Time to endoscopic vacuum therapy-lessons learned after > 150 robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomies (RAMIE) at a German high-volume center.

OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY: In esophageal surgery, anastomotic leak (AL) remains one of the most severe and critical adverse events after oncological esophagectomy. Endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) can be used to treat AL; however, in the current literature, treatment outcomes and reports on how to use this novel technique are scarce. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of patients with an AL after IL RAMIE and to determine whether using EVT as an treatment option is safe and feasible. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This study includes all patients who developed an Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group (ECCG) type II AL after IL RAMIE at our center between April 2017 and December 2021. The analysis focuses on time to EVT, duration of EVT, and follow up treatments for these patients. RESULTS: A total of 157 patients underwent an IL RAMIE at our hospital. 21 patients of these (13.4%) developed an ECCG type II AL. One patient died of unrelated Covid-19 pneumonia and was excluded from the study cohort. The mean duration of EVT was 12 days (range 4-28 days), with a mean of two sponge changes (range 0-5 changes). AL was diagnosed at a mean of 8 days post-surgery (range 2-16 days). Closure of the AL with EVT was successful in 15 out of 20 patients (75%). Placement of a SEMS (Self-expandlable metallic stent) after EVT was performed in four patients due to persisting AL. Overall success rate of anastomotic sealing independently of the treatment modality was achieved in 19 out of 20 Patients (95%). No severe EVT-related adverse events occurred. CONCLUSION: This study shows that EVT can be a safe and effective endoscopic treatment option for ECCG type II AL.

Safety of Esophageal Cancer Surgery During the First Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Europe: A Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: Many hospitals postponed elective surgical care during the first wave of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Some centers continued elective surgery, including esophageal cancer surgery, with the use of preoperative screening methods; however, there is no evidence supporting the safety of this strategy as postoperative outcomes after esophageal cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic have not yet been investigated. METHODS: This multicenter study in four European tertiary esophageal cancer referral centers included consecutive adult patients undergoing elective esophageal cancer surgery from a prospectively maintained database in a COVID-19 pandemic cohort (1 March 2020-31 May 2020) and a control cohort (1 October 2019-29 February 2020). The primary outcome was the rate of respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation. RESULTS: The COVID-19 cohort consisted of 139 patients, versus 168 patients in the control cohort. There was no difference in the rate of respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation (13.7% vs. 8.3%, p = 0.127) and number of pulmonary complications (32.4% vs. 29.9%, p = 0.646) between the COVID-19 cohort and the control cohort. Overall, postoperative morbidity and mortality rates were comparable between both cohorts. History taking and reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) were used as preoperative screening methods to detect a possible severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in all centers. No patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 pre- or postoperatively. CONCLUSION: Esophageal cancer surgery during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic was not associated with an increase in pulmonary complications as no patients were diagnosed with COVID-19. Esophageal cancer surgery can be performed safely with the use of adequate preoperative SARS-CoV-2 screening methods.

Appendicitis during the COVID-19 lockdown: results of a multicenter analysis in Germany.

PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic has transformed medical care worldwide. General surgery has been affected in elective procedures, yet the implications for emergency surgery are unclear. The current study analyzes the effect of the COVID-19 lockdown in spring 2020 on appendicitis treatment in Germany. METHODS: Hospitals that provided emergency surgical care during the COVID-19 lockdown were invited to participate. All patients diagnosed with appendicitis during the lockdown period (10 weeks) and, as a comparison group, patients from the same period in 2019 were analyzed. Clinical and laboratory parameters, intraoperative and pathological findings, and postoperative outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 1915 appendectomies from 41 surgical departments in Germany were included. Compared to 2019 the number of appendectomies decreased by 13.5% (1.027 to 888, p=0.003) during the first 2020 COVID-19 lockdown. The delay between the onset of symptoms and medical consultation was substantially longer in the COVID-19 risk group and for the elderly. The rate of complicated appendicitis increased (58.2 to 64.4%), while the absolute number of complicated appendicitis decreased from 597 to 569, (p=0.012). The rate of negative appendectomies decreased significantly (6.7 to 4.6%; p=0.012). Overall postoperative morbidity and mortality, however, did not change. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 lockdown had significant effects on abdominal emergency surgery in Germany. These seem to result from a stricter selection and a longer waiting time between the onset of symptoms and medical consultation for risk patients. However, the standard of emergency surgical care in Germany was maintained.