Background Esophageal cancer surgery is technically highly demanding. During the past decade robot-assisted surgery has successfully been introduced in esophageal cancer treatment. Various techniques are being evaluated in different centers. In particular, advantages and disadvantages of continuously sutured (COSU) or linear-stapled (LIST) gastroesophageal anastomoses are debated. Here, we comparatively analyzed perioperative morbidities and short-term outcomes in patients undergoing hybrid robot-assisted esophageal surgery following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT), with COSU or LIST anastomoses in a single center. Methods Following standardized, effective, nCRT, 53 patients underwent a hybrid Ivor Lewis robot-assisted esophagectomy with COSU (n = 32) or LIST (n = 21) gastroesophageal anastomoses. Study endpoints were intra- and postoperative complications, in-hospital morbidity and mortality. Duration of operation, intensive care unit (ICU) and overall hospital stay were also evaluated. Furthermore, rates of rehospitalization, endoscopies, anastomotic stenosis and recurrence were assessed in a 90-day follow-up. Results Demographics, ASA scores and tumor characteristics were comparable in the two groups. Median duration of operation was similar in patients with COSU and LIST anastomosis (467 vs. 453 min, IQR 420–521 vs. 416–469, p = 0.0611). Major complications were observed in 4/32 (12.5%) and 4/21 (19%) patients with COSU or LIST anastomosis, respectively (p = 0.697). Anastomotic leakage was observed in 3/32 (9.3%) and 2/21 (9.5%) (p = 1.0) patients with COSU or LIST anastomosis, respectively. Pleural empyema occurred in 1/32 (3.1%) and 2/21 (9.5%) (p = 0.555) patients, respectively. Mortality was similar in the two groups (1/32, 3.1% and 1/21, 4.7%, p = 1.0). Median ICU stay did not differ in patients with COSU or LIST anastomosis (p = 0.255), whereas a slightly, but significantly (p = 0.0393) shorter overall hospital stay was observed for COSU, as compared to LIST cohort (median: 20 vs. 21 days, IQR 17–22 vs. 18–28). Conclusions COSU is not inferior to LIST in the performance of gastroesophageal anastomosis in hybrid Ivor Lewis operations following nCRT.
Objective: To our knowledge, no systematic review or meta-analysis has been conducted on all predictors or moderators of treatment outcome across diagnoses in guided internet-based interventions (IBIs) for adults. We aimed to aggregate the results of relevant studies and identify research gaps. Methods: After duplicate removal, 1615 articles, identified by searching the databases PsycInfo, Ovid Medline, and Pubmed and through snowballing, were screened following detailed in- and exclusion criteria in April and May 2021. Risk of bias (QUIPS) and intra- and interrater reliability for screening and risk of bias were assessed. Variables were grouped and categorized, then synthesized using vote counting based on direction of effect. Results: N=50 articles were included in the review. Seventy-seven predictors or moderators were generated, of which adherence, baseline symptoms, education, age, and gender were most frequently assessed. Adherence, treatment credibility, working alliance, and baseline scores emerged as conclusive predictors/moderators. Results for other variables were mainly inconsistent or inconclusive. Conclusion: Our review highlights that it is currently difficult to predict, across diagnoses, who will benefit from guided IBIs. Further rigorous research is needed to identify predictors and moderators based on a sufficient number of studies. PROSPERO registration: CRD42021242305.
Background: Internet-based interventions offer a way to meet the high demand for psychological support. However, this setting also has disadvantages, such as the lack of personal contact and the limited ability to respond to crises. Blended care combines Internet-based interventions with face-to-face psychotherapy and merges the benefits of both settings. To ensure the uptake of blended care in routine care, Internet-based interventions need to be suitable for different therapeutic approaches and mental disorders.Objective: This paper describes the participatory development process of the Internet-based intervention “TONI” using a common therapeutic language and content on various transdiagnostic topics to be integrated into routine outpatient psychotherapy.Methods: To develop this intervention in a participatory manner, we followed the Integrate, Design, Assess, and Share (IDEAS) framework. In a multilevel development process, we used a combination of interviews, focus groups, and proofreading to optimally tailor online modules to routine outpatient psychotherapy. Building on well-established cognitive-behavioral online content, we included expert interviews with psychodynamic (n = 20) and systemic psychotherapists (n = 9) as well as focus groups with psychotherapists of different approaches (n = 10) and persons with lived experience of mental illness (PWLE; n = 10).Results: We describe the development process of TONI step-by-step, outlining the specific requirements that therapists from different therapeutic approaches as well as PWLE have and how we implemented them in our intervention. This includes the content and specific exercises in the online modules, aspects of data protection, language, design, and usability.Conclusion: Online interventions that use a common therapeutic language and address therapeutic principles across different approaches have the potential to advance digitalization in psychotherapy. Involving psychotherapists and PWLE in intervention development may positively impact acceptance and usage in practice. This study shows how participatory intervention development involving both psychotherapists and PWLE can be carried out.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.