Laparoscopic cecectomy for diseases of the appendix and cecum

Introduction: The cecum is the first part of the large bowel. Cecectomy is a sufficient treatment for some patients, avoiding overtreatment by ileocolic resection. Purpose:The goal of this study was to review a surgeon's experience with laparoscopic cecectomy and provide a technical video demonstration of this uncommon operation. Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted of all consecutive patients treated with laparoscopic cecectomy over a 16-year period. All operations were performed using a 3-trocar technique. The cecum was transected with 1 to 2 firings of a 60 millimeters linear stapler, preserving the ileocecal valve and ascending colon. Results: 19 patients were identified including 12 females (63.2%). Median age was 42 years (range 16-84). Indication for surgery included appendiceal pathology in 12 patients (63.2%) and cecal abnormality in 7 (38.9%). There was no conversion to open surgery. Median intraoperative blood loss was 25 ml (range 0-150 ml) and no patient received a blood transfusion. No intraoperative or postoperative complication was noted. The median length stay was 1 day (range 0-6). Readmission rate was 0%. Final appendiceal histopathology revealed acute/chronic appendicitis in 5 patients, mucinous cystadenoma in 4 patients. Cecal histopathology revealed adenoma in 4 patients. Median follow-up was 16 months (range 4-53). Conclusions: Laparoscopic cecectomy is a sufficient treatment for some patients with benign conditions of the appendix and cecum. It carries minimal morbidity. It should be considered as an alternative to segmental bowel resection in a select group of patients. (AU)

Stenting as a Bridge to Surgery or a Palliative Treatment.

Endoscopic stenting of the colorectum has emerged as a viable alternative to surgical interventions in a selected group of patients. The main indication for stenting is bowel obstruction. As such stenting can be used to palliate patients with metastatic disease or bridge patients to surgical intervention. The main advantages of stenting in the emergency setting include lower morbidity and mortality, lower incidence of stoma formation, shorter hospitalization, and better quality of life. For patients with unresectable disease and short life expectancy, stenting can be considered. However, for patients with longer life expectancy, the potential long-term complications of a metal stent such as erosion, migration, or obstruction have engendered debate whether such patients are better served by operative intervention. Stenting as a bridge to surgery is an alternative to surgery in patients who are high risk for emergency surgery but concerns remain regarding its impact on oncologic outcome in potentially curable patients.

Predictors of one-year outcomes following the abdominoperineal resection.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to determine one-year outcomes and the impact of various factors on the need for readmission and reoperation following abdominoperineal resection (APR). METHOD: A multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted to determine predictors of readmission and/or reoperation within one year of APR performed between January-2000 and December-2013. RESULTS: 536 patients were analyzed for whom the most common indication for surgery was rectal cancer(86.4%). Within one year of operation, 14.2% (n = 76) of patients have major (grade III/IV of Clavien-Dindo [CD]) and 26.1%(n = 140) of patients have minor complications (grade I/II of CD). Respective major and minor perineal wound complication(PWC) rates were 10.4% and 5.6%.Readmission and reoperation rates within 90 days following discharge were 25% and 8.8%, respectively. While PWC (n = 53,39.2%) and small bowel obstruction(n = 23,17%) were the most common causes of readmission within 90 days,PWC(n = 20,23.3%) and distant metastasis(n = 20,23.3%) were the main causes of long-term readmission(90-day to 1 year). CONCLUSION: Perineal wound complications were the most common cause of readmission and reoperation within one year of APR. Well-coordinated efforts aimed at decreasing the perineal wound morbidity may impact the need for readmission and reoperation.

Expectant management surveillance for patients at risk for invasive squamous cell carcinoma of the anus: a large US healthcare system experience.

PURPOSE: To determine the impact of expectant management surveillance for patients at risk for squamous cell carcinoma of the anus (SCCA). METHODS: Adult patients at risk for anal cancer, specifically those with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) or known human papilloma virus (HPV) infections (anal dysplasia, anogenital warts, cervical dysplasia, or cervical cancer), underwent expectant management surveillance with targeted therapy of only grossly abnormal or symptomatic anoderm lesions. A retrospective analysis investigated the SCCA incidence in these surveilled populations and in the general population patients without known HIV or HPV infection. RESULTS: There were 452 incident SCCA in a population of 5,978,510 patients (mean follow-up per patient of 5.4 years). Four hundred ten cancers (90.7%) developed in 5,750,501 HIV-negative patients without documented history of HPV infection (cumulative incidence 0.007%). In at-risk patient populations, the cumulative incidence was 0.69% in patients with anal dysplasia (6 out of 872 patients), 0.14% in HIV+ patients (8 out of 5626 patients), and less than 0.1% in the remaining at-risk groups: cervical cancer (1 out of 1168 patients), cervical dysplasia (14 out of 125,604 patients), and genital warts (14 out of 94,739 patients). CONCLUSIONS: Expectant management surveillance, with targeted treatment for symptomatic or abnormal lesions, is an effective strategy for the diagnosis of anal cancer in at-risk patient populations. In this study, most patients who developed anal cancer had no known risk factors. A screening strategy for the general population needs to be further delineated.

Disease-free Survival and Local Recurrence for Laparoscopic Resection Compared With Open Resection of Stage II to III Rectal Cancer: Follow-up Results of the ACOSOG Z6051 Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the disease-free survival (DFS) and recurrence after the treatment of patients with rectal cancer with open (OPEN) or laparoscopic (LAP) resection. BACKGROUND: This randomized clinical trial (ACOSOG [Alliance] Z6051), performed between 2008 and 2013, compared LAP and OPEN resection of stage II/III rectal cancer, within 12 cm of the anal verge (T1-3, N0-2, M0) in patients who received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. The rectum and mesorectum were resected using open instruments for rectal dissection (included hybrid hand-assisted laparoscopic) or with laparoscopic instruments under pneumoperitoneum. The 2-year DFS and recurrence were secondary endpoints of Z6051. METHODS: The DFS and recurrence were not powered, and are being assessed for superiority. Recurrence was determined at 3, 6, 9, 12, and every 6 months thereafter, using carcinoembryonic antigen, physical examination, computed tomography, and colonoscopy. In all, 486 patients were randomized to LAP (243) or OPEN (243), with 462 eligible for analysis (LAP = 240 and OPEN = 222). Median follow-up is 47.9 months. RESULTS: The 2-year DFS was LAP 79.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 74.4-84.9) and OPEN 83.2% (95% CI 78.3-88.3). Local and regional recurrence was 4.6% LAP and 4.5% OPEN. Distant recurrence was 14.6% LAP and 16.7% OPEN.Disease-free survival was impacted by unsuccessful resection (hazard ratio [HR] 1.87, 95% CI 1.21-2.91): composite of incomplete specimen (HR 1.65, 95% CI 0.85-3.18); positive circumferential resection margins (HR 2.31, 95% CI 1.40-3.79); positive distal margin (HR 2.53, 95% CI 1.30-3.77). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic assisted resection of rectal cancer was not found to be significantly different to OPEN resection of rectal cancer based on the outcomes of DFS and recurrence.

Experience in colon sparing surgery in North America: advanced endoscopic approaches for complex colorectal lesions.

BACKGROUND: Need for colon sparing interventions for premalignant lesions not amenable to conventional endoscopic excision has stimulated interest in advanced endoscopic approaches. The aim of this study was to report a single institution's experience with these techniques. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of a prospectively collected database of all patients referred between 2011 and 2015 for colorectal resection of benign appearing deemed endoscopically unresectable by conventional endoscopic techniques. Patients were counseled for endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) with possible combined endoscopic-laparoscopic surgery (CELS) or alternatively colorectal resection if unable to resect endoscopically or suspicion for cancer. Lesion characteristic, resection rate, complications, and outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: 110 patients were analyzed [mean age 64 years, female gender 55 (50%), median body mass index 29.4 kg/m2]. Indications for interventions were large polyp median endoscopic size 3 cm (range 1.5-6.5) and/or difficult location [cecum (34.9%), ascending colon (22.7%), transverse colon (14.5%), hepatic flexure (11.8%), descending colon (6.3%), sigmoid colon (3.6%), rectum (3.6%), and splenic flexure (2.6%)]. Lesion morphology was sessile (N = 98, 93%) and pedunculated (N = 12, 7%). Successful endoscopic resection rate was 88.2% (N = 97): ESD in 69 patients and CELS in 28 patients. Complication rate was 11.8% (13/110) [delayed bleeding (N = 4), perforation (N = 3), organ-space surgical site infection (SSI) (N = 2), superficial SSI (N = 1), and postoperative ileus (N = 3)]. Out of 110 patients, 13 patients (11.8%) required colectomy for technical failure (7 patients) or carcinoma (6 patients). During a median follow-up of 16 months (range 6-41 months), 2 patients had adenoma recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Advanced endoscopic surgery appears to be a safe and effective alternative to colectomy for patients with complex premalignant lesions deemed unresectable with conventional endoscopic techniques.

Colonoscopy-induced acute diverticulitis: myth or reality?

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy in patients with diverticulosis can be technically challenging and limited data exist relating to the risk of post-colonoscopy diverticulitis. Our aim was to evaluate the incidence, management, and outcomes of acute diverticulitis following colonoscopy. METHODS: Study design is retrospective cohort study. Data were gathered by conducting an automated search of the electronic patient database using current procedural terminology and ICD-9 codes. Patients who underwent a colonoscopy from 2003 to 2012 were reviewed to find patients who developed acute diverticulitis within 30 days after colonoscopy. Patient demographics and colonoscopy-related outcomes were documented, which include interval between colonoscopy and diverticulitis, colonoscopy indication, simultaneous colonoscopic interventions, and follow-up after colonoscopy. RESULTS: From 236,377 colonoscopies performed during the study period, 68 patients (mean age 56 years) developed post-colonoscopy diverticulitis (0.029%; 2.9 per 10,000 colonoscopies). Incomplete colonoscopies were more frequent among patients with a history of previous diverticulitis [n = 10 (29%) vs. n = 3 (9%), p = 0.03]. Mean time to develop diverticulitis after colonoscopy was 12 ± 8 days, and 30 (44%) patients required hospitalization. 34 (50%) patients had a history of diverticulitis prior to colonoscopy. Among those patients, 14 underwent colonoscopy with an indication of surveillance for previous disease. When colonoscopy was performed within 6 weeks of a diverticulitis attack, surgical intervention was required more often when compared with colonoscopies performed after 6 weeks of an acute attack [n = 6 (100%) vs. n = 10 (36%), p = 0.006]. 6 (9%) out of 68 patients received emergency surgical treatment. 15 (24%) out of 62 patients who had non-surgical treatment initially underwent an elective sigmoidectomy at a later date. Recurrent diverticulitis developed in 16 (23%) patients after post-colonoscopy diverticulitis. CONCLUSIONS: Post-colonoscopy diverticulitis is a rare, but potentially serious complication. Although a rare entity, possibility of this complication should be kept in mind in patients presenting with symptoms after colonoscopy.

Predictors of Anastomotic Leak in Elderly Patients After Colectomy: Nomogram-Based Assessment From the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Program Procedure-Targeted Cohort.

BACKGROUND: Elderly patients undergoing colorectal surgery have increasingly become under scrutiny by accounting for the largest fraction of geriatric postoperative deaths and a significant proportion of all postoperative complications, including anastomotic leak. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine predictors of anastomotic leak in elderly patients undergoing colectomy by creating a novel nomogram for simplistic prediction of anastomotic leak risk in a given patient. DESIGN: This study was a retrospective review. SETTINGS: The database review of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program was conducted at a single institution. PATIENTS: Patients aged ≥65 years who underwent elective segmental colectomy with an anastomosis at different levels (abdominal or low pelvic) in 2012-2013 were identified from the multi-institutional procedure-targeted database. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We constructed a stepwise multiple logistic regression model for anastomotic leak as an outcome; predictors were selected in a stepwise fashion using the Akaike information criterion. The validity of the nomogram was externally tested on elderly patients (≥65 years of age) from the 2014 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program colectomy-targeted database. RESULTS: A total of 10,392 patients were analyzed, and anastomotic leak occurred in 332 (3.2%). Of the patients who developed anastomotic leak, 192 (57.8%) were men (p < 0.001). Based on unadjusted analysis, factors associated with an increased risk of anastomotic leak were ASA score III and IV (p < 0.001), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (p = 0.004), diabetes mellitus (p = 0.003), smoking history (p = 0.014), weight loss (p = 0.013), previously infected wound (p = 0.005), omitting mechanical bowel preparation (p = 0.005) and/or preoperative oral antibiotic use (p < 0.001), and wounds classified as contaminated or dirty/infected (p = 0.008). Patients who developed anastomotic leak had a longer length of hospital stay (17 vs 7 d; p < 0.001) and operative time (191 vs 162 min; p < 0.001). A multivariate model and nomogram were created. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its retrospective nature and short-term follow-up (30 d). CONCLUSIONS: An accurate prediction of anastomotic leak affecting morbidity and mortality after colorectal surgery using the proposed nomogram may facilitate decision making in elderly patients for healthcare providers.

Predictors of outcome for endoscopic colorectal stenting: a decade experience.

PURPOSE: Endoscopic stenting is used with increasing frequency to treat colorectal conditions. Little is known about what influences outcome. This study aimed to determine the impact of various factors on the short- and long-term results of colorectal stenting. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of all endoscopic stenting procedures performed by a colorectal surgeon at a tertiary referral institution between 2003 and 2013. Main outcome measures included technical success, clinical success, complications, and predictors of outcome. RESULTS: Of the stent procedures, 183 were performed in 165 patients. The majority of patients (90 %) presented with a malignant obstruction (intrinsic colonic vs. extrinsic non-colonic). Carcinomatosis was present in 22 % of patients with malignancy, and it was associated with lower technical success compared to non-carcinomatosis (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.2 [95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.1-0.8]; p = 0.021). Colonic malignancy was associated with higher clinical success compared to non-colonic malignancy (AOR 3.8 [95 % CI 1.4-10.3]; p = 0.009). Carcinomatosis increased the risk of complications compared to non-carcinomatosis (AOR 3.2 [95 % CI 1.0-10.0]; p = 0.049). The risk of complication was higher when a stent was deployed in the rectum compared to the colon (AOR 4.1 [95 % CI 1.5-11.7]; p = 0.008). The use of a covered stent was associated with higher complication rate compared to a non-covered stent (AOR 13.6 [95 % CI 2.6-71.2]; p = 0.002). Balloon dilation was associated with an increased risk of complications (AOR 4.6 [95 % CI 1.3-16.2]; p = 0.017). CONCLUSIONS: Carcinomatosis was associated with lower technical success rate. Clinical success was higher in patients with a primary colonic malignancy. The use of a covered stent, balloon dilation of stricture, lesions in the rectum, and carcinomatosis were associated with higher risk for complications.

Robotic, laparoscopic, and open colectomy: a case-matched comparison from the ACS-NSQIP.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare perioperative outcomes of patients undergoing robotic, laparoscopic, and open colectomy using a procedure-targeted database. METHODS: Retrospective review of patients undergoing elective colectomy in 2013 was conducted using the procedure-targeted database of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP). Robotic, laparoscopic, and open groups were matched (1:1:1) based on age, gender, body mass index, surgical procedure, diagnosis and ASA classification. Demographics, comorbidities, and short-term (30 day) outcomes were compared. RESULTS: Out of 12 790 patients, 387 fulfilled criteria per group after matching. Univariate comparison showed operating time was longer (P < 0.001) and hospital stay was shorter (P < 0.001) in the robotic group. Morbidity (P < 0.001), superficial SSI (P < 0.001), bleeding requiring transfusion (P < 0.001), ventilator dependency (P = 0.003), and ileus (P < 0.001) rates were lower in the robotic group. After adjusting for confounders, outcomes were comparable between the groups except hospital stay which was shorter in the robotic group (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: ACS-NSQIP data demonstrated several short-term advantages of robotic surgery compared with laparoscopic and open surgery.

Risk factors associated with postoperative morbidity in over 500 colovesical fistula patients undergoing colorectal surgery: a retrospective cohort study from ACS-NSQIP database.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of various factors on 30-day postoperative morbidity in patients who underwent colorectal surgery (CRS) for colovesical fistula (CVF) in the elective and emergency settings. METHODS: Patients who underwent CRS for CVF between 2005 and 2013 were identified from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database by using current procedural terminology codes. Demographics, perioperative, and operative factors were assessed and compared between two groups classified according to the presence or absence of postoperative complications. RESULTS: Five hundred twelve patients met the inclusion criteria [mean age of 61.4 (±14.7) years, female 214 (42%)]. Etiology of fistula was diverticulitis [N = 438 (85.5%)], colon cancer [N = 39 (7.6%)], and Crohn's disease [N = 35 (6.8%)]. One hundred fifty-two procedures (29.7%) were performed laparoscopically. In 186 patients (36%), no bladder intervention was performed. One hundred forty-nine patients (29.1%) had at least one postoperative complication. Patients who developed complication were older (P = <0.001), more often female (P = <0.001), hypertensive (P = 0.005), anemic (P = <0.001), preoperatively transfused (P = 0.02), and with class 2-3 wound classification (P = 0.01). Independent risk factors affecting morbidity were increased age [odds ratio (OR) 1.23 (1.03-1.47), P = 0.01], decreased hematocrit level [OR 3.04(1.83-5.06), P < 0.0001], and open approach [OR 2.56 (1.35-4.84), P = 0.003]. CONCLUSIONS: Morbidity for CVF remains high. Lower preoperative hematocrit level and increased age were associated with higher risk of complication. Laparoscopic surgery may be preferable when possible as morbidity is less with this approach.

Hand-assisted laparoscopic vs open colectomy: an assessment from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program procedure-targeted cohort.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative outcomes of patients who underwent hand-assisted colorectal laparoscopic (HALS) vs open colectomy were compared using recently released procedure-targeted database. METHODS: Review was conducted using the 2012 colectomy-targeted American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Patients were classified into 2 groups according to final surgical approach: HALS vs open (planned). Groups were matched (1:1) based on age, gender, body mass index, surgical procedure, diagnosis, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, and wound classification. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted for group comparison. RESULTS: Of 7,303 patients, 1,740 patients were matched in each group. Open group had higher proportion of patients with preoperative dyspnea (P = .01), ascites (P = .01), weight loss (P < .001), smoking history (P = .04), and increased work relative value units (P < .001). After adjusting for difference in baseline comorbidities, overall morbidity, superficial, deep, and organ-space surgical site infection, urinary tract infection, ileus, reoperation, readmission, and hospital stay were significantly higher in open group (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: National Surgical Quality Improvement Program targeted-data demonstrated several advantages of HALS compared with open colonic resection including shorter hospital stay and lower complication rate. Further adoption of HALS technique as a bridge to straight laparoscopy or tool in difficult cases can positively impact the short-term outcomes after colectomy when compared with open technique.

Case-matched Comparison of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Proctectomy for Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

The present study reports an early institutional experience with robotic proctectomy (RP) and outcome comparison with laparoscopic proctectomy (LP) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Patients who underwent either RP or LP during proctocolectomy for IBD between January 2010 and June 2014 were matched (1:1) and reviewed. Twenty-one patients undergoing RP fulfilled the study criteria and were matched with an equal number of patients who had LP. Operative time was longer (304 vs. 213 min, P=0.008) and estimated blood loss was higher in the RP group (360 vs. 188 mL, P=0.002). Conversion rates (9.5% vs. 14.3%, P>0.99), time to first bowel movement(2.29±1.53 vs. 2.79±2.26, P=0.620), and hospital length stay(7.85±6.41 vs. 9.19±7.47 d, P=0.390) were similar in both groups. No difference was noted in postoperative complications, ileal pouch to anal canal anastomosis-related outcomes, Cleveland Global Quality of Life, and Short Form-12 health survey outcomes between RP and LP. Our good results with standard laparoscopy are unlikely to be improved with robotics in proctectomy cases. Potential benefits of robotic approach for completion proctectomy warrant further investigation as experience grows with robotics.

Perianal Paget's disease: three decades experience of a single institution.

PURPOSE: Perianal Paget's disease is a rare intraepithelial adenocarcinoma of the perianal skin and the second most common localization of extramammary Paget's disease. This study was designed to evaluate long-term outcomes in patients with perianal Paget's disease. METHODS: We identified patients who were treated for perianal Paget's disease between 1981 and 2013. Patient demographics, family history, associated malignancies, treatments, histopathological features, need for re-operations, and long-term outcomes were documented. RESULTS: Our study cohort consisted of 15 male and 10 female patients with a median age of 67 (40-83) years. Four patients had concurrent anorectal adenocarcinoma (two anal canal, two rectal) when perianal Paget's disease was diagnosed. Index operations performed were wide local excision (14 patients), local excision (five patients), abdominoperineal resection (four patients), and radiotherapy (two patients). Five patients developed invasive carcinoma (three anal canal, one vulvar, one perianal squamous cell carcinoma) during a median follow-up time of 60 (3-299) months. Thirteen patients were re-operated. Fifteen patients had a reconstructive procedure following excision. Overall survival was similar between the patients who were treated with wide local excision and local excision regardless of surgical margin status at index excision (P = 0.75). CONCLUSIONS: Since there is a risk for developing invasive carcinoma in the anal canal and perineum in patients with perianal Paget's disease, close follow-up is needed after R0 or R1 excision. Physicians should be aware of the risk of cancers associated with perianal Paget's disease and should rule out them during management.

Robotic versus laparoscopic resection for sigmoid diverticulitis with fistula.

Robotic abdominal surgery is growing despite a paucity of clinical reports to evaluate its impact on patient outcomes. In this retrospective case series, we aim to analyze our early experience with robotic resection in 11 consecutive patients with chronic colonic diverticulitis complicated by fistula to bladder, vagina, or skin and to compare the results of the robotic approach to 20 patients undergoing laparoscopic resection for the same indication. Our main outcome measures include operative time, blood loss, conversion rate, transfusion rate, hospital length of stay, complications, readmission, and fistula healing rate. In our study, we found robotic resection for colonic diverticulitis with fistula was technically feasible and yielded 100% fistula healing rate. The operative time, complication and readmission rates were similar to laparoscopy. A higher conversion rate, diverting stoma need, and longer hospital length of stay were noted in the robotic group; however, these findings could have been attributed to a higher number of cases involving rectal excision in the robotic group. Larger studies are needed to further examine the impact of robotic surgery on the outcome of patients with complicated chronic sigmoid diverticulitis.

High Rate of Positive Circumferential Resection Margins Following Rectal Cancer Surgery: A Call to Action.

OBJECTIVES: To identify predictors of positive circumferential resection margin following rectal cancer resection in the United States. BACKGROUND: Positive circumferential resection margin is associated with a high rate of local recurrence and poor morbidity and mortality for rectal cancer patients. Prior study has shown poor compliance with national rectal cancer guidelines, but whether this finding is reflected in patient outcomes has yet to be shown. METHODS: Patients who underwent resection for stage I-III rectal cancer were identified from the 2010-2011 National Cancer Database. The primary outcome was a positive circumferential resection margin. The relationship between patient, hospital, tumor, and treatment-related characteristics was analyzed using bivariate and multivariate analysis. RESULTS: A positive circumferential resection margin was noted in 2859 (17.2%) of the 16,619 patients included. Facility location, clinical T and N stage, histologic type, tumor size, tumor grade, lymphovascular invasion, perineural invasion, type of operation, and operative approach were significant predictors of positive circumferential resection margin on multivariable analysis. Total proctectomy had nearly a 30% increased risk of positive margin compared with partial proctectomy (OR 1.293, 95%CI 1.185-1.411) and a laparoscopic approach had nearly 22% less risk of a positive circumferential resection margin compared with an open approach (OR 0.882, 95%CI 0.790-0.985). CONCLUSIONS: Despite advances in surgical technique and multimodality therapy, rates of positive circumferential resection margin remain high in the United States. Several tumor and treatment characteristics were identified as independent risk factors, and advances in rectal cancer care are necessary to approach the outcomes seen in other countries.

Significant reduction in the incidence of small bowel obstruction and ventral hernia after laparoscopic compared to open segmental colorectal resection.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to assess the incidence of incisional ventral hernia and small bowel obstruction following laparoscopic and open colorectal resection. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of a large database comprising 13 hospitals, serving 3.6 million patients in Southern California. Patients 18 years and older undergoing elective colorectal resection over a 3-year period were included. The crude incidence rates were calculated, and relative risks of ventral hernia and small bowel obstruction were determined using multivariable proportional hazard modeling. RESULTS: Four thousand six hundred and thirteen patients underwent 4765 colorectal resections between August 2008 and August 2011. Fifty-nine percent of the cases were performed laparoscopically; the median age was 63 years, and 49% were males. Colorectal carcinoma (45%) and diverticulitis (18%) were the most common indications for surgery. The median follow-up was 2.4 years. Kaplan-Meier estimates of ventral hernia at 1, 2, and 3 years among the open cohort were significantly higher at 10.1, 17.0, and 20.5%, compared to 5.7, 8.7, and 10.8% in the laparoscopic cohort (p < 0.001). Similarly, small bowel obstruction was higher in the open compared to the laparoscopic group (open 10.4, 15.0, and 18.3% vs. laparoscopic 2.7, 4.4, and 5.5%, p < 0.001). Patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal resection were less likely to develop ventral hernia [adjusted hazard ratio (AHR) 0.64 (95% CI 0.52, 0.80); p < 0.0001] and small bowel obstruction [AHR 0.41 (95% CI 0.31, 0.54); p < 0.0001]. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of incisional ventral hernia and small bowel obstruction is significantly reduced in patients who undergo laparoscopic compared to open colorectal resection.

Algorithm-based multidisciplinary treatment approach for rectourethral fistula.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to report the outcomes of an algorithm-based multidisciplinary treatment approach to rectourethral fistula. METHODS: This study is a retrospective review of a prospectively collected database at a tertiary center of all consecutive patients treated between 2003 and 2013. RESULTS: Thirty males (mean age 63 years) were reviewed. Prostate cancer treatment was the most common fistula etiology (97%). Urinary drainage consisted of urethral catheter in all patients and suprapubic catheter in 14 (47%). The rate of fecal diversion was 67%. During a mean follow-up of 72 months, healing rate was 90% and recurrence rate 0%. Spontaneous healing was achieved in 14 patients (47%): 8 (27%) without fecal diversion and 6 (20%) following fecal diversion. Thirteen patients (43%) required definitive intervention. The majority of operated patients underwent transanal or transperineal flap (endorectal, dartos, or gracilis) successfully. Only 2 patients (7%) required an abdominal approach (positive oncologic margins or non-functioning bladder). Fifteen out of the 20 patients (75%) who underwent fecal diversion had stoma closure with an overall permanent stoma rate of 17%. Long-term urinary incontinence was noted in 11 patients (37%). Six patients (20%) required permanent urinary diversion or drainage catheters. CONCLUSIONS: Algorithm-based treatment approach for rectourethral fistula is useful in the management of this rare condition. Selective fecal diversion is possible, and majority of patients who require definitive intervention can be treated with a transanal or transperineal approach. The rate of permanent stoma is low, but long-term urinary dysfunction is frequent.