Domains of physical activity and all-cause mortality: systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of cohort studies

Background The dose–response relation between physical activity and all-cause mortality is not well defined at present. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the association with all-cause mortality of different domains of physical activity and of defined increases in physical activity and energy expenditure. Methods MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched up to September 2010 for cohort studies examining all-cause mortality across different domains and levels of physical activity in adult general populations. We estimated combined risk ratios (RRs) associated with defined increments and recommended levels, using random-effects meta-analysis and dose–response meta-regression models. Results Data from 80 studies with 1 338 143 participants (118 121 deaths) were included. Combined RRs comparing highest with lowest activity levels were 0.65 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.60–0.71] for total activity, 0.74 (95% CI 0.70–0.77) for leisure activity, 0.64 (95% CI 0.55–0.75) for activities of daily living and 0.83 (95% CI 0.71–0.97) for occupational activity. RRs per 1-h increment per week were 0.91 (95% CI 0.87–0.94) for vigorous exercise and 0.96 (95% CI 0.93–0.98) for moderate-intensity activities of daily living. RRs corresponding to 150 and 300 min/week of moderate to vigorous activity were 0.86 (95% CI 0.80–0.92) and 0.74 (95% CI 0.65–0.85), respectively. Mortality reductions were more pronounced in women. Conclusion Higher levels of total and domain-specific physical activity were associated with reduced all-cause mortality. Risk reduction per unit of time increase was largest for vigorous exercise. Moderate-intensity activities of daily living were to a lesser extent beneficial in reducing mortality.

What happens to the bone flap? Long-term outcome after reimplantation of cryoconserved bone flaps in a consecutive series of 92 patients.

BACKGROUND Reimplantation of cryoconserved autologous bone flaps is a standard procedure after decompressive craniotomies. Aseptic necrosis and resorption are the most frequent complications of this procedure. At present there is no consensus regarding the definition of the relevant extent and indication for surgical revision. The objective of this retrospective analysis was to identify the incidence of bone flap resorption and the optimal duration of follow-up. METHODS Between February 2009 and March 2012, 100 cryoconserved autologous bone flaps were reimplanted at the Department of Neurosurgery, Inselspital Bern. Three patients were not available for follow-up, and five patients died before follow-up. All patients underwent follow-up at 6 weeks and a second follow-up more than 12 months postoperatively. A clinical and CT-based score was developed for judgment of relevance and decision making for surgical revision. RESULTS Mean follow-up period was 21.6 months postoperatively (range: 12 to 47 months); 48.9 % (45/92) of patients showed no signs of bone flap resorption, 20.7 % (19/92) showed minor resorption with no need for surgical revision, and 30.4 % (28/92) showed major resorption (in 4 % of these the bone flap was unstable or collapsed). CONCLUSIONS Aseptic necrosis and resorption of reimplanted autologous bone flaps occurred more frequently in our series of patients than in most reports in the literature. Most cases were identified between 6 and 12 months postoperatively. Clinical observation or CT scans of patients with autologous bone flaps are recommended for at least 12 months. Patient-specific implants may be preferable to autologous bone flaps.

Laparoscopic approach in perforated appendicitis: increased incidence of surgical site infection?

BACKGROUND: The role of laparoscopy in the setting of perforated appendicitis remains controversial. A retrospective study was conducted to evaluate the early postoperative outcomes of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) compared to open appendectomy (OA) in patients with perforated appendicitis. METHODS: A total of 1,032 patients required an appendectomy between January 2005 and December 2009. Among these patients, 169 presented with perforated appendicitis. Operation times, length of hospital stay, overall complication rates within 30 days, and surgical site infection (SSI) rates were analyzed. RESULTS: Out of the 169 evaluated patients, 106 required LA and 63 OA. Although operation times were similar in both groups (92 ± 31 min for LA vs. 98 ± 45 for OA, p = 0.338), length of hospital stay was shorter in the LA group (6.9 ± 3.8 days vs. 11.5 ± 9.2, p < 0.001). Overall complication rates were significantly lower in the LA group (32.1 vs. 52.4 %, p < 0.001), as were incisional SSI (1.9 vs. 22.2 %, p < 0.001). Organ/space SSI rates were similar in both groups (23.6 % after LA vs. 20.6 % after OA, p = 0.657). CONCLUSIONS: For perforated appendicitis, LA results in a significantly shorter hospital stay, fewer overall postoperative complications, and fewer wound infections compared to OA. Organ/space SSI rates were similar for both procedures. LA provides a safe option for treating patients with perforated appendicitis.