Given the increasing prevalence of diabetes and obesity worldwide, the deleterious effects of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) are becoming a growing challenge for public health. NAFLD is the most common chronic liver disease in the Western world. NAFLD is closely associated with metabolic disorders, including central obesity, dyslipidaemia, hypertension, hyperglycaemia and persistent abnormalities of liver function tests.In general NAFLD is a common denominer for a broad spectrum of damage to the liver, which can be due to hepatocyte injury, inflammatory processes and fibrosis. This is normally seen on liver biopsy and can range from milder forms (steatosis) to the more severe forms (non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), advanced fibrosis, cirrhosis and liver failure). In these patients, advanced fibrosis is the major predictor of morbidity and liver-related mortality, and an accurate diagnosis of NASH and NAFLD is mandatory. Histologic evaluation with liver biopsy remains the gold standard to diagnose NAFLD. Diagnosis of NAFLD is defined as presence of hepatic steatosis, ballooning and lobular inflammation with or without fibrosis. Weight loss, dietary modification, and the treatment of underlying metabolic syndrome remain the mainstays of therapy once the diagnosis is established. Dietary recommendations and lifestyle interventions, weight loss, and the treatment of underlying metabolic syndrome remain the mainstays of therapy once the diagnosis is established with promising results but are difficult to maintain. Pioglitazone and vitamin E are recommended by guidelines in selected patients. This review gives an overview of NAFLD and its treatment options.

BackgroundLaparoscopic surgery has several advantages when compared to open surgery, including faster postoperative recovery and lower pain scores. However, for laparoscopy, a pneumoperitoneum is required to create workspace between the abdominal wall and intraabdominal organs. Increased intraabdominal pressure may also have negative implications on cardiovascular, pulmonary, and intraabdominal organ functionings. To overcome these negative consequences, several trials have been performed comparing low- versus standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum.MethodsA systematic review of all randomized controlled clinical trials and observational studies comparing low- versus standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum.Results and conclusionsQuality assessment showed that the overall quality of evidence was moderate to low. Postoperative pain scores were reduced by the use of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum. With appropriate perioperative measures, the use of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum does not seem to have clinical advantages as compared to standard pressure on cardiac and pulmonary function. Although there are indications that low-pressure pneumoperitoneum is associated with less liver and kidney injury when compared to standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum, this does not seem to have clinical implications for healthy individuals. The influence of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum on adhesion formation, anastomosis healing, tumor metastasis, intraocular and intracerebral pressure, and thromboembolic complications remains uncertain, as no human clinical trials have been performed. The influence of pressure on surgical conditions and safety has not been established to date. In conclusion, the most important benefit of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum is lower postoperative pain scores, supported by a moderate quality of evidence. However, the quality of surgical conditions and safety of the use of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum need to be established, as are the values and preferences of physicians and patients regarding the potential benefits and risks. Therefore, the recommendation to use low-pressure pneumoperitoneum during laparoscopy is weak, and more studies are required.

No abstract

Preoperative exercise therapy might be effective in improving the physical fitness of patients prior to major abdominal surgery, and preoperative chest physiotherapy seems effective in reducing pulmonary complications. However consensus on training method is lacking. Future research should focus on the method and effect of PEXT before high-risk surgical procedures.