http://repub.eur.nl/res/aut/50115/ List of Publications en http://repub.eur.nl/static-eur/img/logo.png http://repub.eur.nl http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/33740/ 2011-11-01T00:00:00Z Background: Several studies have been published on the matter of abdominal aortic and iliac calcifications and the association to clinical entities such as diabetes mellitus and renal failure. However, comparing of these studies is questionable since quantification methods for atherosclerosis differ. Purpose: To evaluate the effect of image acquisition settings, reconstruction parameters, and analysis methods on calcium quantification in the abdominal aorta. Material and Methods: Calcium scores were retrospectively determined on standardized abdominal CT scans of 15 patients. Two researchers obtained calcium scores with 10 different lower thresholds (LT) (130, 145, 160, 175, 200, 300, 400, 500, 600, 1000) in CT scans with and without contrast enhancement, with slice thicknesses (ST) varying between 2.0-5.0 mm for the non-contrast-enhanced series and between 1.0-5.0 mm for the contrast-enhanced series. In addition calcium scores obtained with two convolution kernels (B10f, B20f) were compared. Inter-observer variability was calculated. Results: Calcium scoring at higher STs is overestimated compared to smaller STs and this effect was more pronounced with increasing calcium loads. Concerning the convolution kernel, scores obtained with kernel B10f were overestimated compared to kernel B20f. Increase of LT resulted in a decrease of the calcium score and scoring in contrast-enhanced series resulted in higher scores compared to non-contrast-enhanced series. These effects are more apparent in patients with higher calcium loads. Calcium scoring reproducibility with the reference standard is limited for the aorta-iliac trajectory, whereas scoring with the remaining settings is reproducible. Conclusion: Scores obtained with different settings cannot be compared. The inter-observer reproducibility was limited using the reference standard and practical difficulties were substantial. Scoring with higher LT, ST, and contrast enhancement is faster and has less practical difficulties. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/33411/ 2011-06-01T00:00:00Z Objective: The objective of the study was to determine the long-term effect of the use of a hyaluronic acid-carboxymethylcellulose membrane (Seprafilm) on the incidence of adhesions and subsequent small-bowel obstruction and chronic abdominal complaints after colorectal surgery (Hartmanns procedure). Background: Adhesions occur frequently after abdominal surgery and are the most common cause of bowel obstruction, chronic abdominal pain, and infertility. The risk for adhesion-related readmission in the first 10 years after colorectal surgery is as high as 30%. To reduce the formation of adhesions, a mechanical barrier composed of hyaluronic acid and carboxymethylcellulose was developed, to prevent adherence of tissues after abdominal surgery. Long-term results concerning the incidence of small-bowel obstruction and chronic abdominal pain are lacking. Methods: Between April 1996 and September 1998, 71 patients requiring Hartmanns procedure for sigmoid diverticulitis or obstructed rectosigmoid were randomized to either intraperitoneal placement of Seprafilm under the midline and in the pelvis or as a control. Direct visual evaluation of the incidence and severity of adhesions was performed laparoscopically in 42 patients at second-stage surgery for restoration of the continuity of the colon. The results of this study were published in 2002. In 2006, the patients general practitioners were interviewed by means of a questionnaire concerning their patients health. The patients who were still alive were interviewed and asked to fill out 2 questionnaires concerning pain and quality of life (VAS-pain score, EQ-5D, and SF-36). In 2009, the medical records of the patients were evaluated for adhesion-related hospital re-admissions. Results: Of the 42 evaluated patients, 35 (16 in the Seprafilm group, 19 in the control group) could be enrolled in the long-term follow-up. Median follow-up was 126 months (range 41-148) for the Seprafilm group and 128 months (range 49-149) months for the control group. Incidence of chronic (3 months or longer existing) abdominal complaints was significantly lower in the Seprafilm group compared with controls (35.3% vs. 77.8%, respectively; P = 0.018). Incidence of small-bowel obstruction showed no significant difference in favor of the Seprafilm group; no small-bowel obstructions occurred in the Seprafilm group, whereas in the control group 2 cases of small-bowel obstruction were found to have occurred. Evaluation of the quality of life questionnaires did not reveal significant differences between the 2 groups. Conclusions: In Hartmanns procedure, Seprafilm placement does not provide protection against small-bowel obstruction. Incidence of chronic abdominal complaints is significantly lower after use of Seprafilm.