETS) have led the Polish Network of Neuroendocrine Tumours to update the 2013 guidelines regarding management of these neoplasms. We present the general recommendations for the management of NENs, developed by experts during the Third Round Table Conference - Diagnostics and therapy of gastro-entero-pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms: Polish recommendations in view of current European recommenda-tions, which took place in December 2016 in Żelechów near Warsaw. Drawing from the extensive experience of centres dealing with this type of neoplasms, we hope that we have managed to develop the optimal management system, applying the most recent achievements in the field of medicine, for these patients, and that it can be implemented effectively in Poland. These management guidelines have been arranged in the following order: gastric and duodenal NENs (including gastrinoma); pancreatic NENs; NENs of the small intestine and appendix, and colorectal NENs.

BackgroundDiversion colitis (DC) seems to be common in stoma patients, and the restoration of the continuity of the digestive tract is crucial for relief from the inflammatory process. No prospective studies of the late effects of DC on the lower gastrointestinal (GI) tract mucosa and the clinical condition of patients have been reported.MethodsData from 23 patients who underwent stoma creation were analysed during the reversal period (A) and at an average of 3 months (B1) and 5.6 years (B2) after restoration of GI tract continuity. Every monitoring visit included endoscopy, histology and assessment of the clinical condition of patients.ResultsShortly after GI tract restoration (B1), a significant decrease in inflammation was observed. The Ki67 positivity percentage increased, but this was not significant. At an average of 5.6 years after restoration (group B2), the clinical symptoms were mild. More patients presented with endoscopically detected inflammation of the mucosa, but its severity was not significantly higher than that at 3 months after reversal. Histological inflammation was more common, and its severity was significantly higher than that shortly after reversal but similar to that before reversal. The Ki67 positivity percentage decreased at the last examination (B2).ConclusionsThe results of this study show a complex recurrence of histological inflammation several years after GI tract restoration but without clinical and endoscopic inflammation and with good clinical condition. DC can potentially have a late influence on the rectal mucosa, even after stoma closure.