<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>

<rdf:RDF
 xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
 xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/"
 xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/"
 xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
 xmlns:syn="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
 xmlns:prism="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/prism/"
 xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
>

<channel rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org">
<title>Archives of Surgery current issue</title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org</link>
<description>Archives of Surgery is an influential peer-reviewed monthly general surgery journal able to represent a full range of regional and specialty interests as the official publication of the New England Surgical Society, the Pacific Coast Surgical Association, the Surgical Infection Society, and the Western Surgical Association.</description>
<prism:coverDisplayDate>Jan  1 2010 12:00:00:000AM</prism:coverDisplayDate>
<prism:publicationName>Archives of Surgery</prism:publicationName>
<prism:issn>0004-0010</prism:issn>
<items>
 <rdf:Seq>
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/6?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/8?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/9?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/10?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/12?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/17?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/19?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/28?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/34?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/40?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/41?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/42?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/47?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/49?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/56?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/57?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/63?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/71?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/72?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/79?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/87?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/92?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/96?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/98?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/99?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/100?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/101?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/102?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/103?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/103-a?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/103-b?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/104?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/104-a?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/105?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/105-a?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/106?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/107?rss=1" />
 </rdf:Seq>
</items>
<image rdf:resource="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/icons/misc/titlereprint.gif" />
</channel>

<image rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/icons/misc/titlereprint.gif">
<title>Archives of Surgery</title>
<url>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/icons/misc/titlereprint.gif</url>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org</link>
</image>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/6?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[About This Journal [About This Journal]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/6?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:24 PST</dc:date>
<dc:title><![CDATA[About This Journal [About This Journal]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>6</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>6</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>About This Journal</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/8?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Our 5 Years of Achievements [Editorial]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/8?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Freischlag, J. A.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:24 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Journalology/ Peer Review/ Authorship, Surgery, Surgery, Other]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.245</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Our 5 Years of Achievements [Editorial]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>8</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>8</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Editorial</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/9?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[A Cautionary Note Regarding Safety of Thyroidectomy in the Elderly [From the Archives]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/9?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sosa, J. A.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:24 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Aging/ Geriatrics, Otolaryngology/ Head & Neck Surgery, Endocrine Disease of Head & Neck, Surgery, Surgical Interventions, Endocrine Surgery, Prognosis/ Outcomes, Endocrine Diseases, Thyroid/ Parathyroid Diseases]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.235</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[A Cautionary Note Regarding Safety of Thyroidectomy in the Elderly [From the Archives]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>10</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>9</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>From the Archives</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/10?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Error in Table in: Risk Factors for Recurrence After Repair of Enterocutaneous Fistula [Correction]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/10?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:24 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Surgery, Surgical Interventions, Colorectal Surgery, Gastroenterology, Gastrointestinal Diseases]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.196</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Error in Table in: Risk Factors for Recurrence After Repair of Enterocutaneous Fistula [Correction]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>10</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>10</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Correction</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/12?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Association Between a High Number of Isolated Lymph Nodes in T1 to T4 N0M0 Colorectal Cancer and the Microsatellite Instability Phenotype [Original Article]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/12?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p><b>Hypothesis&nbsp;</b> Stage I or II colorectal carcinomas with microsatellite instability (MSI) are characterized by more isolated lymph nodes in the resected specimen than their counterparts with microsatellite stability (MSS).</p>
<p><b>Design&nbsp;</b> Prospective study.</p>
<p><b>Setting&nbsp;</b> Academic research.</p>
<p><b>Patients&nbsp;</b> Using a pentaplex polymerase chain reaction assay, MSI status was determined prospectively for 135 operative patients.</p>
<p><b>Main Outcome Measures&nbsp;</b> Mismatch repair defects were investigated by immunohistochemistry on tumors demonstrating MSI.</p>
<p><b>Results&nbsp;</b> Among 82 stage I or II colorectal carcinomas, 11 had MSI, and 71 had MSS, with a mean (SD) number of 23.6 (3.1) and 13.7 (1.0) negative lymph nodes, respectively (<I>P</I>&nbsp;=&nbsp;.001). The mean number of lymph nodes for all resected stage I or II colorectal carcinomas analyzed at our hospital was 15. The prevalence of MSI among tumors with more than 15 lymph nodes in the specimen was 25% (9 of 36), and 82% (9 of 11) of MSI tumors belonged to this group.</p>
<p><b>Conclusions&nbsp;</b> A high number of isolated lymph nodes in stage I or II colorectal carcinomas was associated with the MSI phenotype. Good prognosis that is usually associated with tumors having a high number of uninvolved lymph nodes might reflect the high prevalence of MSI among these tumors. The number of examined lymph nodes as a quality criterion should be used with caution. For stage I or stage II colorectal carcinomas, restricting MSI phenotyping to tumors with more than the mean number of lymph nodes identifies almost all MSI tumors.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Eveno, C., Nemeth, J., Soliman, H., Praz, F., de The, H., Valleur, P., Talbot, I. C., Pocard, M.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:24 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Oncology, Colon Cancer, Surgery, Surgical Interventions, Colorectal Surgery, Surgical Oncology, Prognosis/ Outcomes, Gastroenterology, Gastrointestinal Diseases]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.224</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Association Between a High Number of Isolated Lymph Nodes in T1 to T4 N0M0 Colorectal Cancer and the Microsatellite Instability Phenotype [Original Article]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>17</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>12</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/17?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Advances in the Relationship Between Lymph Node Status and Prognosis: Comment on "Association Between a High Number of Isolated Lymph Nodes in T1 to T4 N0M0 Colorectal Cancer and the Microsatellite Instability" [Invited Critique]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/17?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Berho, M., Wexner, S. D.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:24 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Oncology, Colon Cancer, Surgery, Surgical Interventions, Colorectal Surgery, Surgical Oncology, Prognosis/ Outcomes, Gastroenterology, Gastrointestinal Diseases]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.220</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Advances in the Relationship Between Lymph Node Status and Prognosis: Comment on "Association Between a High Number of Isolated Lymph Nodes in T1 to T4 N0M0 Colorectal Cancer and the Microsatellite Instability" [Invited Critique]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>18</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>17</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Invited Critique</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/19?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Total Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy: Feasibility and Outcome in an Early Experience [Original Article]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/19?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p><b>Hypothesis&nbsp;</b> Total laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy is a safe and effective therapeutic approach.</p>
<p><b>Design&nbsp;</b> Single-institutional retrospective review.</p>
<p><b>Setting&nbsp;</b> Tertiary referral center.</p>
<p><b>Patients&nbsp;</b> All consecutive patients undergoing total laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy from July 2007 through July 2009 at a single center (n&nbsp;=&nbsp;62).</p>
<p><b>Main Outcome Measures&nbsp;</b> Blood loss, operative time, postoperative morbidity, length of hospital stay, and 30-day or in-hospital mortality.</p>
<p><b>Results&nbsp;</b> Of 65 patients undergoing laparoscopic resection, 62 patients with a mean age of 66 years (SD, 12 years) underwent total laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy. The pancreaticojejunostomy consisted of a duct-to-mucosa anastomosis with interrupted suture. Median operative time was 368 minutes (range, 258-608 minutes) and median blood loss was 240 mL (range, 30-1200 mL). Diagnosis was pancreatic adenocarcinoma (n&nbsp;=&nbsp;31), intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (n&nbsp;=&nbsp;12), periampullary adenocarcinoma (n&nbsp;=&nbsp;8), neuroendocrine tumor (n&nbsp;=&nbsp;4), chronic pancreatitis (n&nbsp;=&nbsp;3), cholangiocarcinoma (n&nbsp;=&nbsp;1), metastatic renal cell carcinoma (n&nbsp;=&nbsp;1), cystadenoma (n&nbsp;=&nbsp;1), and duodenal adenoma (n&nbsp;=&nbsp;1). Median tumor size was 3 cm (range, 0.9-10.0 cm) and the median number of lymph nodes harvested was 15 (range, 6-31). Perioperative morbidity occurred in 26 patients and included pancreatic fistula (n&nbsp;=&nbsp;11), delayed gastric emptying (n&nbsp;=&nbsp;9), bleeding (n&nbsp;=&nbsp;5), and deep vein thrombosis (n&nbsp;=&nbsp;2). There was 1 postoperative mortality. Median length of hospital stay was 7 days (range, 4-69 days).</p>
<p><b>Conclusions&nbsp;</b> Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy is feasible, safe, and effective. Outcomes appear comparable with those via the open approach; however, controlled trials are needed. Despite this series representing experience within the learning curve, laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy holds promise for providing advantages seen with minimally invasive approaches in other procedures.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kendrick, M. L., Cusati, D.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:24 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Surgery, Surgical Interventions, Endocrine Surgery, Endoscopy/ Minimally Invasive Surgery]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.243</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Total Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy: Feasibility and Outcome in an Early Experience [Original Article]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>23</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>19</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/28?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Prospective Randomized Trial of LC+LCBDE vs ERCP/S+LC for Common Bile Duct Stone Disease [Original Article]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/28?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p><b>Objective&nbsp;</b> To compare outcome parameters for good-risk patients with classic signs, symptoms, and laboratory and abdominal imaging features of cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis randomized to either laparoscopic cholecystectomy plus laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LC+LCBDE) or endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography sphincterotomy plus laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ERCP/S+LC).</p>
<p><b>Design&nbsp;</b> Our study was a prospective trial conducted following written informed consent, with randomization by the serially numbered, opaque envelope technique.</p>
<p><b>Setting&nbsp;</b> Our institution is an academic teaching hospital and the central receiving and trauma center for the City and County of San Francisco, California.</p>
<p><b>Patients&nbsp;</b> We randomized 122 patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1 or 2) meeting entry criteria. Ten of these patients, excluded from outcome analysis, were protocol violators having signed out of the hospital against medical advice before 1 or both procedures were completed.</p>
<p><b>Interventions&nbsp;</b> Treatment was preoperative ERCP/S followed by LC, or LC+LCBDE.</p>
<p><b>Main Outcome Measures&nbsp;</b> The primary outcome measure was efficacy of stone clearance from the common bile duct. Secondary end points were length of hospital stay, cost of index hospitalization, professional fees, hospital charges, morbidity and mortality, and patient acceptance and quality of life scores.</p>
<p><b>Results&nbsp;</b> The baseline characteristics of the 2 randomized groups were similar. Efficacy of stone clearance was likewise equivalent for both groups. The time from first procedure to discharge was significantly shorter for LC+LCBDE (mean [SD], 55 [45] hours vs 98 [83] hours; <I>P</I>&nbsp;&lt;&nbsp;.001). Hospital service and total charges for index hospitalization were likewise lower for LC+LCBDE, but the differences were not statistically significant. The professional fee charges for LC+LCBDE were significantly lower than those for ERCP/S+LC (median [SD], $4820 [1637] vs $6139 [1583]; <I>P</I>&nbsp;&lt;&nbsp;.001). Patient acceptance and quality of life scores were equivalent for both groups.</p>
<p><b>Conclusions&nbsp;</b> Both ERCP/S+LC and LC+LCBDE were highly effective in detecting and removing common bile duct stones and were equivalent in overall cost and patient acceptance. However, the overall duration of hospitalization was shorter and physician fees lower for LC+LCBDE.</p>
<p><b>Trial Registration&nbsp;</b> clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: <inter-ref locator-type="url" locator="http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT00807729">NCT00807729</inter-ref></p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rogers, S. J., Cello, J. P., Horn, J. K., Siperstein, A. E., Schecter, W. P., Campbell, A. R., Mackersie, R. C., Rodas, A., Kreuwel, H. T. C., Harris, H. W.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:24 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Surgery, Surgical Interventions, Endoscopy/ Minimally Invasive Surgery, Randomized Controlled Trial, Prognosis/ Outcomes, Hepatobiliary Surgery, Gastroenterology, Liver/ Biliary Tract/ Pancreatic Diseases]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.226</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Prospective Randomized Trial of LC+LCBDE vs ERCP/S+LC for Common Bile Duct Stone Disease [Original Article]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>33</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>28</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/34?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Malignant and Benign Lesions: Ten-Year Norwegian Single-Center Experience [Original Article]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/34?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p><b>Background&nbsp;</b> The introduction of laparoscopic liver resection has been challenging because new and safe surgical techniques have had to be developed, and skepticism remains about the use of laparoscopy for malignant neoplasms. We present herein a large-volume single-center experience with laparoscopic liver resection.</p>
<p><b>Design&nbsp;</b> Retrospective study.</p>
<p><b>Setting&nbsp;</b> Rikshospitalet University Hospital.</p>
<p><b>Patients&nbsp;</b> One hundred thirty-nine patients who underwent 177 laparoscopic liver resections in 149 procedures from August 18, 1998, through October 14, 2008. One hundred thirteen patients had malignant lesions, of whom 96 had colorectal metastases.</p>
<p><b>Intervention&nbsp;</b> Laparoscopic liver resection for malignant and benign lesions.</p>
<p><b>Main Outcome Measures&nbsp;</b> Perioperative and oncologic outcomes and survival.</p>
<p><b>Results&nbsp;</b> Five procedures (3.4%) were converted to laparotomy and 1 (0.7%) to laparoscopic radiofrequency ablation. The remaining 143 procedures were completed laparoscopically, during which 177 liver resections were undertaken, including 131 nonanatomic and 46 anatomic resections. The median operative time and blood loss were 164 (50-488) minutes and 350 (&lt;50-4000) mL, respectively. There were 10 intraoperative (6.7%) and 18 postoperative (12.6%) complications. One patient (0.7%) died. The median postoperative stay and opioid requirement were 3 (1-42) and 1 (0-11) days, respectively. Tumor-free resection margins determined by histopathologic evaluation were achieved in 140 of 149 malignant specimens (94.0%). The 5-year actuarial survival for patients undergoing procedures for colorectal metastases was 46%.</p>
<p><b>Conclusions&nbsp;</b> In experienced hands, laparoscopic liver resection is a favorable alternative to open resection. Perioperative morbidity and mortality and long-term survival after laparoscopic resection of colorectal metastases appear to be comparable to those after open resections.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kazaryan, A. M., Pavlik Marangos, I., Rosseland, A. R., Rosok, B. I., Mala, T., Villanger, O., Mathisen, O., Giercksky, K.-E., Edwin, B.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:24 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Oncology, Oncology, Other, Surgery, Surgical Interventions, Endoscopy/ Minimally Invasive Surgery, Surgical Oncology, Prognosis/ Outcomes, Hepatobiliary Surgery, Gastroenterology, Liver/ Biliary Tract/ Pancreatic Diseases]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.229</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Malignant and Benign Lesions: Ten-Year Norwegian Single-Center Experience [Original Article]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>40</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>34</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/40?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Small Incision, Big Surgeon: Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Tumors Without a Doubt: Comment on "Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Malignant and Benign Lesions: Ten-Year Norwegian Single-Center Experience" [Invited Critique]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/40?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Gagner, M.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:24 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Oncology, Oncology, Other, Surgery, Surgical Interventions, Endoscopy/ Minimally Invasive Surgery, Surgical Oncology, Prognosis/ Outcomes, Hepatobiliary Surgery, Gastroenterology, Liver/ Biliary Tract/ Pancreatic Diseases]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.225</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Small Incision, Big Surgeon: Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Tumors Without a Doubt: Comment on "Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Malignant and Benign Lesions: Ten-Year Norwegian Single-Center Experience" [Invited Critique]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>41</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>40</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Invited Critique</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/41?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Error in Author Affiliations in: Downwardly Mobile: the Accidental Cost of Being Uninsured [Correction]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/41?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:24 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Medical Practice, Caring for the Uninsured and Underinsured, Medical Practice, Other, Surgery, Surgery, Other, Prognosis/ Outcomes, Disparities in Health Care Theme Issue, Emergency Medicine]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.252</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Error in Author Affiliations in: Downwardly Mobile: the Accidental Cost of Being Uninsured [Correction]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>41</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>41</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Correction</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/42?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Recurrence and Impact of Postoperative Prophylaxis in Laparoscopically Treated Primary Ileocolic Crohn Disease [Original Article]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/42?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p><b>Objectives&nbsp;</b> To define risk factors for recurrence and to determine whether postoperative prophylaxis would influence time to recurrence after primary laparoscopic ileocolectomy for Crohn disease.</p>
<p><b>Design&nbsp;</b> Retrospective record review.</p>
<p><b>Setting&nbsp;</b> Tertiary academic medical center.</p>
<p><b>Patients&nbsp;</b> All patients who underwent primary laparoscopic ileocolectomy for terminal ileal Crohn disease between April 28, 1994, and August 3, 2006, at the Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.</p>
<p><b>Main Outcome Measures&nbsp;</b> All patients were reviewed for follow-up, recurrence, risk factors for recurrence, and use of postoperative immunosuppressive prophylaxis.</p>
<p><b>Results&nbsp;</b> One hundred nine patients were identified, of whom 89 were followed up postoperatively at Mayo Clinic with a median follow-up of 3.5 years (range, 1.8 months to 11.9 years). Recurrence was discovered in 54 patients (61%) at a median of 13.1 months (range, 1.3 months to 8.7 years). Forty-four patients (49%) received postoperative immunosuppressive prophylaxis (37 [42%] received azathioprine, 8 [9%] received 6-mercaptopurine, and 3 [3%] received infliximab). In a multivariate model of various risk factors for recurrence, presence of granulomas was the only significant predictor of recurrence (<I>P</I>&nbsp;=&nbsp;.01). The 2-year cumulative recurrence rates in the prophylaxis and nonprophylaxis groups were 37.5% and 52.6%, respectively (log-rank test, <I>P</I>&nbsp;=&nbsp;.87).</p>
<p><b>Conclusions&nbsp;</b> Recurrence occurred in more than half of the patients with Crohn disease after primary laparoscopic ileocolectomy. In this highly selected patient population, use of immunosuppressive prophylaxis was not associated with a delay in recurrence. Presence of granulomas was the only significant predictor of recurrence. These findings should be further explored in larger and less selected patient populations.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Malireddy, K., Larson, D. W., Sandborn, W. J., Loftus, E. V., Faubion, W. A., Pardi, D. S., Qin, R., Gullerud, R. E., Cima, R. R., Wolff, B., Dozois, E. J.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:24 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Surgery, Surgical Interventions, Colorectal Surgery, Endoscopy/ Minimally Invasive Surgery, Drug Therapy, Drug Therapy, Other, Gastroenterology, Gastrointestinal Diseases, Immunology, Immunology, Other]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.248</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Recurrence and Impact of Postoperative Prophylaxis in Laparoscopically Treated Primary Ileocolic Crohn Disease [Original Article]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>47</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>42</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/47?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Preventing Crohn Disease Recurrence With Drugs After Ileocolectomy: An Exercise in Futility?: Comment on "Recurrence and Impact of Postoperative Prophylaxis in Laparoscopically Treated Primary Ileocolic Crohn Disease" [Invited Critique]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/47?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dayton, M. T.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:24 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Surgery, Surgical Interventions, Colorectal Surgery, Endoscopy/ Minimally Invasive Surgery, Drug Therapy, Drug Therapy, Other, Gastroenterology, Gastrointestinal Diseases, Immunology, Immunology, Other]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.249</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Preventing Crohn Disease Recurrence With Drugs After Ileocolectomy: An Exercise in Futility?: Comment on "Recurrence and Impact of Postoperative Prophylaxis in Laparoscopically Treated Primary Ileocolic Crohn Disease" [Invited Critique]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>48</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>47</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Invited Critique</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/49?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Survival Effects of Adjuvant Chemoradiotherapy After Resection for Pancreatic Carcinoma [Original Article]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/49?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p><b>Background&nbsp;</b> The survival benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy alone or chemoradiotherapy in patients with pancreatic cancer who have undergone surgical resection remains unclear.</p>
<p><b>Objective&nbsp;</b> To identify the additional benefit of adjuvant therapy by retrospectively examining a large population-based registry of patients who underwent definitive surgical resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma.</p>
<p><b>Design and Setting&nbsp;</b> The Florida cancer registry and state inpatient and outpatient hospital data records were queried for pancreatic adenocarcinoma diagnosed between 1998 and 2002.</p>
<p><b>Patients&nbsp;</b> A total of 2877 patients who underwent surgical resection with curative intent for pancreatic adenocarcinoma were identified.</p>
<p><b>Main Outcome Measure&nbsp;</b> Overall survival time.</p>
<p><b>Results&nbsp;</b> Overall, 58.7% of patients were older than 65 years. Most patients were white (90.7%), were non-Hispanic (86.7%), and did not consume alcohol abusively (89.2%). Approximately half of the patients (51.9%) did not receive chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy. Approximately 25.0% of the patients underwent chemoradiotherapy, and 10.0% received chemotherapy alone. Patients were more frequently treated at low-volume centers (57.6%) and nonteaching facilities (72.8%). Multivariate analysis correcting for patient comorbidities demonstrated that postoperative chemoradiotherapy (hazard ratio&nbsp;=&nbsp;0.69, <I>P</I>&nbsp;=&nbsp;.04) and treatment at high-volume centers (hazard ratio&nbsp;=&nbsp;0.85, <I>P</I>&nbsp;&lt;&nbsp;.001) and teaching facilities (hazard ratio&nbsp;=&nbsp;0.84, <I>P</I>&nbsp;&lt;&nbsp;.001) were independent predictors of improved survival.</p>
<p><b>Conclusions&nbsp;</b> Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy was found to provide a significant additional survival benefit to surgical resection for patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Furthermore, this benefit is independent of the additional survival advantage when patients are treated at teaching facilities or high-volume centers. Although selection bias may be contributing to the observed differences, these data nonetheless support the use of adjuvant chemoradiotherapy for pancreatic cancer.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Yang, R., Cheung, M. C., Byrne, M. M., Jin, X., Montero, A. J., Jones, C., Koniaris, L. G.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:24 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Oncology, Oncology, Other, Radiation Therapy, Surgery, Surgical Interventions, Endocrine Surgery, Surgical Oncology, Drug Therapy, Drug Therapy, Other, Gastroenterology, Liver/ Biliary Tract/ Pancreatic Diseases]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.244</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Survival Effects of Adjuvant Chemoradiotherapy After Resection for Pancreatic Carcinoma [Original Article]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>56</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>49</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/56?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Is the Debate Finally Over?: Comment on "Survival Effects of Adjuvant Chemoradiation Following Chemoradiotherapy After Resection for Pancreatic Carcinoma" [Invited Critique]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/56?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ahuja, N.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:24 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Oncology, Oncology, Other, Radiation Therapy, Surgery, Surgical Interventions, Endocrine Surgery, Surgical Oncology, Drug Therapy, Drug Therapy, Other, Gastroenterology, Liver/ Biliary Tract/ Pancreatic Diseases]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.241</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Is the Debate Finally Over?: Comment on "Survival Effects of Adjuvant Chemoradiation Following Chemoradiotherapy After Resection for Pancreatic Carcinoma" [Invited Critique]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>56</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>56</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Invited Critique</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/57?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Decision Modeling to Estimate the Impact of Gastric Bypass Surgery on Life Expectancy for the Treatment of Morbid Obesity [Original Article]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/57?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p><b>Objective&nbsp;</b> To create a decision analytic model to estimate the balance between treatment risks and benefits for patients with morbid obesity.</p>
<p><b>Design&nbsp;</b> Decision analytic Markov state transition model with multiple logistic regression models as inputs. Data from the 2005 National Inpatient Survey were used to calculate in-hospital mortality risk associated with bariatric surgery and then adjusted for 30-day mortality. To calculate excess mortality associated with obesity, we used the 1991-1996 National Health Interview Survey linked to the National Death Index. Bariatric surgery was assumed to influence mortality only through its impact on the excess mortality associated with obesity, and the efficacy of surgery was estimated from a recent large observational trial.</p>
<p><b>Intervention&nbsp;</b> Gastric bypass surgery.</p>
<p><b>Main Outcome Measure&nbsp;</b> Life expectancy.</p>
<p><b>Results&nbsp;</b> Our base case, a 42-year-old woman with a body mass index of 45, gained an additional 2.95 years of life expectancy with bariatric surgery. No surgical treatment was favored in our base case when the 30-day surgical mortality exceeded 9.5% (baseline 30-day mortality, 0.2%) or when the efficacy of bariatric surgery for reducing mortality decreased to 2% or less (baseline efficacy, 53%).</p>
<p><b>Conclusions&nbsp;</b> The optimal decision for individual patients varies based on the balance of risk between perioperative mortality, excess annual mortality risk associated with increasing body mass index, and the efficacy of surgery; however, for the average morbidly obese patient, gastric bypass improves life expectancy.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Schauer, D. P., Arterburn, D. E., Livingston, E. H., Fischer, D., Eckman, M. H.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:24 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Public Health, Obesity, Surgery, Surgical Interventions, Bariatric Surgery, Gastrointestinal/ Upper Foregut, Surgical Interventions, Other]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.240</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Decision Modeling to Estimate the Impact of Gastric Bypass Surgery on Life Expectancy for the Treatment of Morbid Obesity [Original Article]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>62</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>57</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/63?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Association of Viral Infection and Appendicitis [Original Article]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/63?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p><b>Hypothesis&nbsp;</b> What causes appendicitis is not known; however, studies have suggested a relationship between viral diseases and appendicitis. Building on evidence of cyclic patterns of appendicitis with apparent outbreaks consistent with an infectious etiology, we hypothesized that there is a relationship between population rates of appendicitis and several infectious diseases.</p>
<p><b>Design&nbsp;</b> Epidemiologic study.</p>
<p><b>Setting&nbsp;</b> The National Hospital Discharge Survey</p>
<p><b>Patients&nbsp;</b> Estimated US hospitalized population.</p>
<p><b>Main Outcome Measures&nbsp;</b> <I>International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification</I> discharge diagnosis codes of the National Hospital Discharge Survey were queried from 1970 to 2006 to identify admissions for appendicitis, influenza, rotavirus, and enteric infections. Cointegration analysis of time series data was used to determine if the disease incidence trends for these various disease entities varied over time together.</p>
<p><b>Results&nbsp;</b> Rates of influenza and nonperforating appendicitis declined progressively from the late 1970s to 1995 and rose thereafter, but influenza rates exhibited more distinct seasonal variation than appendicitis rates. Rotavirus infection showed no association with the incidence of nonperforating appendicitis. Perforating appendicitis showed a dissimilar trend to both nonperforating appendicitis and viral infection. Hospital admissions for enteric infections substantially increased over the years but were not related to appendicitis cases.</p>
<p><b>Conclusions&nbsp;</b> Neither influenza nor rotavirus are likely proximate causes of appendicitis given the lack of a seasonal relationship between these disease entities. However, because of significant cointegration between the annual incidence rates of influenza and nonperforated appendicitis, it is possible that these diseases share common etiologic determinates, pathogenetic mechanisms, or environmental factors that similarly affect their incidence.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Alder, A. C., Fomby, T. B., Woodward, W. A., Haley, R. W., Sarosi, G., Livingston, E. H.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:24 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Viral Infections, Surgery, Surgical Interventions, Gastrointestinal/ Upper Foregut, Gastroenterology, Gastrointestinal Diseases, Infectious Diseases]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.250</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Association of Viral Infection and Appendicitis [Original Article]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>71</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>63</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/71?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Still Looking for Reasons in Appendicitis: Comment on "Association of Viral Infection and Appendicitis" [Invited Critique]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/71?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Britt, R. C.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:24 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Viral Infections, Surgery, Surgical Interventions, Gastrointestinal/ Upper Foregut, Gastroenterology, Gastrointestinal Diseases, Infectious Diseases]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.251</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Still Looking for Reasons in Appendicitis: Comment on "Association of Viral Infection and Appendicitis" [Invited Critique]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>71</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>71</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Invited Critique</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/72?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Improved Bariatric Surgery Outcomes for Medicare Beneficiaries After Implementation of the Medicare National Coverage Determination [Original Article]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/72?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p><b>Objective&nbsp;</b> To compare the outcomes of Medicare beneficiaries who underwent bariatric surgery within 18 months before and after implementation of the national coverage determination (NCD) for bariatric surgery.</p>
<p><b>Design&nbsp;</b> Analysis of the University HealthSystem Consortium database from October 1, 2004, through September 31, 2007.</p>
<p><b>Setting&nbsp;</b> A total of 102 academic medical centers and approximately 150 of their affiliated hospitals, representing more than 90% of the nation's nonprofit academic medical centers.</p>
<p><b>Patients&nbsp;</b> Medicare and Medicaid patients who underwent bariatric surgery to treat morbid obesity.</p>
<p><b>Main Outcome Measures&nbsp;</b> Demographics, length of stay, 30-day readmission, morbidity, observed-to-expected mortality ratio, and costs.</p>
<p><b>Results&nbsp;</b> A total of 3196 bariatric procedures were performed before and 3068 after the NCD. After the implementation of the NCD, the volume of gastric banding doubled and the proportion of laparoscopic gastric bypass increased from 60.0% to 77.2%. Patients who underwent bariatric surgery after the NCD benefited from a shorter length of stay (3.5 vs 3.1 days, <I>P</I>&nbsp;&lt;&nbsp;.001) and lower overall complication rates (12.2% vs 10.0%, <I>P</I>&nbsp;&lt;&nbsp;.001), with no significant differences in the in-hospital mortality rates (0.28% vs 0.20%). Among Medicare patients, there was a 29.3% reduction in the number of bariatric procedures performed within the first 2 quarters after the NCD. However, the number of procedures returned to baseline volume within 1 year and exceeded baseline volume after 2 years of the NCD.</p>
<p><b>Conclusion&nbsp;</b> The bariatric surgery NCD resulted in improved outcomes for Medicare beneficiaries without limiting access to care for individuals with medical disability.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nguyen, N. T., Hohmann, S., Slone, J., Varela, E., Smith, B. R., Hoyt, D.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:24 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Aging/ Geriatrics, Public Health, Obesity, Quality of Care, Quality of Care, Other, Surgery, Surgical Interventions, Bariatric Surgery, Endoscopy/ Minimally Invasive Surgery, Gastrointestinal/ Upper Foregut, Prognosis/ Outcomes]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.228</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Improved Bariatric Surgery Outcomes for Medicare Beneficiaries After Implementation of the Medicare National Coverage Determination [Original Article]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>78</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>72</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/79?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Impact of Surgical Specialization on Emergency Colorectal Surgery Outcomes [Original Article]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/79?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p><b>Objective&nbsp;</b> To evaluate the impact of surgeon specialization on emergency colorectal resection in terms of mortality, morbidity, and type of operation performed.</p>
<p><b>Design&nbsp;</b> Observational study from January 1, 1993, through December 31, 2006.</p>
<p><b>Setting&nbsp;</b> Bellvitge University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain.</p>
<p><b>Patients&nbsp;</b> A total of 1046 patients underwent emergency colorectal resection. Patients were classified into 2 groups: those operated on by a colorectal surgeon (CS) and those operated on by a general surgeon (GS).</p>
<p><b>Main Outcome Measures&nbsp;</b> Preoperative variables studied were sex, age, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, associated medical disease, presentation, reason for surgery, and type of operation. Univariate relations between predictors and outcomes were estimated, and multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to assess the prognostic effect of the combination of the variables.</p>
<p><b>Results&nbsp;</b> Patients in the CS group underwent a significantly higher percentage of resection and primary anastomosis. The postoperative morbidity rate was 52.2% in the CS group and 60.5% in the GS group (<I>P</I>&nbsp;=&nbsp;.01). The anastomotic dehiscence rate was lower in the CS group (6.2%) than in the GS group (12.1%) (<I>P</I>&nbsp;=&nbsp;.01). Postoperative mortality decreased among patients in the CS group (17.9%) with respect to the patients in the GS group (28.3%) (<I>P</I>&nbsp;&lt;&nbsp;.001). Being operated on by a CS was predictive in both the univariate and multivariate analyses for postoperative complications and mortality, and it was the only variable with predictive value for anastomotic dehiscence.</p>
<p><b>Conclusions&nbsp;</b> Specialization in colorectal surgery has a significant influence on morbidity, mortality, and anastomotic dehiscence after emergency operations.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Biondo, S., Kreisler, E., Millan, M., Fraccalvieri, D., Golda, T., Frago, R., Miguel, B.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:24 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Quality of Care, Quality of Care, Other, Surgery, Surgical Interventions, Colorectal Surgery, Surgical Interventions, Other, Surgery, Other, Prognosis/ Outcomes, Emergency Medicine]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.208</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Impact of Surgical Specialization on Emergency Colorectal Surgery Outcomes [Original Article]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>86</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>79</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/87?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Conversion of Emergent Cricothyrotomy to Tracheotomy in Trauma Patients [Review Article]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/87?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p><b>Objectives&nbsp;</b> To review the literature to determine the rates of airway stenosis after cricothyrotomy, particularly as they compare with previously documented rates of this complication after tracheotomy, and to examine the complications associated with conversion.</p>
<p><b>Data Sources&nbsp;</b> We conducted a review of the medical literature by the use of PubMed and OVID MEDLINE databases.</p>
<p><b>Study Selection&nbsp;</b> We identified all published series that describe the use of cricothyrotomy, with the inclusion of the subset of patients who require an emergency airway after trauma, from January 1, 1978, to January 1, 2008.</p>
<p><b>Data Extraction&nbsp;</b> Only 20 published series of cricothyrotomy were identified: 17 retrospective reports and 3 prospective, observational series.</p>
<p><b>Data Synthesis&nbsp;</b> Considerable variance in methods and follow-up periods were noted between examinations. Published experiences documented the results of 1134 total patients for whom cricothyrotomy was performed, including 368 trauma patients who underwent emergent cricothyrotomy. The rate of chronic subglottic stenosis among survivors after cricothyrotomy was 2.2% (11/511) overall and 1.1% (4/368) among trauma patients for follow-up periods with a range from 2 to 60 months. Only 1 (0.27%) of the 368 trauma patients in whom an emergent cricothyrotomy was performed required surgical treatment for chronic subglottic stenosis. Although the literature that documents complications of surgical airway conversion is scarce, rates of severe complications of up to 43% were reported.</p>
<p><b>Conclusions&nbsp;</b> Cricothyrotomy after trauma is safe for initial airway access among patients who require the establishment of an emergent airway. The prolonged use of a cricothyrotomy tube, however, remains controversial. Although no study to date has demonstrated any benefit of routine conversion to tracheostomy, considerable deficiencies in existing studies highlight the need for further investigations of this practice.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Talving, P., DuBose, J., Inaba, K., Demetriades, D.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:24 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Otolaryngology/ Head & Neck Surgery, Airway Obstruction, Surgery, Surgical Interventions, Surgical Interventions, Other, Review, Emergency Medicine]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.137</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Conversion of Emergent Cricothyrotomy to Tracheotomy in Trauma Patients [Review Article]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>91</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>87</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Review Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/92?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The UK Proposals for Revalidation of Physicians: Implications for the Recertification of Surgeons [Special Article]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/92?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>The editorial titled "For the Protection of the Public and the Good of the Specialty: Maintenance of Certification" (published in the February 2009 issue of the <I>Archives of Surgery</I>) has prompted us to offer the following article to inform the debate about how assessing surgical care and sorting out the variables to be included in maintenance of certification may develop worldwide. The proposals for revalidation of UK physicians involve the relicensing of all physicians and recertification of all specialists on the specialist register of the General Medical Council. The process will be on a 5-year cycle and is currently under development by the General Medical Council. The Royal Colleges have been charged with creating the standards for recertification, and the responsibility will fall on the Royal Colleges to support their fellows and members as the new regulation is introduced and as it develops. This article outlines developments so far, with particular reference to surgeons.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Youngson, G. G., Knight, P., Hamilton, L., Taylor, I., Tanner, A., Steers, J., Steel, C., de Cossart, L.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:24 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Medical Practice, Medical Education, Quality of Care, Patient Safety/ Medical Error, Surgery, Surgery, Other, Disparities in Health Care Theme Issue]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.227</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The UK Proposals for Revalidation of Physicians: Implications for the Recertification of Surgeons [Special Article]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>95</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>92</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Special Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/96?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The Pedicle Effect and Direct Coupling: Delayed Thermal Injuries to the Bile Duct After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy [Resident's Forum]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/96?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>Electrothermal energy, especially in the form of monopolar diathermy, is used widely for dissection during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. While this is largely safe, occasionally there can be unrecognized transfer of energy in the operating area, resulting in electrothermal injury. We report a series of 3 patients who underwent uneventful laparoscopic cholecystectomies but were readmitted 4 to 5 days later with pinhole leaks from the common bile duct as a result of coagulative necrosis caused by unrecognized energy transfer. We suggest that surgeons keep the use of monopolar diathermy to a minimum while dissecting near vital structures.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Humes, D. J., Ahmed, I., Lobo, D. N.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:24 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Surgery, Surgical Interventions, Endoscopy/ Minimally Invasive Surgery, Gastrointestinal/ Upper Foregut, Hepatobiliary Surgery]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.236</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The Pedicle Effect and Direct Coupling: Delayed Thermal Injuries to the Bile Duct After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy [Resident's Forum]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>98</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>96</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Resident's Forum</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/98?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[New Board Member Announcement [Announcement]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/98?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:24 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Journalology/ Peer Review/ Authorship, Surgery, Surgery, Other]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.237</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[New Board Member Announcement [Announcement]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>98</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>98</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Announcement</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/99?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Image of the Month--Quiz Case [Special Feature]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/99?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Materazzi, G., Berti, P., Conte, M., Faviana, P., Miccoli, P.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:24 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Radiologic Imaging, Surgery, Surgical Interventions, Endocrine Surgery, Endoscopy/ Minimally Invasive Surgery, Surgical Oncology, Surgical Interventions, Other, Diagnosis, Computed Tomography]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.242-a</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Image of the Month--Quiz Case [Special Feature]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>99</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>99</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Special Feature</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/100?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Image of the Month--Diagnosis [Special Feature]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/100?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:24 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Radiologic Imaging, Surgery, Surgical Interventions, Endocrine Surgery, Endoscopy/ Minimally Invasive Surgery, Surgical Oncology, Surgical Interventions, Other, Diagnosis, Computed Tomography]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.242-b</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Image of the Month--Diagnosis [Special Feature]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>100</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>100</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Special Feature</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/101?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Image of the Month--Quiz Case [Special Feature]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/101?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mishra, B., Grandhige, G., Salem, R. R.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:24 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Oncology, Oncology, Other, Renal Diseases, Renal Diseases, Other, Surgery, Surgical Interventions, Endocrine Surgery, Surgical Oncology, Surgical Interventions, Other, Diagnosis, Hepatobiliary Surgery, Gastroenterology, Liver/ Biliary Tract/ Pancreatic Diseases]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.230-a</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Image of the Month--Quiz Case [Special Feature]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>101</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>101</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Special Feature</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/102?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Image of the Month--Diagnosis [Special Feature]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/102?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:24 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Oncology, Oncology, Other, Renal Diseases, Renal Diseases, Other, Surgery, Surgical Interventions, Endocrine Surgery, Surgical Oncology, Surgical Interventions, Other, Diagnosis, Hepatobiliary Surgery, Gastroenterology, Liver/ Biliary Tract/ Pancreatic Diseases]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.230-b</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Image of the Month--Diagnosis [Special Feature]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>102</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>102</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Special Feature</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/103?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Defining an Enterocutaneous Fistula [Correspondence]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/103?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Maa, J.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:24 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Bacterial Infections, Critical Care/ Intensive Care Medicine, Adult Critical Care, Surgery, Surgical Interventions, Colorectal Surgery, Surgical Physiology, Surgical Infections, Gastroenterology, Gastrointestinal Diseases, Infectious Diseases]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.231</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Defining an Enterocutaneous Fistula [Correspondence]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>103</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>103</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Correspondence</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/103-a?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Defining an Enterocutaneous Fistula--Reply [Correspondence]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/103-a?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Cryer, H. G.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:24 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Bacterial Infections, Critical Care/ Intensive Care Medicine, Adult Critical Care, Surgery, Surgical Interventions, Colorectal Surgery, Surgical Physiology, Surgical Infections, Gastroenterology, Gastrointestinal Diseases, Infectious Diseases]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.232</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Defining an Enterocutaneous Fistula--Reply [Correspondence]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>103</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>103</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Correspondence</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/103-b?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Careful Approach to the ABCs of the Management of Portal Venous Gas [Correspondence]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/103-b?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Naguib, N., Gupta, V., Mekhail, P., Izzidien, A., Masoud, A.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:24 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Radiologic Imaging, Surgery, Surgical Interventions, Gastrointestinal/ Upper Foregut, Diagnosis, Hepatobiliary Surgery, Computed Tomography, Gastroenterology, Gastrointestinal Diseases]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.233</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Careful Approach to the ABCs of the Management of Portal Venous Gas [Correspondence]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>104</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>103</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Correspondence</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/104?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Careful Approach to the ABCs of the Management of Portal Venous Gas--Reply [Correspondence]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/104?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Conrad, C.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:24 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Radiologic Imaging, Surgery, Surgical Interventions, Gastrointestinal/ Upper Foregut, Diagnosis, Hepatobiliary Surgery, Computed Tomography, Gastroenterology, Gastrointestinal Diseases]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.234</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Careful Approach to the ABCs of the Management of Portal Venous Gas--Reply [Correspondence]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>104</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>104</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Correspondence</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/104-a?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[More About the "Heterogeneity" of Merkel Cell Carcinoma [Correspondence]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/104-a?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chalumeau, C., Ortega-Deballon, P.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:25 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Surgery, Surgical Interventions, Surgical Oncology]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.239</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[More About the "Heterogeneity" of Merkel Cell Carcinoma [Correspondence]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>105</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>104</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Correspondence</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/105?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Designation Does Matter [Correspondence]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/105?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Pratt, G. M.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:25 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Public Health, Obesity, Quality of Care, Patient Safety/ Medical Error, Quality of Care, Other, Statistics and Research Methods, Surgery, Surgical Interventions, Bariatric Surgery, Prognosis/ Outcomes]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.254</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Designation Does Matter [Correspondence]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>105</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>105</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Correspondence</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/105-a?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Bariatric Centers of Excellence Programs Do Improve Surgical Outcomes [Correspondence]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/105-a?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Shikora, S. A., Wolfe, B., Schirmer, B.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:25 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Public Health, Obesity, Quality of Care, Patient Safety/ Medical Error, Quality of Care, Other, Statistics and Research Methods, Surgery, Surgical Interventions, Bariatric Surgery, Prognosis/ Outcomes]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.255</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Bariatric Centers of Excellence Programs Do Improve Surgical Outcomes [Correspondence]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>106</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>105</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Correspondence</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/106?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Centers of Excellence [Correspondence]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/106?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Latts, L., Singer, J.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:25 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Public Health, Obesity, Quality of Care, Patient Safety/ Medical Error, Quality of Care, Other, Statistics and Research Methods, Surgery, Surgical Interventions, Bariatric Surgery, Prognosis/ Outcomes]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.256</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Centers of Excellence [Correspondence]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>107</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>106</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Correspondence</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/107?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Centers of Excellence--Reply [Correspondence]]]></title>
<link>http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/145/1/107?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Livingston, E. H.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:51:25 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Public Health, Obesity, Quality of Care, Patient Safety/ Medical Error, Quality of Care, Other, Statistics and Research Methods, Surgery, Surgical Interventions, Bariatric Surgery, Prognosis/ Outcomes]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1001/archsurg.2009.257</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Centers of Excellence--Reply [Correspondence]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Medical Association</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>145</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>108</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2010-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>107</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Correspondence</prism:section>
</item>

</rdf:RDF>