Is previous radical prostatectomy a contraindication to minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair? A contemporary meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Traditionally, radical prostatectomy (RP) has been considered a contraindication to minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair. Purpose of this systematic review was to examine the current evidence and outcomes of minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair after RP. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Web of Science, PubMed, and EMBASE data sets were consulted. Laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal repair (TAPP), robotic TAPP (r-TAPP), and totally extraperitoneal (TEP) repair were included. RESULTS: Overall, 4655 patients (16 studies) undergoing TAPP, r-TAPP, and TEP inguinal hernia repair after RP were included. The age of the patients ranged from 35 to 85 years. Open (49.1%), laparoscopic (7.4%), and robotic (43.5%) RP were described. Primary unilateral hernia repair was detailed in 96.3% of patients while 2.8% of patients were operated for recurrence. The pooled prevalence of intraoperative complication was 0.7% (95% CI 0.2-3.4%). Bladder injury and epigastric vessels bleeding were reported. The pooled prevalence of conversion to open was 0.8% (95% CI 0.3-1.7%). The estimated pooled prevalence of seroma, hematoma, and surgical site infection was 3.2% (95% CI 1.9-5.9%), 1.7% (95% CI 0.9-3.1%), and 0.3% (95% CI = 0.1-0.9%), respectively. The median follow-up was 18 months (range 8-48). The pooled prevalence of hernia recurrence and chronic pain were 1.1% (95% CI 0.1-3.1%) and 1.9% (95% CI 0.9-4.1%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair seems feasible, safe, and effective for the treatment of inguinal hernia after RP. Prostatectomy should not be necessarily considered a contraindication to minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair.

Long-Term Impact of Severe Postoperative Complications after Esophagectomy for Cancer: Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Severe postoperative complications (SPCs) may occur after curative esophagectomy for cancer and are associated with prolonged hospital stay, augmented costs, and increased in-hospital mortality. However, the effect of SPCs on survival after esophagectomy is uncertain. AIM: To assess the impact of severe postoperative complications (SPCs) on long-term survival following curative esophagectomy for cancer, we conducted a systematic search of PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science databases up to December 2023. The included studies examined the relationship between SPCs and survival outcomes, defining SPCs as Clavien-Dindo grade > 3. The primary outcome measure was long-term overall survival (OS). We used restricted mean survival time difference (RMSTD) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to calculate pooled effect sizes. Additionally, we applied the GRADE methodology to evaluate the certainty of the evidence. RESULTS: Ten studies (2181 patients) were included. SPCs were reported in 651 (29.8%) patients. The RMSTD overall survival analysis shows that at 60-month follow-up, patients experiencing SPCs lived for 8.6 months (95% Cis -12.5, -4.7; p < 0.001) less, on average, compared with no-SPC patients. No differences were found for 60-month follow-up disease-free survival (-4.6 months, 95% CIs -11.9, 1.9; p = 0.17) and cancer-specific survival (-6.8 months, 95% CIs -11.9, 1.7; p = 0.21). The GRADE certainty of this evidence ranged from low to very low. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests a statistically significant detrimental effect of SPCs on OS in patients undergoing curative esophagectomy for cancer. Also, a clinical trend toward reduced CSS and DFS was perceived.

Long-Term Impact of D2 Lymphadenectomy during Gastrectomy for Cancer: Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis and Restricted Mean Survival Time Estimation.

BACKGROUND: Debate exists concerning the impact of D2 vs. D1 lymphadenectomy on long-term oncological outcomes after gastrectomy for cancer. METHODS: PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) analyzing the effect of D2 vs. D1 on survival were included. Overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and disease-free survival (DFS) were assessed. Restricted mean survival time difference (RMSTD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used as effect size measures. RESULTS: Five RCTs (1653 patients) were included. Overall, 805 (48.7%) underwent D2 lymphadenectomy. The RMSTD OS analysis shows that at 60-month follow-up, D2 patients lived 1.8 months (95% CI -4.2, 0.7; p = 0.14) longer on average compared to D1 patients. Similarly, 60-month CSS (1.2 months, 95% CI -3.9, 5.7; p = 0.72) and DFS (0.8 months, 95% CI -1.7, 3.4; p = 0.53) tended to be improved for D2 vs. D1 lymphadenectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to D1, D2 lymphadenectomy is associated with a clinical trend toward improved OS, CSS, and DFS at 60-month follow-up.

Short-term outcomes of different esophagojejunal anastomotic techniques during laparoscopic total gastrectomy: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Different techniques have been described for esophagojejunostomy (EJ) during laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) for gastric cancer. Linear stapled techniques include overlap (OL) and functional end-to-end anastomosis (FEEA) while single staple technique (SST), hemi-double staple technique (HDST), and OrVil® are circular stapled approaches. Nowadays, the choice among techniques for EJ depends on operating surgeon personal preference. PURPOSE: To compare short-term outcomes of different EJ techniques during LTG. METHODS: Systematic review and network meta-analysis. OL, FEEA, SST, HDST, and OrVil® were compared. Primary outcomes were anastomotic leak (AL) and stenosis (AS). Risk ratio (RR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) were used as pooled effect size measures, whereas 95% credible intervals (CrI) were used to measure relative inference. RESULTS: Overall, 3177 patients (20 studies) were included. The technique for EJ was SST (n = 1026; 32.9%), OL (n = 826; 26.5%), FEEA (n = 752; 24.1%), OrVil® (n = 317; 10.1%), and HDST (n = 196; 6.4%). AL was comparable for OL vs. FEEA (RR = 0.82; 95% CrI 0.47-1.49), OL vs. SST (RR = 0.55; 95% CrI 0.27-1.21), OL vs. OrVil® (RR = 0.54; 95% CrI 0.32-1.22), and OL vs. HDST (RR = 0.65; 95% CrI 0.28-1.63). Similarly, AS was similar for OL vs. FEEA (RR = 0.46; 95% CrI 0.18-1.28), OL vs. SST (RR = 0.89; 95% CrI 0.39-2.15), OL vs. OrVil® (RR = 0.36; 95% CrI 0.14-1.02), and OL vs. HDST (RR = 0.61; 95% CrI 0.31-1.21). Anastomotic bleeding, time to soft diet resumption, pulmonary complications, hospital length of stay, and mortality were comparable while operative time was reduced for FEEA. CONCLUSIONS: This network meta-analysis shows similar postoperative AL and AS risk when comparing OL, FEEA, SST, HDST, and OrVil® techniques. Similarly, no differences were found for anastomotic bleeding, operative time, soft diet resumption, pulmonary complications, hospital length of stay and 30-day mortality.

What is the ideal mesh location for incisional hernia prevention during elective laparotomy? A network meta-analysis of randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: Incisional hernia (IH) represents an important complication after surgery. Prophylactic mesh reinforcement (PMR) with different mesh locations [onlay (OL), retromuscular (RM), preperitoneal (PP), and intraperitoneal (IP)] has been described to possibly reduce the risk of postoperative IH. However, data reporting the 'ideal' mesh location are sparse. The aim of this study was to evaluate the optimal mesh location for IH prevention during elective laparotomy. METHODS: Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). OL, RM, PP, IP, and no mesh (NM) were compared. The primary aim was postoperative IH. Risk ratio (RR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) were used as pooled effect size measures, whereas 95% credible intervals (CrI) were used to assess relative inference. RESULTS: Fourteen RCTs (2332 patients) were included. Overall, 1052 (45.1%) had no mesh (NM) while 1280 (54.9%) underwent PMR stratified in IP ( n =344 pts), PP ( n =52 pts), RM ( n =463 pts), and OL ( n =421 pts) placement. Follow-up ranged from 12 months to 67 months. RM (RR=0.34; 95% CrI: 0.10-0.81) and OL (RR=0.15; 95% CrI: 0.044-0.35) were associated with significantly reduced IH RR compared to NM. A tendency toward reduced IH RR was noticed for PP versus NM (RR=0.16; 95% CrI: 0.018-1.01), while no differences were found for IP versus NM (RR=0.59; 95% CrI: 0.19-1.81). Seroma, hematoma, surgical site infection, 90-day mortality, operative time and hospital length of stay were comparable among treatments. CONCLUSIONS: RM or OL mesh placement seems associated with reduced IH RR compared to NM. PP location appears promising; however, future studies are warranted to corroborate this preliminary indication.

C-reactive Protein and Procalcitonin Levels to Predict Anastomotic Leak After Colorectal Surgery: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Anastomotic leak (AL) is a feared complication after colorectal surgery. Prompt diagnosis and treatment are crucial. C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin (PCT) have been proposed as early AL indicators. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the CRP and CPT predictive values for early AL diagnosis after colorectal surgery. METHODS: Systematic literature search to identify studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of postoperative CRP and CPT for AL. A Bayesian meta-analysis was carried out using a random-effects model and pooled predictive parameters to determine postoperative CRP and PCT cut-off values at different postoperative days (POD). RESULTS: Twenty-five studies (11,144 patients) were included. The pooled prevalence of AL was 8% (95 CI 7-9%), and the median time to diagnosis was 6.9 days (range 3-10). The derived POD3, POD4 and POD5 CRP cut-off were 15.9 mg/dl, 11.4 mg/dl and 10.9 mg/dl respectively. The diagnostic accuracy was comparable with a pooled area under the curve (AUC) of 0.80 (95% CIs 0.23-0.85), 0.84 (95% CIs 0.18-0.86) and 0.84 (95% CIs 0.18-0.89) respectively. Negative likelihood ratios (LR-) showed moderate evidence to rule out AL on POD 3 (LR- 0.29), POD4 (LR- 0.24) and POD5 (LR- 0.26). The derived POD3 and POD5 CPT cut-off were 0.75 ng/ml (AUC = 0.84) and 0.9 ng/ml (AUC = 0.92) respectively. The pooled POD5 negative LR (-0.18) showed moderate evidence to rule out AL. CONCLUSIONS: In the setting of colorectal surgery, CRP and CPT serum concentrations lower than the derived cut-offs on POD3-POD5, may be useful to rule out AL thus possibly identifying patients at low risk for AL development.

Linear- versus circular-stapled esophagogastric anastomosis during esophagectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Different techniques have been described for esophagogastric anastomosis. Over the past decades, surgeons have been improving anastomotic techniques with a gradual shift from hand-sewn to stapled anastomosis. Nowadays, circular-stapled (CS) and linear-stapled (LS) anastomosis are commonly used during esophagectomy. METHODS: PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched up to June 2022. The included studies evaluated short-term outcomes for LS vs. CS anastomosis in patients undergoing esophagectomy for cancer. Primary outcomes were anastomotic leak (AL) and stricture (AS). Risk ratio (RR) and standardized mean difference (SMD) were used as pooled effect size measures whereas 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) were used to assess relative inference. RESULTS: Eighteen studies (2861 patients) were included. Overall, 1371 (47.9%) underwent CS while 1490 (52.1%) LS. Compared to CS, LS was associated with a significantly reduced RR for AL (RR = 0.70; 95% CI 0.54-0.91; p < 0.01) and AS (RR = 0.32; 95% CI 0.20-0.51; p < 0.0001). Stratified subgroup analysis according to the level of anastomosis (cervical and thoracic) still shows a tendency toward reduced risk for LS. No differences were found for pneumonia (RR 0.78; p = 0.12), reflux esophagitis (RR 0.74; p = 0.36), operative time (SMD -0.25; p = 0.16), hospital length of stay (SMD 0.13; p = 0.51), and 30-day mortality (RR 1.26; p = 0.42). CONCLUSIONS: LS anastomosis seems associated with a tendency toward a reduced risk for AL and AS. Although surgeon's own training and experience might direct the choice of esophagogastric anastomosis, our meta-analysis encourages the use of LS anastomosis.

Patient-tailored algorithm for laparoscopic cruroplasty standardization: comparison with hiatal surface area and medium-term outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Different methods have been described for laparoscopic hiatoplasty and hiatus hernia (HH) repair. All techniques are not standardized and the choice to reinforce or not the hiatus with a mesh is left to the operating surgeon's preference. Hiatal surface area (HSA) has been described as an attempt at standardization; in case the area is > 4 cm2, a mesh is used to reinforce the repair. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to describe a new patient-tailored algorithm (PTA), compare its performance in predicting crura mesh buttressing to HSA, and analyze outcomes. METHODS: Retrospective, single-center, descriptive study (September 2018-September 2021). Adult patients (≥ 18 years old) who underwent laparoscopic HH repair. Outcomes and quality of life measured with the disease-specific gastroesophageal reflux disease health-related quality of life (GERD-HRQL) and reflux symptom index (RSI) were analyzed. RESULTS: Fifty patients that underwent laparoscopic hiatoplasty and Toupet fundoplication were included. The median age was 61 years (range 32-83) and the median BMI was 26.7 (range 17-36). According to the PTA, 27 patients (54%) underwent simple suture repair while crural mesh buttressing with Phasix-ST® was used in 23 (46%). According to the HSA, the median hiatus area was 4.7 cm2 while 26 patients had an HSA greater than 4 cm2. The overall concordance rate between PTA and HSA was 94% (47/50). The median hospital stay was 1.9 days (range 1-8) and the 90-day complication rate was 4%. The median follow-up was 18.6 months (range 1-35). Hernia recurrence was diagnosed in 6%. Postoperative dysphagia occurred in one patient (2%). The GERD-HRQL (p < 0.001) and RSI (p = 0.001) were significantly improved. CONCLUSIONS: The application of PTA for cruroplasty standardization in the setting of HH repair seems effective. While concordance with HSA is high, the PTA seems easier and promptly available in the operative theater with a potential increase in procedure standardization, reproducibility, and teaching.

Staple Line Reinforcement During Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

PURPOSE: Staple line reinforcement (SLR) during laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is controversial. The purpose of this study was to perform a comprehensive evaluation of the most commonly utilized techniques for SLR. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare no reinforcement (NR), suture oversewing (SR), glue reinforcement (GR), bioabsorbable staple line reinforcement (Gore® Seamguard®) (GoR), and clips reinforcement (CR). Risk Ratio (RR), weighted mean difference (WMD), and 95% credible intervals (CrI) were used as pooled effect size measures. RESULTS: Overall, 3994 patients (17 RCTs) were included. Of those, 1641 (41.1%) underwent NR, 1507 (37.7%) SR, 689 (17.2%) GR, 107 (2.7%) GoR, and 50 (1.3%) CR. SR was associated with a significantly reduced risk of bleeding (RR=0.51; 95% CrI 0.31-0.88), staple line leak (RR=0.56; 95% CrI 0.32-0.99), and overall complications (RR=0.50; 95% CrI 0.30-0.88) compared to NR while no differences were found vs. GR, GoR, and CR. Operative time was significantly longer for SR (WMD=16.2; 95% CrI 10.8-21.7), GR (WMD=15.0; 95% CrI 7.7-22.4), and GoR (WMD=15.5; 95% CrI 5.6-25.4) compared to NR. Among treatments, there were no significant differences for surgical site infection (SSI), sleeve stenosis, reoperation, hospital length of stay, and 30-day mortality. CONCLUSIONS: SR seems associated with a reduced risk of bleeding, leak, and overall complications compared to NR while no differences were found vs. GR, GoR, and CR. Data regarding GoR and CR are limited while further trials reporting outcomes for these techniques are warranted.

Techniques for reconstruction after distal gastrectomy for cancer: updated network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: The choice of the best reconstruction technique after distal gastrectomy (DG) remains controversial and still not defined. The purpose was to perform a comprehensive evaluation within the major type of intestinal reconstruction after DG for gastric cancer. METHODS: Systematic review and network meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare Billroth I (BI), Billroth II (BII), Billroth II Braun (BII Braun), Roux-en-Y (RY), and Uncut Roux-en-Y (URY). Risk ratio (RR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) were used as pooled effect size measures while 95% credible intervals (CrI) were used to assess relative inference. RESULTS: Ten RCTs (1456 patients) were included. Of these, 448 (33.7%) underwent BI, 220 (15.1%) BII, 114 BII Braun (7.8%), 533 (36.6%) RY, and 141 URY (9.6%). No significant differences were found among treatments for 30-day mortality, anastomotic leak, anastomotic stricture, and overall complications. At 12-month follow-up, RY was associated with a significantly reduced risk of remnant gastritis compared to BI (RR=0.56; 95% Crl 0.35-0.76) and BII reconstruction (RR=0.47; 95% Crl 0.22-0.97). Similarly, despite the lack of statistical significance, RY seems associated with a trend toward reduced endoscopically proven esophagitis compared to BI (RR=0.58; 95% Crl 0.24-1.51) and bile reflux compared to BI (RR=0.48; 95% Crl 0.17-1.41), BII (RR=0.74; 95% Crl 0.20-2.81), and BII Braun (RR=0.65; 95% Crl 0.30-1.43). CONCLUSIONS: This network meta-analysis shows that there are five main options for intestinal anastomosis after DG. All techniques seem equally safe with comparable anastomotic leak, anastomotic stricture, overall morbidity, and short-term outcomes. In the short-term follow-up (12 months), RY seems associated with a reduced risk of remnant gastritis and a trend toward a reduced risk of bile reflux and esophagitis.

Three-field versus two-field lymphadenectomy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: A long-term survival meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: In the setting of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, controversy exists regarding the optimal extent of lymphadenectomy, while conclusive evidence regarding the advantages of 3-field versus 2-field lymphadenectomy remains controversial. The purpose of the present meta-analysis was to investigate the effect of 3-field lymphadenectomy versus 2-field lymphadenectomy on overall survival. METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analyses were computed to compare 3-field lymphadenectomy versus 2-field lymphadenectomy in the setting of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Risk ratio, weighted mean difference, hazard ratio, and restricted mean survival time difference were used as pooled effect size measures. RESULTS: Fourteen studies (3,431 patients) were included. Overall, 1,664 (48.8%) patients underwent 3-field lymphadenectomy, and 1,767 (51.5%) underwent 2-field lymphadenectomy. Three-field lymphadenectomy was associated with a significantly improved 5-year overall survival (hazard ratio: 0.80; 95% confidence interval 0.71-0.90; P < .001). The restricted mean survival time difference showed a statistically significant difference between 3-field lymphadenectomy versus 2-field lymphadenectomy up to 48 months (1.6 months; P = .04), however, no significant differences were found at 60-month follow-up (1.2 months; P = .14). No significant differences were found in term of postoperative mortality, anastomotic leak, pulmonary complications, chylothorax, and recurrent nerve palsy. CONCLUSION: For resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, 3-field lymphadenectomy seems associated with a slight trend toward improved 5-year overall survival; however, its clinical benefit remains limited.

Magnetic sphincter augmentation device removal: surgical technique and results at medium-term follow-up.

BACKGROUND: The magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) device has become a common option for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Knowledge of MSA-related complications, indications for removal, and techniques are puzzled. With this study, we aimed to evaluate indications, techniques for removal, surgical approach, and outcomes with MSA removal. METHODS: This is an observational singe-center study. Patients were followed up regularly with endoscopy, pH monitoring, and assessed for specific gastroesophageal reflux disease health-related quality of life (GERD-HRQL) and generic short-form 36 (SF-36) quality of life. RESULTS: Five patients underwent MSA explant. Four patients were males and the median age was 47 years (range 44-55). Heartburn, epigastric/chest pain, and dysphagia were commonly reported. The median implant duration was 46 months (range 31-72). A laparoscopic approach was adopted in all patients. Intraoperative findings included normal anatomy (40%), herniation in the mediastinum (40%), and erosion (20%). The most common anti-reflux procedures were Dor (n = 2), Toupet (n = 2), and anterior partial fundoplication (n = 1). The median operative time was 145 min (range 60-185), and the median hospital length of stay was 4 days (range 3-6). The median postoperative follow-up was 41 months (range 12-51). At the last follow-up, 80% of patients were off PPI; the GERD-HRQL and SF-36 questionnaire were improved with DeMeester score and esophageal acid exposure normalization. CONCLUSION: The MSA device can be safely explanted through a single-stage laparoscopic procedure. Tailoring a fundoplication, according to preoperative patient symptoms and intraoperative findings, seems feasible and safe with a promising trend toward improved symptoms and quality of life.

Diaphragmatic herniation after esophagogastric surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The anatomy of the esophageal hiatus is altered during esophagogastric surgery with an increased risk of postoperative hiatus hernia (HH). The purpose of this article was to examine the current evidence on the surgical management and outcomes associated with HH after esophagogastric surgery for cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Web of Science, PubMed, and EMBASE data sets were consulted. RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies were included for a total of 404 patients requiring surgical treatment for HH after esophagogastric surgery. The age of the patients ranged from 35 to 85 years, and the majority were males (82.3%). Abdominal pain, nausea/vomiting, and dyspnea were the commonly reported symptoms. An emergency repair was required in 51.5%, while a minimally invasive repair was performed in 48.5%. Simple suture cruroplasty and mesh reinforced repair were performed in 65% and 35% of patients, respectively. The duration between the index procedure and HH repair ranged from 3 to 144 months, with the majority (67%) occurring within 24 months. The estimated pooled prevalence rates of pulmonary complications, anastomotic leak, overall morbidity, and mortality were 14.1% (95% CI = 8.0-22.0%), 1.4% (95% CI = 0.8-2.2%), 35% (95% CI = 20.0-54.0%), and 5.0% (95% CI = 3.0-8.0%), respectively. The postoperative follow-up ranged from 1 to 110 months (mean = 24) and the pooled prevalence of HH recurrence was 16% (95% CI = 13.0-21.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence reporting data for HH after esophagogastric surgery is narrow. The overall postoperative pulmonary complications, overall morbidity, and mortality are 14%, 35%, and 5%, respectively. Additional studies are required to define indications and treatment algorithm and evaluate the best technique for crural repair at the index operation in an attempt to minimize the risk of HH.

Systematic review and updated network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing open, laparoscopic-assisted, and robotic distal gastrectomy for early and locally advanced gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: The role of minimally invasive surgery for the treatment of early and locally advanced gastric cancer remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to perform a comprehensive evaluation of major surgical approaches for operable distal gastric cancer. METHODS: Systematic review and network meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials were performed to compare open distal gastrectomy, laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy, and robotic distal gastrectomy. Risk ratio, weighted mean difference, and 95% credible intervals were used as pooled effect size measures. RESULTS: Seventeen randomized controlled trials (5,909 patients) were included. Overall, 2,776 (46.8%) underwent open distal gastrectomy, 2,964 (50.1%) laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy, and 141 (3.1%) robotic distal gastrectomy. Among these 3 groups, there were no significant differences in 30-day mortality, anastomotic leak, and overall complications. Compared to open distal gastrectomy, laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy was associated with significantly reduced intraoperative blood loss, early postoperative pain, time to first flatus, and hospital length of stay. Similarly, robotic distal gastrectomy was associated with significantly reduced blood loss and time to first flatus compared to open distal gastrectomy. No differences were found in the total number of harvested lymph nodes, tumor-free resection margins, 5-year overall, and disease-free survival. The subgroup analysis in locally advanced gastric cancer showed trends toward reduced blood loss, time to first flatus, and hospital length of stay with minimally invasive approaches but similar overall and disease-free survival. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy and robotic distal gastrectomy performed by well-trained experienced surgeons, even in the setting of locally advanced gastric cancer, seem associated with improved short-term outcomes with similar overall and disease-free survival compared with open distal gastrectomy.

Total extraperitoneal (TEP) versus laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) hernioplasty: systematic review and trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials.

PURPOSE: To examine the updated evidence on safety, effectiveness, and outcomes of the totally extraperitoneal (TEP) versus the laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) repair and to explore the timely tendency variations favoring one treatment over another. METHODS: Systematic review and trial sequential analysis (TSA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were consulted. Risk Ratio (RR), weighted mean difference (WMD), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used as pooled effect size measures. RESULTS: Fifteen RCTs were included (1359 patients). Of these, 702 (51.6%) underwent TAPP and 657 (48.4%) TEP repair. The age of the patients ranged from 18 to 92 years and 87.9% were males. The estimated pooled RR for hernia recurrence (RR = 0.83; 95% CI 0.35-1.96) and chronic pain (RR = 1.51; 95% CI 0.54-4.22) were similar for TEP vs. TAPP. The TSA shows a cumulative z-curve without crossing the monitoring boundaries line (Z = 1.96), thus supporting true negative results while the information size was calculated as adequate for both outcomes. No significant differences were found in term of early postoperative pain, operative time, wound-related complications, hospital length of stay, return to work/daily activities, and costs. CONCLUSIONS: TEP and TAPP repair seems comparable in terms of postoperative hernia recurrence and chronic pain. The cumulative evidence and information size are sufficient to provide a conclusive evidence on recurrence and chronic pain. Similar trials or meta-analyses seem unlikely to show diverse results and should be discouraged.

Treatment of Inguinal Hernia: Systematic Review and Updated Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: Despite the advent of innovative surgical platforms and operative techniques, a definitive indication of the best surgical option for the treatment of unilateral primary inguinal hernia remains unsettled. Purpose was to perform an updated and comprehensive evaluation within the major approaches to inguinal hernia. METHODS: Systematic review and network meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) compare Lichtenstein tension-free repair, laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) repair, and totally extraperitoneal repair (TEP). Risk ratio (RR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) were used as pooled effect size measures, whereas 95% credible intervals (CrI) were used to assess relative inference. RESULTS: Thirty-five RCTs (7777 patients) were included. Overall, 3496 (44.9%) underwent Lichtenstein, 1269 (16.3%) TAPP, and 3012 (38.8%) TEP repair. The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) was significantly lower for minimally invasive repair at <12 hours, 24 hours, and 48 hours. Postoperative chronic pain [TAPP vs Lichtenstein (RR = 0.36; 95% CrI 0.15-0.81) and TEP vs Lichtenstein (RR = 0.36; 95% CrI 0.21-0.54)] and return to work/activities [TAPP vs Lichtenstein (WMD = -3.3; 95% CrI -4.9 to -1.8) and TEP vs Lichtenstein (WMD = -3.6; 95% CrI -4.9 to -2.4)] were significantly reduced for minimally invasive approaches. Wound hematoma and infection were significantly reduced for minimally invasive approaches, whereas no differences were found for seroma, hernia recurrence, and hospital length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive TAPP and TEP repair seem associated with significantly reduced early postoperative pain, return to work/activities, chronic pain, hematoma, and wound infection compared to the Lichtenstein tension-free repair. Hernia recurrence, seroma, and hospital length of stay seem similar across treatments.

Laparoscopic Toupet Fundoplication for the Treatment of Laryngopharyngeal Reflux: Results at Medium-Term follow-Up.

BACKGROUND: The effect of laparoscopic Toupet fundoplication (LTF) for the treatment of laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) is unclear. The purpose of this study is to investigate the feasibility and effectiveness of LTF for the treatment of LPR-related symptoms and disease-specific quality of life (QoL) up to 3-year follow-up. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Observational cohort study (2015-2019). Patients suffering from LPR were included. Preoperative evaluation included esophagogastroduodenoscopy, esophageal manometry and 24-h pH/impedance study. Symptoms and QoL were measured with the reflux symptom index (RSI) and the laryngopharyngeal reflux-health-related quality of life (LPR-HRQL) validate questionnaires at baseline and during follow-up. RESULTS: Eighty-six patients were included. Twenty-three (27%) patients had pure LPR while 63 (73%) presented with combined LPR/GERD. Cough (89.7%), dyspnea/choking (39.6%) and asthma (25.6%) were the most commonly reported extraesophageal symptoms. The median (interquartile range, IQR) total RSI score before operation and at 3-month, 6-month, 1-year, 2-year and 3-year follow-up was 36.1 (10.3), 9.58 (12.3), 11.8 (10.2), 12.4 (9.6), 12.0 (13.1) and 10.1 (12.0), respectively. The median (IQR) total LPR-HRQL score before operation and at 3-month, 6-month, 1-year, 2-year and 3-year follow-up was 57.4 (22.2), 13.4 (14.9), 15.2 (12.8), 11.4 (10.9) and 11.9 (13.5), respectively. The subscores "voice," "cough," "throat" and "swallow" showed a significant improvement after intervention. Compared to baseline, each per-year follow-up pairwise comparison was significantly improved (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: LTF seems feasible, effective and promising for the treatment of LPR with improved symptoms and disease-specific patients' quality of life perception up to 3-year follow-up.

Treatment of Persistent Leaks After Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy with the Simultaneous Over-the-Scope Clip (OTSC) and Mega Stent Strategy.

Persistent staple-line leak is a challenging complication after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). The over-the-scope clip (OTSC) (Ovesco®, Tübingen, Germany) and the Mega stent (Taewoong medical, Seoul, South Korea) recently gained encouraging results in the management of early leaks. This is a retrospective series (n = 8) focused on the management of persistent leaks after LSG with the simultaneous OTSC/Mega stent strategy. Seven patients underwent primary LSG. The median time from LSG to OTSC/Mega stent treatment was 48.5 days (range 28-63), and the median defect size was 9.5 mm (range 7-12). The median time to clear liquid diet, hospital length of stay, and overall treatment time were 4 days (range 2-5), 31 days (range 26-57), and 47 days (range 34-107), respectively. Overall success rate was 87.5%. Postoperative morbidity was 25%. The mean follow-up time was 18 months (range 3-24) with no fistula recurrence.

Dor versus Toupet fundoplication after Laparoscopic Heller Myotomy: Systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Laparoscopic Heller Myotomy (LHM) with partial fundoplication has become the treatment of choice for esophageal achalasia. However, the choice of the partial fundoplication is debated. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes for Dor and Toupet fundoplication after LHM. A systematic search of randomized controlled trials comparing Dor and Toupet fundoplication was performed using PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science. Three studies met the inclusion criteria. Overall, 174 patients were included in the analysis. The postoperative abnormal acid reflux [pooled Risk Ratio 0.98 (95% HPD 0.54-1.80)] and dysphagia [pooled Risk Ratio 1.03 (95% HPD 0.51-2.05)] were similar comparing Dor and Toupet fundoplication. The % total time pH ≤ 4 [estimated pooled mean difference -0.08 (95% HPD -1.04-0.90)] and DeMeester score [estimated pooled mean difference 0.51 (95% HPD -0.90-1.94)] were comparable. Additionally, the operative time [estimated pooled mean difference 0.02 (95% HPD -0.53-0.52)] and iatrogenic esophageal perforation [pooled Risk Ratio 1.05 (95% HPD 0.52-2.10)] were similar in the two groups. Dor and Toupet fundoplication after laparoscopic Heller myotomy seem comparable in term of postoperative abnormal acid exposure and dysphagia. The choice of the partial fundoplication should be left to surgeon experience and tailored on each patient.