Low-Impact Laparoscopy vs Conventional Laparoscopy for Appendectomy: A Prospective Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Low-impact laparoscopy (LIL), combining low-pressure insufflation and microlaparoscopy, is a surgical technique that is still not widely used and that has never been evaluated for the management of acute appendicitis. The aim of this study is to assess the feasibility of an LIL protocol, to compare postoperative pain, average length of stay, and in-hospital use of analgesics by patients who underwent appendectomy according to a conventional laparoscopy or an LIL protocol. STUDY DESIGN: Patients presenting with acute uncomplicated appendicitis who were operated on between January 1, 2021, and July 10, 2022, were included in this double-blind, single-center, prospective study. They were preoperatively randomly assigned to a group undergoing conventional laparoscopy, ie with an insufflation pressure of 12 mmHg and conventional instrumentation, and an LIL group, with an insufflation pressure of 7 mmHg and microlaparoscopic instrumentation. RESULTS: Fifty patients were included in this study, 24 in the LIL group and 26 in the conventional group. There were no statistically significant differences between the 2 patient groups, including weight and surgical history. The postoperative complication rate was comparable between the 2 groups (p = 0.81). Pain was reported as significantly lower according to the visual analog scale 2 hours after surgery among the LIL group (p = 0.019). For patients who underwent surgery according to the LIL protocol, the study confirms a statistically significant difference for theoretical and actual length of stay, ie -0.77 days and -0.59 days, respectively (p < 0.001 and p = 0.03). In-hospital use of analgesics was comparable between both groups. CONCLUSIONS: In uncomplicated acute appendicitis, the LIL protocol could reduce postoperative pain and average length of stay compared to conventional laparoscopic appendectomy.

Preoperative prognostic factors for obstructive colorectal cancer.

AIM: The aim of the study was to determine the preoperative predictive factors of overall survival, relapse-free survival, and peritoneal carcinomatosis in obstructive colorectal cancer. METHODS: Data from patients undergoing emergency surgery for obstructive colorectal cancer at our center between 2004 and 2016 were extracted retrospectively from our health records. Several preoperative parameters were used to predict survival and peritoneal carcinomatosis using univariate and multivariate analysis, and ROC curves. RESULTS: A total of 107 patients with obstructive colorectal cancer were included. Five-year relapse-free and overall survival rates were 14% and 28%, respectively, with 15% peritoneal carcinomatosis. Univariate analysis showed that age ≥ 83 years old, preoperative ASA score ≥ 3, initial hemodynamic instability, and CRP > 18.3 mg/L was significantly associated with worse relapse-free and overall survival. In a multivariate analysis, only age > 83 years (HR = 1.75; HR = 2.16, for relapse-free and overall survival status, respectively) and hemodynamic instability (HR = 7.29; HR = 6.55) were confirmed in the multivariate model. Global peritoneal carcinomatosis was significantly associated with synchronous liver metastases in the multivariate model (OR = 4.56), and synchronous peritoneal carcinomatosis only was significantly associated with platelet to lymphocyte ratio (PLR) > 269 and synchronous liver metastases in the multivariate model (OR = 0.003; OR = 7.26). CONCLUSION: Synchronous liver metastases are prognostic risk factor for global and synchronous peritoneal carcinomatosis whereas PLR > 269 was a significant protective factor for synchronous peritoneal carcinomatosis only for obstructive colorectal cancer. Age > 83 years and initial hemodynamic instability were key preoperative prognostic risk factors for worse relapse-free and overall survival. Prognostic usefulness of blood cell ratios for mortality and peritoneal carcinomatosis warrants further investigation.

Case series of mesh migration after rectopexy surgery for rectal prolapse.

Mesh rectopexy for rectal prolapse can cause some serious mesh-related complications. Mesh migration into close viscera following rectopexy is rare. We report three cases of mesh migration after mesh rectopexy treated in our unit. The first patient presented with purulent discharge from the buttock 15 years after the rectopexy, the second patient presented with abdominal pain and pneumaturia also 15 years after the rectopexy and the third patient presented 22 years after the rectopexy with vaginal discharge. Diagnosis was made by physical examination, computed tomography scan, magnetic resonance imaging, cystoscopy or rectoscopy. The three patients underwent total removal of the meshes without any complications.

Primary Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass Results in Greater Weight Loss at 15-Year Follow-Up Compared with Secondary Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass After Failure of Gastric Band or Mason McLean Vertical Gastroplasty.

PURPOSE: The aim of the study is to compare the outcomes of patients treated with secondary Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) after adjustable gastric banding (AGB) or vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG) with those of patients having primary RYGB. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients undergoing secondary RYGB after AGB or VBG between 1997 and 2004 with a minimal follow-up of 15 years were matched using a propensity score (according to gender, age, BMI, duration of follow-up) with comparable patients who underwent primary RYGB. RESULTS: The mean follow-up was 16.50 years in the secondary RYGB group (N = 32) versus 16.33 years in the primary RYGB group (N = 32). Early postoperative complications rate was 6.25% in the secondary RYGBs versus 9.38% in the primary RYGBs (P = 1). Late postoperative complications and additional surgical procedures were 56.25% and 37.5% in the secondary and primary RYGB group, respectively (P = 0.21). Long-term (at 16-20 years) %TWL and %EWL were significantly lower (P < 0.01 and P = 0.013, respectively) after secondary RYGB (%TWL = 7.56%; %EWL = 17.15%) than after primary RYGB (%TWL = 24.51%; %EWL = 55.61%). Remission of obesity-related comorbidities was comparable (P > 0.05). Gastroesophageal reflux was more frequent after secondary RGYB-43.75% versus 25%, P < 0.05. Quality of life-Morehead-Ardelt II score (0.02 in secondary RYGB versus 0.69 in primary RYGB, P = 0.13), general self-assessment of health status and weight satisfaction were comparable. CONCLUSION: Secondary RYGB after AGB or VBG is less efficient at weight loss, GERD remission and energy expenditure at 15 years after conversion. However, it is as effective for improvement/resolution of obesity-related comorbidities and is associated with similar QoL scores.

Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Double Fistulo-Jejunostomy for Chronic Gastric Leaks After Converted Vertical Banded Gastroplasty to Sleeve Gastrectomy.

BACKGROUND: As laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is becoming the most popular bariatric procedure worldwide, treatment options for managing complications, in particular gastric leaks, are also emerging. Staple line leak is a major short-term complication of the procedure. Patients with persistent gastric leaks after failure of endoscopic and radiologic management are candidates for salvage surgery. Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y fistulo-jejunostomy (RYFJ) represents a surgical option to treat persistent gastric leak post-LSG. METHODS: We present the case of a 55-year-old woman undergoing laparoscopic double RYFJ for persistent gastric leaks after complicated bariatric surgery. The patient developed two chronic gastric leaks (gastro-esophageal and cardial localizations) following conversion to sleeve gastrectomy for failed vertical banded gastroplasty. With the two leaks being refractory to endoscopic treatment 6 months later after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy, salvage surgery was proposed. Surgery was performed laparoscopically, the gastric leak orifices were identified after careful dissection, and a double RYFJ was successfully completed. RESULTS: Postoperative course was uneventful. The patient remains in good health 6 months after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Double LRYFJ for chronic leaks after complicated bariatric procedures seems safe with good postoperative outcomes. However, it remains a challenging procedure and should be reserved for selected patients in specialized bariatric centers.