Abhiman Cheeyandira
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Previous Organizations / Institutes
The organizations / institutes from the scholar's other articles in the past ten years
Research Subjects
Abhiman Cheeyandira has a total of 11 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
A. Kurian
Abington Memorial Hospital
1 shared publication- Anthony T. Petrick
Department of Surgery, Geisinger Medical Center, Danville, Pennsylvania
1 shared publication - Audra J. Reiter
Division of Pediatric Surgery, Ann & Robert H Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA
1 shared publication C. Joe Northup
Department of Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
1 shared publicationJohn M. Morton
Department of Surgery, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
1 shared publication- John W. Baker
Department of Surgery, Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- Open Access
- 1 April 2020
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in Journal of Surgical Case Reports
- Vol. 2020 (4) , rjaa109
The effects of COVID-19 pandemic on the provision of urgent surgery: a perspective from the USA
Corona virus pandemic has affected all the 50 states in the USA. States such as NY, CA and WA being the most affected. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) website, as of 28 March 2020, the total number of cases in the USA is over 103 300 and number of deaths to 1668. In the coming weeks, COVID-19 rates are expected to begin skyrocketing and hit a peak in late April/May/June given lessons learned from China, Italy and others. COVID-19 has been declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO) as confirmed cases approach 575 444 patients with 26 654 deaths across over 160 countries, as of 28 March 2020. There is a lot of impact on management of the urgent and emergent cases. This article highlights the changes that are being made in delivering urgent and emergent surgical care during the pandemic.
- 1 April 2020
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in Journal of Surgical Case Reports
- Vol. 2020 (4) , rjaa109
Open AccessThe effects of COVID-19 pandemic on the provision of urgent surgery: a perspective from the USA
Corona virus pandemic has affected all the 50 states in the USA. States such as NY, CA and WA being the most affected. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) website, as of 28 March 2020, the total number of cases in the USA is over 103 300 and number of deaths to 1668. In the coming weeks, COVID-19 rates are expected to begin skyrocketing and hit a peak in late April/May/June given lessons learned from China, Italy and others. COVID-19 has been declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO) as confirmed cases approach 575 444 patients with 26 654 deaths across over 160 countries, as of 28 March 2020. There is a lot of impact on management of the urgent and emergent cases. This article highlights the changes that are being made in delivering urgent and emergent surgical care during the pandemic.
- 7 April 2010
- Published by Springer Nature in Hernia
- Vol. 14 (4) , 383-387
Laparoscopic repair of primary versus incisional ventral hernias: time to recognize the differences?
To elucidate the differences in the pathology of incisional and primary ventral hernias and the outcomes of their laparoscopic repair. An operating room database of all laparoscopic ventral hernias performed between 2001 and 2009 was analyzed retrospectively. Patients were divided into two main groups: Group 1 (incisional hernias) and Group 2 (primary hernias). All P-values < 0.05 were considered to be significant. There were 121 patients in Group 1 (mean age: 60.35 years) and 100 patients in Group 2 (mean age: 51.94 years). There was a significantly higher percentage of females in Group 1 (70 vs. 28%, P < 0.0001). There were significantly more complex hernias (defined as multiple points of weakness on the anterior abdominal wall) in Group 1 (37 vs. 10%, P < 0.0001). A total of 89% of patients required lysis of adhesions in Group 1 as compared with 73% in Group 2 (P = 0.007). There was a significantly higher percentage of conversions in Group 1 (9%) compared with Group 2 (2%, P = 0.02). The mean mesh size was significantly larger in Group 1 (243.22 vs. 131.46 cm2). The mean length of procedure (LOP) was significantly longer in Group 1 (113.94 min) as compared with Group 2 (70.96 min). The overall morbidity rate was not significantly different between the two groups (23 vs. 16%). The mean length of stay (LOS) was significantly longer for Group 1 (2.2 vs. 0.75 days, P < 0.0001). Finally, 22.3% of the patients in Group 1 were discharged on the same day as compared with 59% of the patients in Group 2 (P < 0.0001). The LOP and LOS are longer after the laparoscopic repair of incisional than for primary ventral hernias. This disparity should be kept in mind when counseling patients and while designing trials investigating laparoscopic ventral hernia repairs (LVHRs).
- 7 April 2010
- Published by Springer Nature in Hernia
- Vol. 14 (4) , 383-387
Laparoscopic repair of primary versus incisional ventral hernias: time to recognize the differences?
To elucidate the differences in the pathology of incisional and primary ventral hernias and the outcomes of their laparoscopic repair. An operating room database of all laparoscopic ventral hernias performed between 2001 and 2009 was analyzed retrospectively. Patients were divided into two main groups: Group 1 (incisional hernias) and Group 2 (primary hernias). All P-values < 0.05 were considered to be significant. There were 121 patients in Group 1 (mean age: 60.35 years) and 100 patients in Group 2 (mean age: 51.94 years). There was a significantly higher percentage of females in Group 1 (70 vs. 28%, P < 0.0001). There were significantly more complex hernias (defined as multiple points of weakness on the anterior abdominal wall) in Group 1 (37 vs. 10%, P < 0.0001). A total of 89% of patients required lysis of adhesions in Group 1 as compared with 73% in Group 2 (P = 0.007). There was a significantly higher percentage of conversions in Group 1 (9%) compared with Group 2 (2%, P = 0.02). The mean mesh size was significantly larger in Group 1 (243.22 vs. 131.46 cm2). The mean length of procedure (LOP) was significantly longer in Group 1 (113.94 min) as compared with Group 2 (70.96 min). The overall morbidity rate was not significantly different between the two groups (23 vs. 16%). The mean length of stay (LOS) was significantly longer for Group 1 (2.2 vs. 0.75 days, P < 0.0001). Finally, 22.3% of the patients in Group 1 were discharged on the same day as compared with 59% of the patients in Group 2 (P < 0.0001). The LOP and LOS are longer after the laparoscopic repair of incisional than for primary ventral hernias. This disparity should be kept in mind when counseling patients and while designing trials investigating laparoscopic ventral hernia repairs (LVHRs).