Laparoscopic Lavage vs Primary Resection for Acute Perforated Diverticulitis: Long-term Outcomes From the Scandinavian Diverticulitis (SCANDIV) Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Perforated colonic diverticulitis usually requires surgical resection, with significant morbidity. Short-term results from randomized clinical trials have indicated that laparoscopic lavage is a feasible alternative to resection. However, it appears that no long-term results are available. Objective: To compare long-term (5-year) outcomes of laparoscopic peritoneal lavage and primary resection as treatments of perforated purulent diverticulitis. Design, Setting, and Participants: This international multicenter randomized clinical trial was conducted in 21 hospitals in Sweden and Norway, which enrolled patients between February 2010 and June 2014. Long-term follow-up was conducted between March 2018 and November 2019. Patients with symptoms of left-sided acute perforated diverticulitis, indicating urgent surgical need and computed tomography-verified free air, were eligible. Those available for trial intervention (Hinchey stages

Endorectal ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging for staging of early rectal cancers: how well does it work in practice?

BACKGROUND: Rectal tumor treatment strategies are individually tailored based on tumor stage, and yield different rates of posttreatment morbidity, mortality, and local recurrence. Therefore, the accuracy of pretreatment staging is highly important. Here we investigated the accuracy of staging by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and endorectal ultrasound (ERUS) in a clinical setting. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 500 patients were examined at the rectal cancer outpatient clinic at Haukeland University Hospital between October 2014 and January 2018. This study included only cases in which the resection specimen had a histopathological staging of adenoma or early rectal cancer (pT1-pT2). Patients with previous pelvic surgery or preoperative radiotherapy were excluded. The 145 analyzed patients were preoperatively examined via biopsy (n = 132), digital rectal examination (n = 77), rigid rectoscopy (n = 127), ERUS (n = 104), real-time elastography (n = 96), and MRI (n = 84). RESULTS: ERUS distinguished between adenomas and early rectal cancer with 88% accuracy (95% CI: 0.68-0.96), while MRI achieved 75% accuracy (95% CI: 0.54-0.88). ERUS tended to overstage T1 tumors as T2-T3 (16/24). MRI overstaged most adenomas to T1-T2 tumors (18/22). Neither ERUS nor MRI distinguished between T1 and T2 tumors. CONCLUSIONS: In a clinical setting, ERUS differentiated between benign and malignant tumors with high accuracy. The present findings support previous reports that ERUS and MRI have low accuracy for T-staging of early rectal cancer. We recommend that MRI be routinely combined with ERUS for the clinical examination of rectal tumors, since MRI consistently overstaged adenomas as cancer. In adenomas, MRI had no additional benefit for preoperative staging.

Randomized Controlled Trial of Extended Perioperative Counseling in Enhanced Recovery After Colorectal Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery after surgery programs reduce the length of hospital stay in patients who undergo elective colorectal resection, but the reasons for this reduction are not well understood. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this randomized controlled trial was to assess the impact of extended perioperative counseling in treatment groups that were otherwise the same with respect to enhanced recovery after surgery criteria. DESIGN: Patients eligible for open or laparoscopic colorectal resection were randomly assigned to extended counseling (repeated information and guidance by a dedicated nurse) or standard counseling. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at a single institution. PATIENTS: Patients (n = 164) were randomly assigned to enhanced recovery after surgery plus extended counseling (n = 80) or enhanced recovery after surgery with standard counseling (n = 84). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary end point was the total length of hospital stay. Discharge criteria were defined. Secondary end points were postoperative complications, postoperative length of hospital stay, readmission rate, and mortality. RESULTS: Total hospital stay was significantly shorter among patients randomly assigned to enhanced recovery after surgery plus extended counseling (median 5 (range 2-29) days vs 7 (range 2-39) days, p < 0.001). The 2 treatment groups differed in adherence to the elements of postoperative enhanced recovery after surgery such as mobilization and total oral intake. The 2 treatment groups did not differ in overall, major, and minor morbidity; reoperation rate; readmission rate; and 30-day mortality. LIMITATIONS: The main limitation of this study was the absence of blinding. CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative information and guidance were important factors in enhanced recovery after surgery care and were associated with a significantly shorter length of hospital stay. Our findings suggest that perioperative counseling enables patients to comply with the elements of postoperative enhanced recovery after surgery and thereby reduces the length of hospital stay. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01610726). See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A505.

Enhanced Recovery After Colorectal Surgery (ERAS) in Elderly Patients Is Feasible and Achieves Similar Results as in Younger Patients.

Aim: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) is a multimodal approach that aims to optimize perioperative treatment. Whether elderly patients receiving colorectal surgery can adhere to and benefit from an ERAS approach is uncertain. The aim of this study was to compare patients in different age groups participating in an ERAS program. Method: In this substudy of a randomized controlled trial, we analyzed the interventional ERAS arm of adult patients eligible for laparoscopic or open colorectal resection with regard to the importance of age. Patients were divided into three groups based on age: ≤65 years (n = 79), 66-79 years (n = 56), and ≥80 years (n = 19). The primary end point was total postoperative hospital stay (THS). Secondary end points were postoperative hospital stay, postoperative complications, postoperative C-reactive protein levels, readmission rate, mortality, and patient adherence to the different ERAS elements. All parameters and measuring the adherence to the ERAS protocol were recorded before surgery, on the day of the operation, and daily until discharge. Results: There were no significant differences in length of THS between age groups (≤65 years, median 5 [range 2-47] days; 66-79 years, median 5.5 [range 2-36] days; ≥80 years, median 7 [range 3-50] days; p = .53). All secondary outcomes were similar between age groups. Patient adherence to the ERAS protocol was as good in the elderly as it was in the younger patients. Conclusion: Elderly patients adhered to and benefited from an ERAS program, similar to their younger counterparts.

Laparoscopic Lavage vs Primary Resection for Acute Perforated Diverticulitis: The SCANDIV Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Perforated colonic diverticulitis usually requires surgical resection, which is associated with significant morbidity. Cohort studies have suggested that laparoscopic lavage may treat perforated diverticulitis with less morbidity than resection procedures. OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes from laparoscopic lavage with those for colon resection for perforated diverticulitis. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Multicenter, randomized clinical superiority trial recruiting participants from 21 centers in Sweden and Norway from February 2010 to June 2014. The last patient follow-up was in December 2014 and final review and verification of the medical records was assessed in March 2015. Patients with suspected perforated diverticulitis, a clinical indication for emergency surgery, and free air on an abdominal computed tomography scan were eligible. Of 509 patients screened, 415 were eligible and 199 were enrolled. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were assigned to undergo laparoscopic peritoneal lavage (n = 101) or colon resection (n = 98) based on a computer-generated, center-stratified block randomization. All patients with fecal peritonitis (15 patients in the laparoscopic peritoneal lavage group vs 13 in the colon resection group) underwent colon resection. Patients with a pathology requiring treatment beyond that necessary for perforated diverticulitis (12 in the laparoscopic lavage group vs 13 in the colon resection group) were also excluded from the protocol operations and treated as required for the pathology encountered. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was severe postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo score >IIIa) within 90 days. Secondary outcomes included other postoperative complications, reoperations, length of operating time, length of postoperative hospital stay, and quality of life. RESULTS: The primary outcome was observed in 31 of 101 patients (30.7%) in the laparoscopic lavage group and 25 of 96 patients (26.0%) in the colon resection group (difference, 4.7% [95% CI, -7.9% to 17.0%]; P = .53). Mortality at 90 days did not significantly differ between the laparoscopic lavage group (14 patients [13.9%]) and the colon resection group (11 patients [11.5%]; difference, 2.4% [95% CI, -7.2% to 11.9%]; P = .67). The reoperation rate was significantly higher in the laparoscopic lavage group (15 of 74 patients [20.3%]) than in the colon resection group (4 of 70 patients [5.7%]; difference, 14.6% [95% CI, 3.5% to 25.6%]; P = .01) for patients who did not have fecal peritonitis. The length of operating time was significantly shorter in the laparoscopic lavage group; whereas, length of postoperative hospital stay and quality of life did not differ significantly between groups. Four sigmoid carcinomas were missed with laparoscopic lavage. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with likely perforated diverticulitis and undergoing emergency surgery, the use of laparoscopic lavage vs primary resection did not reduce severe postoperative complications and led to worse outcomes in secondary end points. These findings do not support laparoscopic lavage for treatment of perforated diverticulitis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01047462.

Survival and an overview of decision-making in patients with cholangiocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Cholangiocarcinoma is rare, accounting for approximately 3% of all gastrointestinal cancers. This study aimed to identify the survival rate among surgically treated and palliated patients, and secondly to identify parameters that could predict a curative resection. METHODS: A total of 121 patients, 55 men and 66 women, median age 70 years (range 31-91), who had been treated for cholangiocarcinoma in the period of 1990-2005 were evaluated retrospectively. RESULTS: Curative resection was performed in 40 patients (33%), whereas 81 received palliative treatment (67%). 16% (19 of 121) of the patients had an explorative laparotomy without tumour resection. Age above 65 years (OR 3.4; 95% CI 1.4-8.4; P=0.008), weight loss (OR 8.5; 95% CI 1.5-46; P=0.01) or tumour location (The resection rate of hilar cholangiocarcinoma was lower than that of intrapancreatic cancer.) (OR 2.7; 95% CI 1.7-4.5; P=0.001) predicted palliative treatment. The adjusted 5-year survival rate of patients who received tumour resection and palliative treatment was 30% and 1.2 %, respectively (P<0.001). The survival rate of patients who were subjected to hepatectomy (70%) was better than that of patients who had a local or distal resection (20%) (P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: In few patients with a resectable cholangiocarcinoma, an explorative laparotomy is often necessary to evaluate resectability. However, long-term survival is significantly better in patients who received radical surgical resection.

[Perforated peptic ulcer--a 12-year material]. / Ulcus perforatum - et 12-årsmateriale.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to explore patient characteristics, diagnostic and surgical procedures and results of treatment of perforated peptic ulcer at our hospital, and determine prognostic factors for death and postoperative complications. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data were collected retrospectively from 102 patients with perforated peptic ulcer identified from a broad case file search of 590 patients from 1992 to 2003. Prognostic factors for dead and post-operative complications were analysed using both uni- and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: 48 men and 54 women, median age 71 (25 - 94) were evaluated. Surgery was performed in 100 patients, 2 received conservative treatment. 55 patients had perforated gastric ulcers (including prepyloric ulcers), and 47 patients had perforated duodenal ulcers. Out of the 100 patients who underwent surgery, 22 died and 39 suffered postoperative complications. By univariate analysis, high age, high ASA score and a long interval between initial symptoms and surgery were significantly associated with death (p < 0.01) and postoperative complications (p < 0.05). By logistic regression, high age (OR 1.1; 95 % CI 1.0 - 1.2; p = 0.04) and high ASA classification (OR 6.7; 95 % CI 1.4 - 33; p = 0.02) predicted death, and high ASA classification predicted postoperative complications (OR 4.2; 95 % CI 1.7 - 10.2; p = 0.002). INTERPRETATION: Perforated peptic ulcer is a disease with low incidence, high mortality and a high frequency of postoperative complications, mainly determined by the patient's age and ASA classification.