Background: Red cell distribution width (RDW) is one of the standard parameters with blood cell counts. Much previous research has indicated that it increases in cases of systemic inflammation or cardiametabolic incident. However, information on the relation of RDW with solid tumors causing systemic inflammation is limited. In the present research, we examined the relation of RDW with malignant and benign lesions of the colon. Materials and Methods: 115 patients with colon polyps (group 1), and 30 with colon cancer (group 2) who were diagnosed histopathologically in our clinic between January 2010-January 2013 were scanned retrospectively. Patients with anemia, hematologic diseases and active inflammation were excluded. RDW, mean corpuscular volume (MCV), hemoglobin (Hgb) and platelet (Plt) measurements were recorded and their relations with the malignant and benign lesions of the colon were examined. Results: Both groups were similar in age and gender distribution. RDW values of patients with colon cancer were significantly higher than the patients with colon polyp (p=0,01). No significant differences were detected between the two groups in terms of MCV and Plt values (p>0,05). Conclusions: RDW can be used as an early warning biomarker for solid colon tumors. Further prospective research is required on the relations of cheap and easily measured RDW parameters with colon malignancies.

The aim of our study was to compare short-term outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic sphincter-saving total mesorectal excision (TME) in male patients with mid-low rectal cancer (RC) after neadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT). The study was conducted as a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database, and we analyzed 14 robotic and 65 laparoscopic sphincter saving TME (R-TME and L-TME, respectively) performed by one surgeon between 2005 and 2013. Patient characteristics, perioperative recovery, postoperative complications and and pathology results were compared between the two groups. The patient characteristics did not differ significantly between the two groups. Median operating time was longer in the R-TME than in the L-TME group (182 min versus 140 min). Only two conversions occurred in the L-TME group. No difference was found between groups regarding perioperative recovery and postoperative complication rates. The median number of harvested lymph nodes was higher in the RTME than in the L-TME group (32 versus 23, p = 0.008). The median circumferential margin (CRM) was 10 mm in the R-TME group, 6.5 mm in the L-TME group (p = 0.047. The median distal resection margin (DRM) was 27.5 mm in the R-TME, 15 mm in the L-TME group (p = 0.014). Macroscopic grading of the specimen in the R-TME group was complete in all patients. In the L-TME group, grading was complete in 52 (80%) and incomplete in 13 (20%) cases (p = 0.109). R-TME is a safe and feasible procedure that facilitates performing of TME in male patients with mid-low RC after NCRT.

Objective: Incisional hernia is a significant problem after laparotomy, and there is still no consensus on an ideal treatment method. The aim of this study was to compare the results of onlay and sublay mesh repair techniques. Material and Methods:In this randomized prospective trial, 100 patients were divided into two groups: onlay and sublay groups. Recurrences were evaluated by performing a physical examination. Results:The median follow-up was 37.1 (26.6 to 46.5) months. In the onlay group, the mean operation time was significantly shorter. However, in terms of postoperative pain and wound complications, the sublay group had significantly better results. The recurrence rates were found to be similar in both groups (6% in the onlay group and 2% in the sublay group). Conclusion:In the treatment of incisional hernia, sublay mesh repair is superior to onlay mesh repair in terms of postoperative pain and wound complications. Both techniques have similar recurrence rates. Keywords:Incisional hernia, mesh repair, onlay, sublay INTRODUCTIONIncisional hernia is a significant complication after laparotomy; its incidence ranges between 10% and 20% (1-4). This common problem can result in bowel strangulation, pain, and enterocutaneous fistula, and it affects the quality of life. The results of repair techniques vary widely. High recurrence rates have been reported for suture techniques, whereas mesh placement can reduce recurrence (5-10). In mesh repair, one of the most important problems is the placement of the mesh. Some techniques are reported to be associated with particularly high rates of some complications, such as recurrence, wound infection, and fistula (11,12). In the literature, several studies compare mesh and suture repair techniques, open and laparoscopic repair techniques, and mesh type as well as the plane in which the mesh should be placed. Currently, there is no consensus regarding the abdominal plane in which the mesh should be placed (13).The aim of this study was to compare the early and late results of onlay and sublay mesh repair techniques. , an American Society of Anesthesiologists score (ASA) of 4, or severe pulmonary or cardiac disease were not included. The remaining patients who agreed to be involved and signed the informed consent form were randomized into two groups: onlay group and sublay group. After the initial evaluation, 100 patients were included and were randomized to each group by the closed envelope method. The patients' demographic data, BMI, diameter of fascial defects, operation time (from first incision to dressing), visual analog scale (VAS) scores at the second and 24 th hours, length of hospital stay, drain takeoff time, postoperative complications, and recurrences were recorded. The fascial defect diameter was measured intraoperatively and is presented in cm 2 . All operations were performed according to the elective standard. There were no emergency operations. MATERIAL AND METHODS Operative TechniqueAll operations were performed under general anesthesia, and no antibioti...

No abstract

No abstract

Objective: Non-operative management of abdominal injuries has recently become more common. Especially nonoperative treatment of blunt abdominal trauma is gaining wide acceptance. In this study, the efficacy of nonoperative treatment in abdominal trauma (blunt penetrating) is discussed. Material and Methods:All patients who received treatment due to abdominal trauma from November 2008 to January 2013 were retrospectively analyzed. The demographic characteristics, type of injury, injured organ, type of treatment (operative vs. nonoperative) and mortality data were evaluated. Results:The study includes 115 patients treated for abdominal trauma in our department. The mechanism of trauma was stab wounds in 60%, blunt abdominal trauma in 23.5% and gunshot wounds in 16.5%. Forty-two patients (36.5%) were operated for hemodynamic instability and/or peritonitis on admission. The remaining 63.5% of patients (n=73) were treated nonoperatively, 10 of whom required laparotomy during follow-up. The remaining 63 patients were treated with non-operative management. The success rate for non-operative treatment was 86.3% and there was no difference in terms of the types of injuries. The mortality rate was 4.3% (n= 5) in the whole series, but there were no deaths among the patients who had received non-operative treatment. In the whole patient group 54.2% (n=63) were treated nonoperatively. Conclusion:Nonoperative treatment in abdominal trauma is safe and effective. Patients with clinical stability and normal physical examination findings can be treated nonoperatively with close monitoring.

The success rate for treating acute appendicitis medically is high, with antibiotic treatment being effective as the firstline therapy for many unselected patients. An increase in CRP levels to 80.8 mg/L and above seems to be a meaningful parameter for determining a lack of response to medical treatment.

Otilonium bromide is a safe agent with low side effects. It can be used before the ERCP procedure to decrease the duodenal motility. It eases the procedure, moreover, it increases the patients' satisfaction.