Transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: evaluation of the learning curve.

BACKGROUND: Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) provides an excellent view of the resection margins for rectal cancer from below, but is challenging due to few anatomical landmarks. During implementation of this technique, patient safety and optimal outcomes need to be ensured. The aim of this study was to evaluate the learning curve of TaTME in patients with rectal cancer in order to optimize future training programs. METHODS: All consecutive patients after TaTME for rectal cancer between February 2012 and January 2017 were included in a single-center database. Influence of surgical experience on major postoperative complications, leakage rate and operating time was evaluated using cumulative sum charts and the splitting model. Correction for potential case-mix differences was performed. RESULTS: Over a period of 60 months, a total of 138 patients were included in this study. Adjusted for case-mix, improvement in postoperative outcomes was clearly seen after the first 40 patients, showing a decrease in major postoperative complications from 47.5 to 17.5% and leakage rate from 27.5 to 5%. Mean operating time (42 min) and conversion rate (from 10% to zero) was lower after transition to a two-team approach, but neither endpoint decreased with experience. Readmission and reoperation rates were not influenced by surgical experience. CONCLUSIONS: The learning curve of TaTME affected major (surgical) postoperative complications for the first 40 patients. A two-team approach decreased operative time and conversion rate. When implementing this new technique, a thorough teaching and supervisory program is recommended to shorten the learning curve and improve the clinical outcomes of the first patients.

Impact of Centralizing Gastric Cancer Surgery on Treatment, Morbidity, and Mortality.

INTRODUCTION: Centralization of gastric cancer surgery is thought to improve outcome and has been imposed in the Netherlands since 2012. This study analyzes the effect of centralization in terms of treatment outcome and survival in the Eastern part of the Netherlands. METHODS: All gastric cancer patients without distant metastases who underwent a gastrectomy in six hospitals in the Eastern part of the Netherlands between 2008 and 2011 (pre-centralization) and 2013-2016 (post-centralization) were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patient and tumor characteristics and treatment outcomes (duration of surgery, blood loss, resection margin, lymphadenectomy, chemotherapy, postoperative complications and hospital stay, and overall and disease-free survival) were analyzed and compared between pre- and post-centralization. RESULTS: One hundred forty-four patients were included pre-centralization and 106 patients post-centralization. Patient and tumor characteristics were almost similar in the two periods. After centralization, more patients were treated with perioperative chemotherapy (25 vs. 42% p < 0.01). The proportion of patients treated with an adequate lymphadenectomy (21 vs. 93% p < 0.01) and laparoscopic surgery (6 vs. 40% p < 0.01) increased significantly (p < 0.01). The amount of cardiac complications (16 vs. 7.5% p < 0.05) decreased; however, complications needing a re-intervention were comparable (42 vs. 40% p = 0.79). Median hospital stay decreased from 10 to 8 days (p < 0.01). A 30-day mortality did not differ significantly (4.2 vs. 1.9%). A 1-year overall (78 vs. 80% p = 0.17) and disease-free survival (73 vs. 74% p = 0.66) remained stable. DISCUSSION: Centralizing gastric cancer treatment in the Eastern part of the Netherlands resulted in improved lymph node harvesting and a successful introduction of laparoscopic gastrectomies. Centralization has not translated into improved mortality, and other variables may also have led to these improved outcomes. Further research using a nationwide population-based study will be needed to confirm these data.

Right hemothorax: An unusual presentation of a Barrett's ulcer perforation.

INTRODUCTION: Despite improvements in detection and surgical techniques perforation of the esophagus are lifethreatening. In this case report a rare presentation esophageal perforation due to Barrett's ulceration into an aortic vessel is described. PRESENTATION OF CASE: We report a 42 year old man with known Barrett's esophagus presenting with abdominal pain. Further investigations showed an active intrathoracal hemorrhage due to esophageal perforation at exactly the same site of the known Barret's ulcer one year before. Thoracotomy with evacuation of blood was performed and an aortic branch as bleeding focus was found. DISCUSSION: Hemothorax due to esophageal perforation of a benign Barrett's ulcer is rare. The diagnosis of aortoesophageal fistula's can be complicated and its presentation is frequently unspecific and is simply confused with other disorders. Acute thoracotomy is necessary and choice of closure depends on the cause and size of the perforation. CONCLUSION: This case illustrates the need for maintaining a wide-ranging view of potential casus of hemothorax. The key to survival in patients with aorto-esophageal fistula is maintaining awareness of the condition to allow early diagnosis and operative management of this treatable lesion.