ライフサイエンスコーパス: anastomotic leak

1 postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI) and anastomotic leak.

2 helps reduce risk of clinically significant anastomotic leak.

3 mportant implications in the pathogenesis of anastomotic leak.

4 ntraabdominal abscess, or pancreaticojejunal anastomotic leak.

5 ection resulted from a choledochojejunostomy anastomotic leak.

6 tion had a decreased incidence of pancreatic anastomotic leak.

7 by concerns around increased risk of AKI and anastomotic leak.

8 t and to correlate perfusion with subsequent anastomotic leak.

9 ot cigarette smoking) increased the risk for anastomotic leak.

10 s seemed to meet usual clinical criteria for anastomotic leak.

11 f the technique with the lowest incidence of anastomotic leak.

12 y for treating benign esophageal ruptures or anastomotic leaks.

13 the risk of postoperative complications like anastomotic leaks.

14 n, and its use might affect the incidence of anastomotic leaks.

15 ode retrieval, and decrease the incidence of anastomotic leaks.

16 Oral contrast swallow detected 7 anastomotic leaks.

17 We registered 28 (5.6%) anastomotic leaks.

18 foration and in the management of esophageal anastomotic leaks.

19 the literature, we achieved a lower rate of anastomotic leak (0.3% vs. 2%, P = 0.001) and stomal ste

20 Complications: 4 major wound infections, 2 anastomotic leaks, 10 symptomatic marginal ulcers, 5 sto

21 Major complications were anastomotic leak (13%), atelectasis/pneumonia (2%), intr

22 vs. 52%); mean blood loss (677 vs. 368 mL); anastomotic leak (14% vs. 9%); and discharge within 10 d

23 (38%), pancreas graft thrombosis (27%), and anastomotic leak (15%).

24 Anastomotic leak (15.5% vs 21.2%, P = 0.028) and reinter

25 t differences in complications were seen for anastomotic leak (17.2% v 10.7%; P = .007) and surgical

26 SSIPK+ patients also had lower rates of anastomotic leak (2.7% vs 6.8%, P = 0.04), prolonged pos

27 ions (61, 9.9%), chest infection (50, 8.1%), anastomotic leak (27, 4.4%), hemorrhage (14, 2.3%), and

28 ous adverse events for all patients included anastomotic leaks (30 events in chemotherapy alone group

29 The outcome measures examined were SSI, anastomotic leak, 30-day mortality, overall morbidity, d

30 cluding mortality (2.9% vs 0.5%, P < 0.001), anastomotic leak (4.3% vs 1.4%, P = 0.002), and a higher

31 .5% (86.4% associated with perforation, 9.5% anastomotic leak, 4.5% patient managed nonoperatively).

32 ed as potential independent risk factors for anastomotic leak (60-day follow-up).

33 te infections [5(4%) vs. 5(4.4%), p > 0.95], anastomotic leak [7(7%) vs. 5(4.4%), p 0.55], and re-ope

34 Grade 3 or higher adverse events included anastomotic leak (8.6%), acute respiratory distress synd

35 frequent being nonsurgical infections (23%), anastomotic leak (9.8%), other postoperative abnormal fl

36 anastomosis, NSAIDs were not associated with anastomotic leak (adjusted odds ratio 0.85, 95% CI 0.58-

37 Anastomotic leak after anterior resection increased mort

38 ate, but multicentric prospective studies on anastomotic leak after colon resection are lacking.

39 Anastomotic leak after colon resection for cancer is a f

40 Anastomotic leak after colorectal surgery is a severe co

41 l entities may be considered to represent an anastomotic leak after low anterior resection, with diff

42 eotide decreases the incidence of pancreatic anastomotic leak after pancreaticoduodenectomy for malig

43 nt (SEPS) for a benign esophageal rupture or anastomotic leak after upper gastrointestinal surgery in

44 Anastomotic leaks after AR occurred in 5% (16 of 291) an

45 poral changes in pH for early assessments of anastomotic leaks after gastrointestinal surgeries, and

46 The risk factors for anastomotic leak (AL) after anterior resection have been

47 CT) might be an early and reliable marker of anastomotic leak (AL) after colorectal surgery.

48 ical factors that may predispose patients to anastomotic leak (AL) after large bowel surgery.

49 as to evaluate failure-to-rescue (FTR) after anastomotic leak (AL) in colectomy patients.

50 surgery, infectious complications, including anastomotic leak (AL), remain major sources of morbidity

51 , and early postoperative mortality, whereas anastomotic leak, anastomotic stricture, and recurrent l

52 verall postsurgical complications, including anastomotic leak and abdominal abscess.

53 ith LAA correlated with the likelihood of an anastomotic leak and confirmed the critical relationship

54 Two Immediate animals developed anastomotic leak and died; the Delay group had no compli

55 Anastomotic leak and its sequelae are dreaded complicati

56 llows rapid diagnosis of acute rejection and anastomotic leak and provides a simple way to monitor os

57 Secondary measures were anastomotic leaks and mortality rates up to postoperativ

58 There were no discernible anastomotic leaks and one late recurrent TEF related to

59 Endoscopic management of esophageal anastomotic leaks and perforations with the use of esoph

60 Anastomotic leaks and reinterventions were more frequent

61 tions after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass include anastomotic leaks and strictures, marginal ulcers, jejun

62 Recipient complications included three anastomotic leaks and three intra-abdominal abscesses.

63 spital mortality of 0.6%, 24%-pneumonia, 11%-anastomotic leak, and Clavien Dindo III in 27%.

64 ral antibiotics reduces by nearly half, SSI, anastomotic leak, and ileus, the most common and trouble

65 complication rate, rate of wound infection, anastomotic leak, and length of hospital stay were no di

66 urinary tract infection, urinary retention, anastomotic leak, and postoperative ileus.

67 eal perforation and postoperative esophageal anastomotic leak are often encountered.

68 Anastomotic leaks are a major source of morbidity after

69 Anastomotic leaks are among the most dreaded complicatio

70 Anastomotic leaks are frequently diagnosed late in the p

71 Benign esophageal ruptures and anastomotic leaks are life-threatening conditions that a

72 at seal and offer disambiguation in cases of anastomotic leaks based on point-of-need monitoring, wit

73 weighted OR = (0.74) 1.22 (2.02) ; P = .4), anastomotic leak (CACPR: 1.6%, non-CACPR: 2.0%; weighted

74 reactive protein (CRP) (P<0.05) but not with anastomotic leak/conduit necrosis or mortality.

75 of the 5 discharge criteria in anticipating anastomotic leak development.

76 am was created to easily predict the risk of anastomotic leak for a given patient.

77 ive perioperative outcome domains (including anastomotic leak), four quality of life outcome domains

78 198 study patients, 168 had no demonstrated anastomotic leak, free fluid, or abscess at any time aft

79 and perineal sepsis due to ileal pouch-anal anastomotic leaks frequently results in pouch loss.

80 diation developed a significant incidence of anastomotic leak (>60%; p<0.01) when colonized by P. aer

81 Anastomotic leak has a large overall effect on 30-day cl

82 any of 5 common complications (wound, chest, anastomotic leak, hemorrhage, and cardiac event).

83 incidence of respiratory failure, pneumonia, anastomotic leak, ileus, or urinary retention.

84 ly postoperative cholangiography revealed an anastomotic leak in 4.6% of patients and extravasation a

85 mpair wound healing and increase the risk of anastomotic leak in colon surgery.

86 e tissue destructive phenotype and prevented anastomotic leak in rats.

87 We developed a novel model of anastomotic leak in which rats were exposed to pre-opera

88 clinical trends in permanent stoma rates and anastomotic leaks in favor of LC but with an increased p

89 Only three patients had anastomotic leaks in the most recent 164 procedures (1.8

90 Abscess/anastomotic leak increased time to adjuvant chemotherapy

91 bosis, hemorrhage, pseudoaneurysm formation, anastomotic leaks, intra-abdominal infections, and, al.

92 Anastomotic leak is a potentially devastating complicati

93 Anastomotic leak is still one of the most devastating co

94 Anastomotic leak is still the most dreaded complication

95 b group (bronchopleural fistula, oesophageal anastomotic leak, lung infection, sudden death, and deat

96 Complications included esophagogastric anastomotic leak (n = 15, 36%), which uniformly resolved

97 l stents (61 PSEMS, 15 FSEMS, 7 SEPS) for an anastomotic leak (n=32), iatrogenic rupture (n=13), Boer

98 n rate, grade III/IV morbidity, reoperation, anastomotic leak, nodes retrieved, involved distal margi

99 re was no significant difference in rates of anastomotic leak, nonroutine discharges or readmission a

100 variables were independent risk factors for anastomotic leak: obesity [P = 0.003, odds ratio (OR) =

101 Anastomotic leak occurred in 16% of patients, 2% require

102 Anastomotic leaks occurred in 4 of 56 HVI patients (7%)

103 ing, and prevention of pelvic sepsis when an anastomotic leak occurs.

104 ere associated with a 24% increased risk for anastomotic leak (odds ratio, 1.24 [95% CI, 1.01-1.56];

105 There were 17 anastomotic leaks, of which 2 were on day 1 and were exc

106 Patients who had an anastomotic leak or intra-abdominal abscess were include

107 There were no anastomotic leaks or deaths.

108 e bowel obstruction, wound complications, or anastomotic leaks or died.

109 ary outcomes when stenting was performed for anastomotic leaks or perforations.

110 No anastomotic leaks or strictures occurred in the patients

111 formation but does not increase the rate of anastomotic leaks or the length of hospital stay after l

112 wound dehiscence (OR = 0.43, P = 0.001), and anastomotic leak (OR = 0.53, P < 0.001).

113 rgan space infection (OR = 0.59, P = 0.005), anastomotic leak (OR = 0.53, P = 0.002).

114 t, was independently associated with reduced anastomotic leak (OR = 0.57, 95% CI: 0.35-0.94), SSI (OR

115 psis (OR = 2.18 [1.50-3.16], P < 0.001); and anastomotic leak (OR = 1.32 [1.02-1.71], P = 0.03).

116 medical complications (OR = 13.2, RR = 2.5), anastomotic leak (OR = 13.7, RR = 3.3), reoperations (OR

117 between standard and prolonged TTS regarding anastomotic leak (P = 0.596), conduit necrosis (P = 0.52

118 as no difference in conversion (P = 0.2835), anastomotic leak (P = 0.8342), or mortality (P = 0.5680)

119 mortality (15.2% vs 1.9% in patients without anastomotic leak, P < 0.0001) and length of hospitalizat

120 ere was no significant difference in risk of anastomotic leak, pneumonia, nasogastric tube reinsertio

121 ciated with a reduction in wound dehiscence, anastomotic leak, pneumonia, prolonged requirement of me

122 ses were performed to synthesize outcomes of anastomotic leaks, pneumonia, nasogastric tube reinserti

123 ial SSI, deep SSI, organ space SSI, any SSI, anastomotic leak, postoperative ileus, sepsis, readmissi

124 It has been hypothesized that anastomotic leak predisposes rectal cancer patients to l

125 he risk of multiple complications, including anastomotic leaks, pulmonary complications, technical co

126 There was no difference in anastomotic leak rate (8.1% HL vs 6.7% LL).

127 The anastomotic leak rate in patients who received an anasto

128 MBP+/ABX+ was also associated with lower anastomotic leak rate than no-prep [OR = 0.45 (95% CI: 0

129 Anastomotic leak rate was 11.7% (n = 26).

130 Overall anastomotic leak rate was 12.3% in the intrathoracic ana

131 deviation 7.01), 30-day mortality was 1.5%, anastomotic leak rate was 3.1%.

132 The short-term anastomotic leak rate was 8%.

133 The anastomotic leak rate was 8.7%, and widely varied betwee

134 ains an issue related to functional outcome, anastomotic leak rate, and oncological adequacy.

135 Secondary outcomes were overall anastomotic leak rate, other postoperative complications

136 HL does not seem to increase the anastomotic leak rate.

137 agement has improved outcomes as measured by anastomotic leak rates and colon related mortality.

138 Anastomotic leak rates increased from 11.7% to 13.1%, wh

139 pneumonia and key quality metrics, but with anastomotic leak rates still >10%.

140 derwent oesophagogastrectomy, post-operative anastomotic leak rates were higher in the chemotherapy p

141 no significant difference was seen in SSI or anastomotic leak rates, but there was a significant redu

142 e [MD], -1.1 LN; 95% CI, -2.45 to 0.25 LNs), anastomotic leak (RD, 0.0; 95% CI, -0.03 to 0.03), EBL (

143 mph node [LN] harvest), short-term outcomes (anastomotic leak, recurrent laryngeal nerve [RLN] palsy,

144 stomosis is a common surgical procedure, but anastomotic leaks remain significant postoperative compl

145 ts traditionally considered at high risk for anastomotic leak remains unclear.

146 ant chemoradiation is used, the incidence of anastomotic leaks remains unacceptably high ( approximat

147 tal are all important determining factors of anastomotic leak risk.

148 erval (CI) 0.46-0.56, P < 0.00001, I = 13%], anastomotic leak (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.55-0.70, P < 0.00001

149 to the determine impact of severe esophageal anastomotic leak (SEAL) upon long-term survival and loco

150 n were pelvic abscesses (seven patients) and anastomotic leaks (seven patients).

151 Anastomotic leak significantly increased mortality (15.2

152 ic stents in the management of postoperative anastomotic leaks, spontaneous esophageal perforations,

153 Follow-up complications include anastomotic leak, staple-line disruption, stomal stenosi

154 paration (no-prep) on outcomes, particularly anastomotic leak, surgical site infection (SSI), and ile

155 organ space infection, wound dehiscence, and anastomotic leak than no preparation and a lower rate of

156 Five patients (3.5%) had a documented anastomotic leak; three died).

157 ne required a prolonged hospital stay for an anastomotic leak; two (18%) temporarily suffered delayed

158 ormed for plastic versus metallic stents and anastomotic leaks versus perforations separately.

159 The incidence of clinical anastomotic leak was 3.5%.

160 or permanent stoma creation, while only free anastomotic leak was associated with an increased incide

161 Anastomotic leak was associated with the incidence of en

162 e negative predictive value in ruling out an anastomotic leak was at least 96.9% for CRP alone (96.9%

163 Anastomotic leak was correlated with the requirement for

164 Anastomotic leak was defined as radiographic demonstrati

165 The rate of postoperative anastomotic leak was similar between groups.

166 Anastomotic leak was the most commonly reported morbidit

167 The overall 90-day rate of anastomotic leaks was 4.3% for all patients (151 patient

168 djuvant treatment, distance from anal verge, anastomotic leak) were collected.

169 -stage procedures did not change the risk of anastomotic leak when all operations were taken into acc

170 omy had an increased incidence of pancreatic anastomotic leak, whereas those who received preoperativ

171 resent early after esophageal perforation or anastomotic leak with limited mediastinal or pleural con

172 incisional hernia in 5 patients (1.8%), and anastomotic leak with peritonitis in 14 patients (5.1%).

173 Complications included anastomotic leaks with peritonitis and death, fatal pulm

174 for the treatment of esophageal ruptures and anastomotic leaks with special emphasis on different ste

175 , intraabdominal abscess, pancreaticojejunal anastomotic leak, wound infection, and postoperative dea