regarding CT and free fluid in post trauma patients, this study is all very well if we want radiologists to decide what we do , but in the absence of a clinical assessment on the same patients its pretty useless. What I would like to know is a) does it save unnecessary laparotomies, and b) does it spot injuries that would otherwise have been missed on clinical exam - at least for a period of time that would compromise the patients subsequent clinical progress. In addition c)how does it compare with other techniques that can be done at the bedside. We all know that in American hospitals patients enter via the CT scanner hole, but it usually takes quite a time to drag a patient down to CT scanner, heave him onto the table, monitor him while your doing all this etc etc.
It seems a nice study for remunerative radiology but useless for the surgeon As regards piles, I wasn't clear just how the haemorrhoids were excised, and what was this about skin bridge reconstruction. Could I trouble my more knowledgeable colleagues for some additional words of explanation.