Browsing by Author "Azizoglu, Mustafa"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3

Citation - WoS: 1
Citation - Scopus: 1
Comparison of Single-Incision Laparoscopic Percutaneous and Cystoscope Forceps Assisted Morgagni Hernia Repair Techniques
(W. B. Saunders Co-Elsevier Inc, 2024) Okur, Mehmet Hanifi; Aydogdu, Bahattin; Azizoglu, Mustafa; Arslan, Serkan; Bayram, Salih; Basuguy, Erol
Objective: Our goal was to compare single-incision laparoscopic percutaneous and cystoscope forcepsassisted Morgagni hernia repair techniques. Materials and methods: A total of 40 patients were allocated to two groups, each with 20 patients. Group 1: Single incision (port) laparoscopic surgical percutaneous Morgagni hernia repair (with a 5 mm Storz laparoscopic scope entered through the umbilicus). Group 2: Single incision (port) laparoscopic surgical percutaneous Morgagni hernia repair (with an 11 Fr [3.6 mm] cystoscope entered through the umbilicus + using forceps + sac plication, and sac cauterization). In Group 1; the sac was not removed. In group 2; we advanced the forceps through the cystoscope, caught the sac, pushed the needle through the sac, plicated the sac, and then cauterized the sac with Bugbee electrode. Results: Of the 40 patients, 70 % (n 1 / 4 28) were male. The symptoms at admission included repeated chest infections (40 %), dyspnea (30 %), vomiting (22 %), and abdominal pain (22 %). No difference was found between groups in terms of age, gender symptomatology, or associated anomalies. The operation time was shorter in group 2 compared to group 1 (p < 0.05; 25 min vs 40 min). Although there was one recurrence in Group 1, no recurrence was reported in Group 2. The recurrence incidence did not differ between groups (p > 0.05). Conclusions: Cystoscope-assisted repair of Morgagni hernia was found to be superior in terms of safety and shorter operation time. Level of evidence: Type III. Type of the study: Retrospective study. (c) 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Citation - WoS: 9
Citation - Scopus: 10
Laparoscopic versus open portoenterostomy for treatment of biliary atresia: a meta-analysis
(SpringerLink, 2023) Bilici, Salim; Mehmet Hanif Okur, Bahattin Aydoğdu, Mustafa Azizoğlu, Salim Bilici, Salih Bayram, Fikret Salik; Azizoglu, Mustafa; Aydogdu, Bahattin; Salik, Fikret; Okur, Mehmet Hanifi; Bayram, Salih
Abstract Objective Our goal was to compare laparoscopic portoenterostomy versus open portoenterostomy for the treatment of biliary atresia. Materials and methods Using the databases EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane, we carried out a thorough literature search up to 2022. Studies comparing laparoscopic and open surgery for the treatment of biliary atresia were included. Results Twenty-three studies comparing laparoscopic portoenterostomy (LPE) (n=689) and open portoenterostomy (OPE) (n=818) were considered appropriate for meta-analysis. Age at surgery time was lower in the LPE group than OPE group (I 2=84%), (WMD − 4.70, 95% CI − 9.14 to − 0.26; P=0.04). Signifcantly decreased blood loss (I 2=94%), (WMD − 17.85, 95% CI − 23.67 to − 12.02; P<0.00001) and time to feed were found in the laparoscopic group (I 2=97%), (WMD − 2.88, 95% CI − 4.71 to − 1.04; P=0.002). Signifcantly decreased operative time was found in the open group (I 2=85%), (WMD 32.52, 95% CI 15.65–49.39; P=0.0002). Weight, transfusion rate, overall complication rate, cholangitis, time to drain removal, length of stay, jaundice clearance, and two-year transplant-free survival were not signifcantly diferent across the groups. Conclusions Laparoscopic portoenterostomy provides advantages regarding operative bleeding and the time to begin feeding. No diferences in remain characteristics. Based on the data presented to us by this meta-analysis, LPE is not superior to OPE in terms of overall results.
The Performance of the Inflammatory Indexes in Predicting Double J Catheter Insertion Necessity Among Children and Adult Patients With Ureteral Stone
(Reial Acad Medicina Illes Balears, 2023) Azizoglu, Mustafa; Sagir, Suleyman
Objective: The present study was designed to examine the differences in NLR, PLR, and PNLR between two distinct patient groups, further examining their utility as diagnostic markers.Materials and methods: Patients were then separated into two categories: Group 1 (those not require DJ catheter insertion) and Group 2 (those needed DJ catheter insertion). Factors such as patient age, gender, symptoms, diagnosis, hematological parameters, and some indexes (NLR, PLR, and PNLR) were thoroughly assessed.Results: The research study featured 150 participants, split into two groups of 80 (Group 1) and 70 (Group 2) individuals. Despite average age differences, the distribution of ages was statistically significant. Group 1 had more children, while Group 2 contained more adults. Gender distribution between groups was not significantly different. Group 2 had larger mean stone sizes than Group 1. Stone location showed no significant variation between the groups. WBC and NEU were higher in Group 2, while LYM was higher in Group 1. There was no significant difference in MONO, PLT, and urea levels, but CRE level was higher in Group 2. NLR, PLR, and PNLR were also significantly higher in Group 2. Cut-off values for NLR, PLR, and PNLR had moderate to good predictive abilities. There was a positive correlation between stone size and PNLR index.Conclusions: Our study demonstrates the predictive utility of hematological parameters (NLR, PLR, PNLR) in determining the need for DJ catheter placement in ureteral stone patients.