From "Cure" to "Care": The Role of the MultiDisciplinary Team on Colorectal Cancer Patients' Satisfaction and Oncological Outcomes.

Background: MultiDisciplinary Team (MDT) are held to undertake decisions regarding the whole aspect of oncological diseases. Over the years, they acquired a collaborative approach where clinical decisions are shared by all members. Different guidelines recommend the implementation of MDT, in order to improve the outcomes of these patients. Our aim is to evaluate how the implementation of MDT affects the patients' satisfaction and adherence to treatment. Methods: A survey was submitted to every patient affected by colorectal cancer treated by the MDT of Sant'Andrea Hospital (Rome, IT). The investigation period was January 2017-March 2020. Data from patients inside the MDT were compared with patients outside the MDT to evaluate a reduction in waiting times. Results: A total of 591 patients were collected. A total of 355 patients with colorectal neoplasia were included in our analysis. Cumulative overall survival was 79%. The average waiting time for computed tomography or colonoscopy was 14.9 days for patients in the MDT versus 24.5. A total of 201 patients were eligible for our satisfaction survey. An 89.5% of patients felt followed in their treatment. A 93.5% of patients expressed a high grade of satisfaction for the MDT design. Conclusion: Our study confirms the importance of a well-structured MDT. Dedicated slots shorten the waiting time, leading to better satisfaction and faster diagnosis. Patients' satisfaction should be considered as an index of good practice when it comes to oncological patients' treatment.

Laparoscopic versus Open Surgery for Gastric Cancer in Western Countries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Short- and Long-Term Outcomes.

Background. The advantages of a laparoscopic approach for the treatment of gastric cancer have already been demonstrated in Eastern Countries. This review and meta-analysis aims to merge all the western studies comparing laparoscopic (LG) versus open gastrectomies (OG) to provide pooled results and higher levels of evidence. Methods. A systematic literature search was performed in MEDLINE(PubMed), Embase, WebOfScience and Scopus for studies comparing laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy in western centers from 1980 to 2021. Results. After screening 355 articles, 34 articles with a total of 24,098 patients undergoing LG (5445) or OG (18,653) in western centers were included. Compared to open gastrectomy, laparoscopic gastrectomy has a significantly longer operation time (WMD = 47.46 min; 95% CI = 31.83−63.09; p < 0.001), lower blood loss (WMD = −129.32 mL; 95% CI = −188.11 to −70.53; p < 0.0001), lower analgesic requirement (WMD = −1.824 days; 95% CI = −2.314 to −1.334; p < 0.0001), faster time to first oral intake (WMD = −1.501 days; 95% CI = −2.571 to −0.431; p = 0.0060), shorter hospital stay (WMD = −2.335; 95% CI = −3.061 to −1.609; p < 0.0001), lower mortality (logOR = −0.261; 95% the −0.446 to −0.076; p = 0.0056) and a better 3-year overall survival (logHR 0.245; 95% CI = 0.016−0.474; p = 0.0360). A slight significant difference in favor of laparoscopic gastrectomy was noted for the incidence of postoperative complications (logOR = −0.202; 95% CI = −0.403 to −0.000 the = 0.0499). No statistical difference was noted based on the number of harvested lymph nodes, the rate of major postoperative complication and 5-year overall survival. Conclusions. In Western centers, laparoscopic gastrectomy has better short-term and equivalent long-term outcomes compared with the open approach, but more high-quality studies on long-term outcomes are required.

Democratizing Flexible Endoscopy Training: Noninferiority Randomized Trial Comparing a Box-Trainer vs a Virtual Reality Simulator to Prepare for the Fundamental of Endoscopic Surgery Exam.

BACKGROUND: A considerable number of surgical residents fail the mandated endoscopy exam despite having completed the required clinical cases. Low-cost endoscopy box trainers (BTs) could democratize training; however, their effectiveness has never been compared with higher-cost virtual reality simulators (VRSs). STUDY DESIGN: In this randomized noninferiority trial, endoscopy novices trained either on the VRS used in the Fundamental of Endoscopic Surgery manual skills (FESms) exam or a validated BT-the Basic Endoscopic Skills Training (BEST) box. Trainees were tested at fixed timepoints on the FESms and on standardized ex vivo models. The primary endpoint was FESms improvement at 1 week. Secondary endpoints were FESms improvement at 2 weeks, FESms pass rates, ex vivo tests performance, and trainees' feedback. RESULTS: Seventy-seven trainees completed the study. VRS and BT trainees showed comparable FESms improvements (25.16 ± 14.29 vs 25.58 ± 11.75 FESms points, respectively; p = 0.89), FESms pass rates (76.32% vs 61.54%, respectively; p = 0.16) and total ex vivo tasks completion times (365.76 ± 237.56 vs 322.68 ± 186.04 seconds, respectively; p = 0.55) after 1 week. Performances were comparable also after 2 weeks of training, but FESms pass rates increased significantly only in the first week. Trainees were significantly more satisfied with the BT platform (3.97 ± 1.20 vs 4.81 ± 0.40 points on a 5-point Likert scale for the VRS and the BT, respectively; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Simulation-based training is an effective means to develop competency in endoscopy, especially at the beginning of the learning curve. Low-cost BTs like the BEST box compare well with high-tech VRSs and could help democratize endoscopy training.

Multicentric validation of EndoDigest: a computer vision platform for video documentation of the critical view of safety in laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

BACKGROUND: A computer vision (CV) platform named EndoDigest was recently developed to facilitate the use of surgical videos. Specifically, EndoDigest automatically provides short video clips to effectively document the critical view of safety (CVS) in laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). The aim of the present study is to validate EndoDigest on a multicentric dataset of LC videos. METHODS: LC videos from 4 centers were manually annotated with the time of the cystic duct division and an assessment of CVS criteria. Incomplete recordings, bailout procedures and procedures with an intraoperative cholangiogram were excluded. EndoDigest leveraged predictions of deep learning models for workflow analysis in a rule-based inference system designed to estimate the time of the cystic duct division. Performance was assessed by computing the error in estimating the manually annotated time of the cystic duct division. To provide concise video documentation of CVS, EndoDigest extracted video clips showing the 2 min preceding and the 30 s following the predicted cystic duct division. The relevance of the documentation was evaluated by assessing CVS in automatically extracted 2.5-min-long video clips. RESULTS: 144 of the 174 LC videos from 4 centers were analyzed. EndoDigest located the time of the cystic duct division with a mean error of 124.0 ± 270.6 s despite the use of fluorescent cholangiography in 27 procedures and great variations in surgical workflows across centers. The surgical evaluation found that 108 (75.0%) of the automatically extracted short video clips documented CVS effectively. CONCLUSIONS: EndoDigest was robust enough to reliably locate the time of the cystic duct division and efficiently video document CVS despite the highly variable workflows. Training specifically on data from each center could improve results; however, this multicentric validation shows the potential for clinical translation of this surgical data science tool to efficiently document surgical safety.

Statistical models to preoperatively predict operative difficulty in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy operative difficulty is highly variable and influences outcomes. This systematic review analyzes the performance and clinical value of statistical models to preoperatively predict laparoscopic cholecystectomy operative difficulty. METHODS: PRISMA guidelines were followed. PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched until June 2020. Primary studies developing or validating preoperative models predicting laparoscopic cholecystectomy operative difficulty in cohorts of >100 patients were included. Studies not reporting performance metrics or enough information for clinical implementation were excluded. Data were extracted according to CHARMS, and study quality was assessed using the PROBAST tool. RESULTS: In total, 2,654 articles were identified, and 22 met eligibility criteria. Eighteen were model development, whereas 4 were validation studies. Eighteen studies were at high risk of bias. However, 11 studies showed low concern for applicability. Identified models predict 9 definitions of laparoscopic cholecystectomy operative difficulty, the most common being conversion to open surgery and operating time. The most validated models predict an intraoperative difficulty scale and procedures >90 minutes with an area under the curve of >0.70 and >0.76, respectively. Commonly used predictors include demographic variables such as age and gender (9/18 models) and ultrasound findings such as gallbladder wall thickness (11/18). Clinical implementation was never studied. CONCLUSION: There is a longstanding interest in estimating laparoscopic cholecystectomy operative difficulty. Models to preoperatively predict laparoscopic cholecystectomy operative difficulty have generally good performance and seem applicable. However, an unambiguous definition of operative difficulty, validations, and clinical studies are needed to implement patients' stratification in laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

2D vs 3D laparoscopic right colectomy: A propensity score-matching comparison of personal experience with systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The benefits of laparoscopic approach for right colectomy have been well established. However, the technical difficulty to construct the intra-corporeal anastomosis is still cumbersome. AIM: To analyze the results of 3D and 2D laparoscopic right colectomy and to compare it to the published series through a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: A retrospective study with propensity score matching analysis of patients undergoing laparoscopic right colectomy at Umbria2 Hospitals from January 2014 to March 2020 was performed. A systematic review was accomplished comparing 2D and 3D right colectomy. RESULTS: In the personal series 47 patients of the 2D group were matched to 47 patients of the 3D group. The 3D group showed a favorable trend in terms of mean operative time (170.7 ± 32.9 min vs 183.8 ± 35.4 min; P = 0.053) and a significant lower anastomotic time (16.9 ± 2.3 min vs 19.6 ± 2.9 min, P < 0.001). The complete mesocolic excision (CME) subgroups analysis showed a shorter anastomotic time (16.5 ± 1.8 min vs 19.9 ± 3.0 min; P < 0.001) and operative time (175.0 ± 38.5 min vs 193.7 ± 37.1 min; P = 0.063) in the 3D group. Six studies and our series were included in the meta-analysis with 551 patients (2D group: 291; 3D group: 260).The pooled analysis demonstrated a significant difference in favour of the 3D group regarding the operative time (P < 0.001) and the anastomotic time (P < 0.001) while no differences were identified between groups in terms of blood loss (P = 0.827), LNH yield (P = 0.243), time to first flatus (P = 0.333), postoperative complications (P = 0.718) and length of stay (P = 0.835). CONCLUSION: The meta-analysis results showed that 3D laparoscopic right colectomy shortens operative and anastomotic time without affecting the standard lymphadenectomy. In our series, the advantage of the 3D system becomes evident when CME and/or more complex associated procedure are requested significantly reducing both the total operative and the anastomotic time.

Laparoscopic versus open distal gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer in middle-low-volume centers in Western countries: a propensity score matching analysis.

BACKGROUND: Gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy is the standard treatment for patients with resectable gastric cancer. Laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) is routinely performed for early gastric cancer, and its indications are increasing even for locally advanced gastric cancer. The aim of this study is to compare two middle-low-volume centers in Western countries experience on LDG versus open distal gastrectomy (ODG) for locally advanced gastric cancer in terms of surgical and oncological outcomes. METHODS: We reviewed the data of 123 consecutive patients that underwent LDG and ODG with D2 lymphadenectomy between 2009 and 2014. Among them, 91 were eligible for inclusion (46 LDG and 45 ODG). After propensity score matching analysis, using a 1:1 case-control match, 34 patients were stratified for each group. RESULTS: The mean operative time was significantly longer in the LDG group (257.2 vs. 197.2, p < 0.001). No differences were observed in terms of intraoperative blood loss, average number of lymph nodes removed, and lymph node metastases. The postoperative morbidity was comparable in the two groups. LDG group had a significant faster bowel canalization and soft oral intake (p < 0.001). The 5-year overall and disease-free survival were higher for patients treated by laparoscopy, but the post-hoc subgroups analysis revealed that the advantage of LDG was significant just in N0 and stage IB-II patients, whereas N+ and stage III patient's survival curves were perfectly superimposable. CONCLUSIONS: LDG for locally advanced gastric cancer seems to be feasible and safe with surgical and long-term oncological outcomes comparable with open surgery, even in medium-low-volume centers.

Training in bariatric and metabolic endoscopy.

The limited penetration of bariatric surgery and the scarce outcome of pharmacological therapies created a favorable space for primary bariatric endoscopic techniques. Furthermore, bariatric endoscopy is largely used to diagnose and treat surgical complications and weight regain after bariatric surgery. The increasingly essential role of endoscopy in the management of obese patients results in the need for trained professionals. Training methods are evolving, and the apprenticeship method is giving way to the simulation-based method. Existing simulation platforms include mechanical simulators, ex vivo and in vivo models, and virtual reality simulators. This review analyzes current training methods for bariatric endoscopy and available training programs with dedicated bariatric core curricula, giving a glimpse of future perspectives.

Endoscopic Preoperative Tattooing and Marking in the Gastrointestinal Tract: A Systematic Review of Alternative Methods.

Background: An accurate and reliable localization of endoluminal gastrointestinal (GI) lesions is crucial, particularly during minimally invasive surgery. As an extreme consequence, a misdetected GI lesion can lead to the resection of the wrong segment, especially in colorectal surgery. A preoperative endoscopic marking is recommended in case of GI lesions, which are expected to be difficult to detect from the serosal side. In clinical practice, three preoperative endoscopic marking methods are currently used: India ink, SPOT™, and endoclips with intraoperative fluoroscopy. All of them have substantial limitations. This has encouraged research on alternative solutions. Methods: In the current systematic review, animal and clinical studies about alternative preoperative endoscopic marking methods of GI lesions were analyzed using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Results: Thirty studies were found using PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE/Ovid, and the Cochrane Library for the qualitative analysis. Conclusion: Although several smart solutions have been proposed and tested successfully, all of them seem to have a substantial drawback related either to scarce stability on the marking site or potential spreading on the bowel wall or diffusion into the surgical planes.

Development of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol in laparoscopic colorectal surgery: results of the first 120 consecutive cases from a university hospital.

The ERAS® represents a dynamic culmination of upon perioperative care elements, successfully applied to different surgical specialties with shorter hospital stay and lower morbidity rates. The aim of this study is to describe the introduction of the ERAS protocol in colorectal surgery in our hospital analysing our first series. Between September 2014 and June 2016, 120 patients suffering from colorectal diseases were included in the study. Laparoscopic approach was used in all patients if not contraindicated. Patients were discharged when adequate mobilization, canalization, and pain control were obtained. Analysed outcomes were: length of hospital stay, readmission rate, perioperative morbidity, and mortality. Malignant lesions were the most common indication (84.2%; 101/120). Laparoscopic approach was performed in the 95.8% of cases (115/120) with a conversion rate of 4.4% (5/115). Surgical procedures performed were: 36 rectal resections (30%), 36 left colonic resections (30%), 42 right hemicolectomy (35%), and 6 Miles (5%). The median hospital stay was of 4 (3-34) days in the whole series with a morbidity rate of 10% (12/120); four patients experienced Clavien-Dindo ≥ IIIa complications; and only one anastomotic leak was observed. No 30-day readmission and no perioperative mortality were recorded. At the univariate analysis, the presence of complications was the only predictive factor for prolonged hospital stay (p < 0.001). In our experience, implementation of ERAS protocol for colorectal surgery allows a significant reduction of hospital stay improving perioperative management and postoperative outcomes.

Influence of perineural invasion in predicting overall survival and disease-free survival in patients With locally advanced gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the prognostic significance of perineural invasion (PNI) in locally advanced gastric cancer patients who underwent D2 gastrectomy and adjuvant chemotherapy. METHODS: The records of a series of 103 patients undergoing D2 gastrectomy with curative intent combined with adjuvant chemotherapy from January 2004 to December 2014 were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: PNI was positive in 47 (45.6%) specimens. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival rates were 81%, 55%, and 42%, respectively. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rates were 76%, 57%, and 49%, respectively. A multivariate analysis showed that age number of positive lymph nodes, T stage, and PNI were independently associated with overall survival. Regarding DFS, the multivariate analysis showed that only PNI was independently associated with DFS. CONCLUSIONS: PNI and T stage and positive lymph nodes are independent markers of poor prognosis in patients with gastric cancer. PNI should be incorporated in the postoperative staging system for planning follow-up after surgery and in our opinion to propose more aggressive postoperative therapies in PNI-positive patients.

Does ghost ileostomy have a role in the laparoscopic rectal surgery era? A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Anastomotic leakage following anterior rectal resection is the most important and most commonly faced complication of laparoscopy and open surgery. To prevent this complication, the construction of a preventing stoma is usually adopted. It is not easy to decide whether to construct a protective stoma in patients with a medium risk of anastomotic leakage. In these patients, ghost ileostomy (GI), a pre-stage ileostomy that can be externalized and opened if needed, has proved useful. We conducted a prospective, randomized, controlled study to evaluate the advantages of GI in laparoscopic rectal resection. METHODS: All patients with surgical indications for laparoscopic rectal resection who were at medium risk for anastomotic leakage from January 2007 to January 2013 were included and were randomly divided in 2 groups. All of the patients were subjected to laparoscopic anterior rectal resection with the performance of GI (group A) or without the construction of any protective stoma (group B). The presence and severity of clinically evident postoperative anastomotic leakage and other postoperative complications and reinterventions were investigated. RESULTS: Of the 55 patients allocated to group A, 3 experienced anastomotic leakage compared with 4 in group B. The patients with GI experienced a lower severity of anastomotic leakage and shorter hospitalization compared with the patients in group B. None of the patients with GI and anastomotic leakage required laparotomy to treat the dehiscence. CONCLUSIONS: The use of GI in laparoscopic rectal resections in patients at medium risk for anastomotic leakage was useful because it allowed for the avoidance of stoma creation in all of the patients, thus reducing the number of stomas performed, improving the quality of life of the patients and preserving, in most cases, the benefits gained by laparoscopy.

Can a curved stapler made for open surgery be useful in laparoscopic lower rectal resections? Technique and experience of a single centre.

BACKGROUND: The use of laparoscopy to perform lower anterior rectal resection is increasing worldwide because it allows better visualisation and rectal mobilisation and also reduces postoperative pain and recovery. The Contour Curved Stapler (CCS) is a very helpful device because of its curved profile that enables better access into the pelvic cavity and allows rectal closure and section to be performed in one shot. In this paper, we present an original technique to use this device, made for open surgery, in laparoscopy and the results of our experience. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated the data of all patients who underwent lower laparoscopic anterior rectal resection and in which the CCS was used to perform section of the rectum between September 2005 and September 2011. To perform section of the rectum a Lapdisc(®) was inserted through a 6-7 cm supra-pubic midline incision to allow placement of the CCS into the pelvic cavity. Patients' biographical and surgical data such as sex, age, indication for surgery, infection, anastomotic leakage or stenosis and staple-line bleeding were prospectively collected in a computerised database and evaluated. RESULTS: Between September 2005 and September 2011, we performed 45 laparoscopic lower rectal resection using CCS, 27 male and 18 female with a mean age of 61 years (range 40-82 years) and a mean body mass index (BMI) of 26.5 kg/m(2) (range 16.5-35 kg/m(2)). In 29 cases a temporary ileostomy was performed. Mean operative time was 131 min (range 97-210 min). In all cases it was possible to perform a lower section of the rectum with CCS. No intraoperative or postoperative staple line bleeding occurred. In two patients we observed anastomotic leaks and in one of these a temporary ileostomy was performed. None of the patients showed an anastomotic stenosis at 1-year follow-up colonoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that CCS enables section of the lower rectum to be easily performed, especially in adverse anatomical condition, and the technique proposed by us allows the use of this stapler without giving up the benefits of laparoscopic access.