Bowel preparation for elective colorectal resection: multi-treatment machine learning analysis on 6241 cases from a prospective Italian cohort.

BACKGROUND: Current evidence concerning bowel preparation before elective colorectal surgery is still controversial. This study aimed to compare the incidence of anastomotic leakage (AL), surgical site infections (SSIs), and overall morbidity (any adverse event, OM) after elective colorectal surgery using four different types of bowel preparation. METHODS: A prospective database gathered among 78 Italian surgical centers in two prospective studies, including 6241 patients who underwent elective colorectal resection with anastomosis for malignant or benign disease, was re-analyzed through a multi-treatment machine-learning model considering no bowel preparation (NBP; No. = 3742; 60.0%) as the reference treatment arm, compared to oral antibiotics alone (oA; No. = 406; 6.5%), mechanical bowel preparation alone (MBP; No. = 1486; 23.8%), or in combination with oAB (MoABP; No. = 607; 9.7%). Twenty covariates related to biometric data, surgical procedures, perioperative management, and hospital/center data potentially affecting outcomes were included and balanced into the model. The primary endpoints were AL, SSIs, and OM. All the results were reported as odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). RESULTS: Compared to NBP, MBP showed significantly higher AL risk (OR 1.82; 95% CI 1.23-2.71; p = .003) and OM risk (OR 1.38; 95% CI 1.10-1.72; p = .005), no significant differences for all the endpoints were recorded in the oA group, whereas MoABP showed a significantly reduced SSI risk (OR 0.45; 95% CI 0.25-0.79; p = .008). CONCLUSIONS: MoABP significantly reduced the SSI risk after elective colorectal surgery, therefore representing a valid alternative to NBP.

Abdominal drainage after elective colorectal surgery: propensity score-matched retrospective analysis of an Italian cohort.

BACKGROUND: In Italy, surgeons continue to drain the abdominal cavity in more than 50 per cent of patients after colorectal resection. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of abdominal drain placement on early adverse events in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery. METHODS: A database was retrospectively analysed through a 1:1 propensity score-matching model including 21 covariates. The primary endpoint was the postoperative duration of stay, and the secondary endpoints were surgical site infections, infectious morbidity rate defined as surgical site infections plus pulmonary infections plus urinary infections, anastomotic leakage, overall morbidity rate, major morbidity rate, reoperation and mortality rates. The results of multiple logistic regression analyses were presented as odds ratios (OR) and 95 per cent c.i. RESULTS: A total of 6157 patients were analysed to produce two well-balanced groups of 1802 patients: group (A), no abdominal drain(s) and group (B), abdominal drain(s). Group A versus group B showed a significantly lower risk of postoperative duration of stay >6 days (OR 0.60; 95 per cent c.i. 0.51-0.70; P < 0.001). A mean postoperative duration of stay difference of 0.86 days was detected between groups. No difference was recorded between the two groups for all the other endpoints. CONCLUSION: This study confirms that placement of abdominal drain(s) after elective colorectal surgery is associated with a non-clinically significant longer (0.86 days) postoperative duration of stay but has no impact on any other secondary outcomes, confirming that abdominal drains should not be used routinely in colorectal surgery.

Mechanical bowel preparation in elective colorectal surgery: a propensity score-matched analysis of the Italian colorectal anastomotic leakage (iCral) study group prospective cohorts.

Retrospective evaluation of the effects of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) on data derived from two prospective open-label observational multicenter studies in Italy regarding elective colorectal surgery. MBP for elective colorectal surgery remains a controversial issue with contrasting recommendations in current guidelines. The Italian ColoRectal Anastomotic Leakage (iCral) study group, therefore, decided to estimate the effects of no MBP (treatment variable) versus MBP for elective colorectal surgery. A total of 8359 patients who underwent colorectal resection with anastomosis were enrolled in two consecutive prospective studies in 78 surgical centers in Italy from January 2019 to September 2021. A retrospective PSMA was performed on 5455 (65.3%) cases after the application of explicit exclusion criteria to eliminate confounders. The primary endpoints were anastomotic leakage (AL) and surgical site infections (SSI) rates; the secondary endpoints included SSI subgroups, overall and major morbidity, reoperation, and mortality rates. Overall length of postoperative hospital stay (LOS) was also considered. Two well-balanced groups of 1125 patients each were generated: group A (No MBP, true population of interest), and group B (MBP, control population), performing a PSMA considering 21 covariates. Group A vs. group B resulted significantly associated with a lower risk of AL [42 (3.5%) vs. 73 (6.0%) events; OR 0.57; 95% CI 0.38-0.84; p = 0.005]. No difference was recorded between the two groups for SSI [73 (6.0%) vs. 85 (7.0%) events; OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.63-1.22; p = 0.441]. Regarding the secondary endpoints, no MBP resulted significantly associated with a lower risk of reoperation and LOS > 6 days. This study confirms that no MBP before elective colorectal surgery is significantly associated with a lower risk of AL, reoperation rate, and LOS < 6 days when compared with MBP.

Preservation of the inferior mesenteric artery VS ligation of the inferior mesenteric artery in left colectomy: evaluation of functional outcomes-a prospective non-randomized controlled trial.

Vascular approach during elective laparoscopic left colectomy impacts post-operative outcomes. The aim of our study was to evaluate how different approaches impact positively defecatory, urinary and sexual functions and quality of life during elective laparoscopic left colectomy. A prospective non-randomized controlled trial at two tertiary center was conducted. All patients who underwent elective laparoscopic left colonic resection from January 2019 to July 2022 were analyzed. They were divided into two groups based on Inferior Mesenteric Artery (IMA) preservation with distal ligation of sigmoid branches close to a colonic wall for complicated diverticular disease and IMA high tie ligation for oncological disease. Patients were asked to fulfil standardized, validated questionnaires to evaluate pre and post-operative defecatory, urinary and sexual functions and quality of life. Defecatory disorders were assessed by high-resolution anorectal manometry preoperatively and six months after surgery. A total of 122 patients were included in the study. The 62 patients with IMA preservation showed a lower incidence of defecatory disorders also confirmed by manometer data, minor incontinence and less lifestyle alteration than the 60 patients with IMA high tie ligation. No urinary disorders such as incomplete emptying, frequency, intermittence or urgency were highlighted after surgery in the IMA preservation group. Evidence of any sexual disorders remained controversial. The IMA-preserving vascular approach seems to be an effective strategy to prevent postoperative functional disorders. It is a safe and feasible technique especially for diverticular disease. New prospective randomized and highly probative studies are needed to confirm the effectiveness in specific clinical situations.

Blood Transfusions and Adverse Events after Colorectal Surgery: A Propensity-Score-Matched Analysis of a Hen-Egg Issue.

Blood transfusions are considered a risk factor for adverse outcomes after colorectal surgery. However, it is still unclear if they are the cause (the hen) or the consequence (the egg) of adverse events. A prospective database of 4529 colorectal resections gathered over a 12-month period in 76 Italian surgical units (the iCral3 study), reporting patient-, disease-, and procedure-related variables, together with 60-day adverse events, was retrospectively analyzed identifying a subgroup of 304 cases (6.7%) that received intra- and/or postoperative blood transfusions (IPBTs). The endpoints considered were overall and major morbidity (OM and MM, respectively), anastomotic leakage (AL), and mortality (M) rates. After the exclusion of 336 patients who underwent neo-adjuvant treatments, 4193 (92.6%) cases were analyzed through a 1:1 propensity score matching model including 22 covariates. Two well-balanced groups of 275 patients each were obtained: group A, presence of IPBT, and group B, absence of IPBT. Group A vs. group B showed a significantly higher risk of overall morbidity (154 (56%) vs. 84 (31%) events; OR 3.07; 95%CI 2.13-4.43; p = 0.001), major morbidity (59 (21%) vs. 13 (4.7%) events; OR 6.06; 95%CI 3.17-11.6; p = 0.001), and anastomotic leakage (31 (11.3%) vs. 8 (2.9%) events; OR 4.72; 95%CI 2.09-10.66; p = 0.0002). No significant difference was recorded between the two groups concerning the risk of mortality. The original subpopulation of 304 patients that received IPBT was further analyzed considering three variables: appropriateness of BT according to liberal transfusion thresholds, BT following any hemorrhagic and/or major adverse event, and major adverse event following BT without any previous hemorrhagic adverse event. Inappropriate BT was administered in more than a quarter of cases, without any significant influence on any endpoint. The majority of BT was administered after a hemorrhagic or a major adverse event, with significantly higher rates of MM and AL. Finally, a major adverse event followed BT in a minority (4.3%) of cases, with significantly higher MM, AL, and M rates. In conclusion, although the majority of IPBT was administered with the consequence of hemorrhage and/or major adverse events (the egg), after adjustment accounting for 22 covariates, IPBT still resulted in a definite source of a higher risk of major morbidity and anastomotic leakage rates after colorectal surgery (the hen), calling urgent attention to the implementation of patient blood management programs.

Rivaroxaban vs placebo for extended antithrombotic prophylaxis after laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer.

The clinical benefit of extended prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism (VTE) after laparoscopic surgery for cancer is unclear. The efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants for this indication are unexplored. PROphylaxis of venous thromboembolism after LAParoscopic Surgery for colorectal cancer Study II (PROLAPS II) was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, investigator-initiated, superiority study aimed at assessing the efficacy and safety of extended prophylaxis with rivaroxaban after laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer. Consecutive patients who had laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer were randomized to receive rivaroxaban (10 mg once daily) or a placebo to be started at 7 ± 2 days after surgery and given for the subsequent 3 weeks. All patients received antithrombotic prophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin from surgery to randomization. The primary study outcome was the composite of symptomatic objectively confirmed VTE, asymptomatic ultrasonography-detected deep vein thrombosis (DVT), or VTE-related death at 28 ± 2 days after surgery. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding. Patient recruitment was prematurely closed due to study drug expiry after the inclusion of 582 of the 646 planned patients. A primary study outcome event occurred in 11 of 282 patients in the placebo group compared with 3 of 287 in the rivaroxaban group (3.9 vs 1.0%; odds ratio, 0.26; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.07-0.94; log-rank P = .032). Major bleeding occurred in none of the patients in the placebo group and 2 patients in the rivaroxaban group (incidence rate 0.7%; 95% CI, 0-1.0). Oral rivaroxaban was more effective than placebo for extended prevention of VTE after laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer without an increase in major bleeding. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT03055026.

Could Stoma Be Avoided after Laparoscopic Low Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer? Experience with Transanal Tube in 195 Cases.

Anastomotic leakage is the most-feared complication of rectal surgery. Transanal devices have been suggested for anastomotic protection as an alternative to defunctioning stoma, although evidence is conflicting, and no single device is widely used in clinical practice. The aim of this paper is to investigate the safety and efficacy of a transanal tube for the prevention of leakage following laparoscopic rectal cancer resection. A transanal tube was used in the cases of total mesorectal excision with low colorectal or coloanal anastomosis, undamaged doughnuts, and negative intraoperative air-leak test. The transanal tube was kept in place until the seventh postoperative day. A total of 195 consecutive patients were retrieved from a prospective surgical database and included in the study. Of these, 71.8% received preoperative chemoradiotherapy. The perioperative mortality rate was 1.0%. Anastomotic leakage occurred in 19 patients, accounting for an incidence rate of 9.7%. Among these, 13 patients underwent re-laparoscopy and ileostomy, while 6 patients were managed conservatively. Overall, the stoma rate was 6.7%. The use of a transanal tube may be a suitable strategy for anastomotic protection following restorative rectal cancer resection. This approach could avoid the burden of a stoma in selected patients with low anastomoses.

Microsatellite Status Detection in Gastrointestinal Cancers: PCR/NGS Is Mandatory in Negative/Patchy MMR Immunohistochemistry.

BACKGROUND: Microsatellite instability (MSI) is a predictive biomarker for immune checkpoint inhibitors. The main goal was to investigate the discordance between IHC and PCR/NGS for MSI testing in gastrointestinal cancers. METHODS: Two series were analyzed through IHC for mismatch-repair-system proteins (MMRP) and PCR, with one series of 444 colorectal cancers (CRC) and the other of 176 gastric cancers (GC). All cases with discordant results between IHC and PCR were analyzed by NGS. IHC staining was evaluated as follows: proficient MMR (pMMR), with all MMR positive; deficient MMR (dMMR), with the loss of one heterodimer; and cases with the loss/patchy expression of one MMR (lo-paMMR). Cases with instability in at least two markers by PCR were MSI-high (MSI-H) and with instability in one marker, MSI-low (MSI-L). Cases without instability were evaluated as microsatellite-stable (MSS). RESULTS: In the CRC cohort, 15 out of 444 cases were dMMR and 46 lo-paMMR. Among the 15 dMMR, 13 were MSI-H and 2 MSS. Among the 46 lo-paMMR, 13 were MSI-H and 33 were MSS. In the GC cohort, 13 out of 176 cases were dMMR and 6 cases lo-paMMR. Among the 13 dMMR, 12 were MSI-H and only 1 was MSS. All six lo-paMMR cases were MSS. All NGS results were in agreement with PCR. CONCLUSIONS: In clinical practice, MMR-IHC could be used as a screening test and additional molecular analysis is mandatory exclusively in cases carrying loss/patchy MMR-IHC.

MDCT Findings in Gastrointestinal Perforations and the Predictive Value according to the Site of Perforation.

Background: Gastrointestinal perforations are a frequent cause of acute abdominal symptomatology for patients in the emergency department. The aim of this study was to investigate the findings of multidetector-row computed tomography of gastrointestinal perforations and analyze the impact of any imaging signs on the presurgical identification of the perforation site. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed emergency MDCT findings of 93 patients submitted to surgery for gastrointestinal perforation at two different institutions. Two radiologists separately reviewed the emergency MDCT examinations performed on each patient, before and after knowing the surgical diagnosis of the perforation site. A list of findings was considered. Positive predictive values were estimated for each finding with respect to each perforation site, and correspondence analysis (CA) was used to investigate the relationship between the findings and each of the perforation types. Results: We did not find inframesocolic free air in sigmoid colorectal perforations, and in rare cases, only supramesocolic free fluid in gastroduodenal perforations was found. A high PPV of perivisceral fat stranding due to colonic perforation and general distension of upstream loops and collapse of downstream loops were evident in most patients. Conclusions: Our data could offer additional information on the perforation site in the case of doubtful findings to support surgeons, especially in planning a laparoscopic approach.

Laparoscopic gastrectomy for stage II and III advanced gastric cancer: long­term follow­up data from a Western multicenter retrospective study.

INTRODUCTION: There has been an increasing interest for the laparoscopic treatment of early gastric cancer, especially among Eastern surgeons. However, the oncological effectiveness of Laparoscopic Gastrectomy (LG) for Advanced Gastric Cancer (AGC) remains a subject of debate, especially in Western countries where limited reports have been published. The aim of this paper is to retrospectively analyze short- and long-term results of LG for AGC in a real-life Western practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All consecutive cases of LG with D2 lymphadenectomy for AGC performed from January 2005 to December 2019 at seven different surgical departments were analyzed retrospectively. The primary outcome was diseases-free survival (DFS). Secondary outcomes were overall survival (OS), number of retrieved lymph nodes, postoperative morbidity and conversion rate. RESULTS: A total of 366 patients with stage II and III AGC underwent either total or subtotal LG. The mean number of harvested lymph nodes was 25 ± 14. The mean hospital stay was 13 ± 10 days and overall postoperative morbidity rate 27.32%, with severe complications (grade ≥ III) accounting for 9.29%. The median follow-up was 36 ± 16 months during which 90 deaths occurred, all due to disease progression. The DFS and OS probability was equal to 0.85 (95% CI 0.81-0.89) and 0.94 (95% CI 0.92-0.97) at 1 year, 0.62 (95% CI 0.55-0.69) and 0.63 (95% CI 0.56-0.71) at 5 years, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our study has led us to conclude that LG for AGC is feasible and safe in the general practice of Western institutions when performed by trained surgeons.

ERAS program adherence-institutionalization, major morbidity and anastomotic leakage after elective colorectal surgery: the iCral2 multicenter prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs influence morbidity rates and length of stay after colorectal surgery (CRS), and may also impact major complications and anastomotic leakage rates. A prospective multicenter observational study to investigate the interactions between ERAS program adherence and early outcomes after elective CRS was carried out. METHODS: Prospective enrolment of patients submitted to elective CRS with anastomosis in 18 months. Adherence to 21 items of ERAS program was measured upon explicit criteria in every case. After univariate analysis, independent predictors of primary endpoints [major morbidity (MM) and anastomotic leakage (AL) rates] were identified through logistic regression analyses including all significant variables, presenting odds ratios (OR). RESULTS: Institutional ERAS protocol was declared by 27 out of 38 (71.0%) participating centers. Median overall adherence to ERAS program items was 71.4%. Among 3830 patients included in the study, MM and AL rates were 4.7% and 4.2%, respectively. MM rates were independently influenced by intra- and/or postoperative blood transfusions (OR 7.79, 95% CI 5.46-11.10; p < 0.0001) and standard anesthesia protocol (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.48-0.96; p = 0.028). AL rates were independently influenced by male gender (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.06-2.07; p = 0.021), intra- and/or postoperative blood transfusions (OR 4.29, 95% CI 2.93-6.50; p < 0.0001) and non-standard resections (OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.01-2.22; p = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: This study disclosed wide room for improvement in compliance to several ERAS program items. It failed to detect any significant association between institutionalization and/or adherence rates to ERAS program with primary endpoints. These outcomes were independently influenced by gender, intra- and postoperative blood transfusions, non-standard resections, and standard anesthesia protocol.

Impact of neoadjuvant therapy followed by laparoscopic radical gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection in Western population: A multi-institutional propensity score-matched study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In the setting of a minimally invasive approach, we aimed to compare short and long-term postoperative outcomes of patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) + surgery or upfront surgery in Western population. METHODS: All consecutive patients from six Italian and one Serbian center with locally advanced gastric cancer who had undergone laparoscopic gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection were selected between 2005 and 2019. After propensity score-matching, postoperative morbidity and oncologic outcomes were investigated. RESULTS: After matching, 97 patients were allocated in each cohort with a mean age of 69.4 and 70.5 years. The two groups showed no difference in operative details except for a higher conversion rate in the NAT group (p = 0.038). The overall postoperative complications rate significantly differed between NAT + surgery (38.1%) and US (21.6%) group (p = 0.019). NAT was found to be related to a higher risk of postoperative morbidity in patients older than 60 years old (p = 0.013) but not in patients younger (p = 0.620). Conversely, no difference in overall survival (p = 0.41) and disease-free-survival (p = 0.34) was found between groups. CONCLUSIONS: NAT appears to be related to a higher postoperative complication rate and equivalent oncological outcomes when compared with surgery alone. However, poor short-term outcomes are more evident in patients over 60 years old receiving NAT.

ICG fluorescence imaging in colorectal surgery: a snapshot from the ICRAL study group.

BACKGROUND: Fluorescence-guided visualization is a recently proposed technology in colorectal surgery. Possible uses include evaluating perfusion, navigating lymph nodes and searching for hepatic metastases and peritoneal spread. Despite the absence of high-level evidence, this technique has gained considerable popularity among colorectal surgeons due to its significant reliability, safety, ease of use and relatively low cost. However, the actual use of this technique in daily clinical practice has not been reported to date. METHODS: This survey was conducted on April 2020 among 44 centers dealing with colorectal diseases and participating in the Italian ColoRectal Anastomotic Leakage (iCral) study group. Surgeons were approximately equally divided based on geographical criteria from multiple Italian regions, with a large proportion based in public (89.1%) and nonacademic (75.7%) centers. They were invited to answer an online survey to snapshot their current behaviors regarding the use of fluorescence-guided visualization in colorectal surgery. Questions regarding technological availability, indications and techniques, personal approaches and feelings were collected in a 23-item questionnaire. RESULTS: Questionnaire replies were received from 37 institutions and partially answered by 8, as this latter group of centers do not implement fluorescence technology (21.6%). Out of the remaining 29 centers (78,4%), fluorescence is utilized in all laparoscopic colorectal resections by 72.4% of surgeons and only for selected cases by the remaining 27.6%, while 62.1% of respondents do not use fluorescence in open surgery (unless the perfusion is macroscopically uncertain with the naked eye, in which case 41.4% of them do). The survey also suggests that there is no agreement on dilution, dosing and timing, as many different practices are adopted based on personal judgment. Only approximately half of the surgeons reported a reduced leak rate with fluorescence perfusion assessment, but 65.5% of them strongly believe that this technique will become a minimum requirement for colorectal surgery in the future. CONCLUSION: The survey confirms that fluorescence is becoming a widely used technique in colorectal surgery. However, both the indications and methods still vary considerably; furthermore, the surgeons' perceptions of the results are insufficient to consider this technology essential. This survey emphasizes the need for further research to reach recommendations based on solid scientific evidence.

Management and 1-year outcomes of anastomotic leakage after elective colorectal surgery.

PURPOSE: To analyze different types of management and one-year outcomes of anastomotic leakage (AL) after elective colorectal resection. METHODS: All patients with anastomotic leakage after elective colorectal surgery with anastomosis (76/1,546; 4.9%), with the exclusion of cases with proximal diverting stoma, were followed-up for at least one year. Primary endpoints were as follows: composite outcome of one-year mortality and/or unplanned intensive care unit (ICU) admission and additional morbidity rates. Secondary endpoints were as follows: length of stay (LOS), one-year persistent stoma rate, and rate of return to intended oncologic therapy (RIOT). RESULTS: One-year mortality rate was 10.5% and unplanned ICU admission rate was 30.3%. Risk factors of the composite outcome included age (aOR = 1.08 per 1-year increase, p = 0.002) and anastomotic breakdown with end stoma at reoperation (aOR = 2.77, p = 0.007). Additional morbidity rate was 52.6%: risk factors included open versus laparoscopic reoperation (aOR = 4.38, p = 0.03) and ICU admission (aOR = 3.63, p = 0.05). Median (IQR) overall LOS was 20 days (14-26), higher in the subgroup of patients reoperated without stoma. At 1 year, a stoma persisted in 32.0% of patients, higher in the open (41.2%) versus laparoscopic (12.5%) reoperation group (p = 0.04). Only 4 out of 18 patients (22.2%) were able to RIOT. CONCLUSION: Mortality and/or unplanned ICU admission rates after AL are influenced by increasing age and by anastomotic breakdown at reoperation; additional morbidity rates are influenced by unplanned ICU admission and by laparoscopic approach to reoperation, the latter also reducing permanent stoma and failure to RIOT rates. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov # NCT03560180.

Laparoscopic segmental resection for tumours of the Angle of Treitz: a challenging but feasible surgical option. Results from a retrospective case-series analysis.

Tumours of the small intestine are rare and account for about 5% of gastrointestinal tract neoplasms. The angle of Treitz (AT) could be defined as the intestinal loop comprised between the third duodenal portion and the first 10 cm of jejunum. A gold standard surgical treatment for AT neoplasm has not yet been well defined. This paper is focused on a very rare disease and at the best of our knowledge this is the largest case series in the literature about the Laparoscopic Segmental Resection (LSR) of AT tumours. Using a prospectively collected database, all data of consecutive patients, from January 2007 to May 2019, who underwent LSR for AT tumours at two different institutions were analysed. Patients' demographics, intra and post-operative data, 30-day mortality and overall survival were collected. A total of 16 patients were retrieved from our database. The mean operative time was 206,5 ± 79 min. Conversion to open surgery was needed in two cases due to tumor size and, respectively, invasion of the transverse colon which required a multivisceral resection. The mean distal and proximal resection margins were 7.4 ± 2.2 and 3.9 ± 1.2 cm. The median number of harvested nodes was 9 ± 3. Pathological diagnosis was GIST in 11 cases, adenocarcinoma in 4 and sarcoma in 1 case. In conclusion, in experienced hands, LSR appears to be a safe and effective treatment option for tumours of the AT. Prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Colorectal surgery in Italy during the Covid19 outbreak: a survey from the iCral study group.

BACKGROUND: The COVID19 pandemic had a deep impact on healthcare facilities in Italy, with profound reorganization of surgical activities. The Italian ColoRectal Anastomotic Leakage (iCral) study group collecting 43 Italian surgical centers experienced in colorectal surgery from multiple regions performed a quick survey to make a snapshot of the current situation. METHODS: A 25-items questionnaire was sent to the 43 principal investigators of the iCral study group, with questions regarding qualitative and quantitative aspects of the surgical activity before and after the COVID19 outbreak. RESULTS: Two-thirds of the centers were involved in the treatment of COVID19 cases. Intensive care units (ICU) beds were partially or totally reallocated for the treatment of COVID19 cases in 72% of the hospitals. Elective colorectal surgery for malignancy was stopped or delayed in nearly 30% of the centers, with less than 20% of them still scheduling elective colorectal resections for frail and comorbid patients needing postoperative ICU care. A significant reduction of the number of colorectal resections during the time span from January to March 2020 was recorded, with significant delay in treatment in more than 50% of the centers. DISCUSSION: Our survey confirms that COVID19 outbreak is severely affecting the activity of colorectal surgery centers participating to iCral study group. This could impact the activity of surgical centers for many months after the end of the emergency.

Does a 3D laparoscopic approach improve surgical outcome of mininvasive right colectomy? A retrospective case-control study.

Laparoscopy has gained wide acceptance due its benefits for patients. However, advanced laparoscopic procedures are still challenging. One critical issue is lack of stereoscopic vision. Despite its diffusion, the totally laparoscopic approach for right hemicolectomy (TLRC) is still debated due to its difficulty, particularly for fashioning of the ileocolic anastomosis. The aim of this multicenter study is to investigate whether 3D vision offers any advantages on surgical performance over 2D vision during TLRC. All data of consecutive patients who underwent elective TLRC for cancer at three Italian surgical centers with either 2D or 3D technology from January 2013 to December 2018 were retrieved from a computer-maintained database. A case-matched analysis using the Mantel-Haenszel method was performed. After matching, a total of 106 patients were analyzed with 53 patients in each group. Mean operative time was significantly longer for 2D-TLRC than for 3D-TLRC (153.2 ± 52.4 vs. 131 ± 51 min, p = 0.029) and a statistically significant difference in anastomosing time (p = 0.032, 19.2 ± 5.9 min vs. 21.7 ± 6.2 min for 3D and 2D group, respectively) was also recorded. No difference in the median number of harvested nodes (23 ± 11 vs. 21 ± 7 for 3D and 2D group, respectively; p = 0.48) was found. Neither intraoperative complications nor conversions occurred in the two groups. In conclusion, 3D vision appears to improve the performance of a TLRC by reducing operative time and making intracorporeal anastomosis easier. Prospective randomized studies are required to determine the real beneficial effects.

Laparoscopic resection with complete mesocolic excision for splenic flexure cancer: long-term follow-up data from a multicenter retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Splenic flexure cancer (SFC), identified as tumors raised in the distal transverse colon and proximal descending colon, accounts for 2 to 5% of all surgically treated colorectal cancers. Despite the fact that the laparoscopic approach has become the gold standard for many colorectal procedures, it has never been extensively investigated in SFC due to lack of an agreed consensus on the appropriate operative procedure. The aim of this multicenter retrospective study is to evaluate the oncologic value of laparoscopic segmental resection with complete mesocolic excision (CME) for cancer located in the splenic flexure. METHODS: All data of consecutive patients who had undergone laparoscopic resection with CME for SFC from January 2005 to December 2017 at five different tertiary centers were retrospectively analyzed. The Kaplan-Meier (KM) test was used to assess the overall survival (OS) and the disease-free survival (DFS) rates after surgery. Univariate Cox regression was used to explore the association between OS and other independent factors. RESULTS: Recurrence was observed in 13 (11.6%) patients and a significant association between disease stage and recurrence (P < 0.001) was found with a higher proportion of stage IV patients in the recurrence group (46.1% vs. 7.1%). During a median follow-up of 43 months (range 12-149), 13 deaths occurred, all of them due to disease progression. KM curves for all stages showed an estimated survival rate of 51% at 148 months. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic segmental resection with CME appears to be an oncologically safe and effective procedure for treatment of SFC and may be considered as a standard surgical method for elective management of the disease. In the future, routine lymph node mapping could be used to confirm this hypothesis.

Is robotic right colectomy economically sustainable? a multicentre retrospective comparative study and cost analysis.

BACKGROUND: Following the Food and Drug Administration approval, robot-assisted colorectal surgery has gained more acceptance among surgeons. One of the open issues about robotic surgery is the economic sustainability. The aim of our study is to evaluate the economic sustainability of robotic as compared to laparoscopic right colectomy for the Italian National Health System. METHODS: We performed a retrospective multicentre case-matched study including 94 patients for each group from four different Italian surgical departments. An economic evaluation gathered from a real-world data was performed to assess the sustainability of the robotic approach for right colectomy in the Italian National Health System. In particular, a differential cost analysis between the two procedures was performed. RESULTS: No statistical differences were found between the two groups for postoperative outcomes. After a careful review of the literature on the cost assessment for the operative room, medical devices and hospital stay according with our data, we estimated the followings: (a) the mean operative room cost for robotic group was 2179 ± 476 € vs. 1376 ± 322 € for laparoscopic group; (b) the mean hospital stay cost for robotic group was 3143 ± 1435 € vs. 3292 ± 1123 € for laparoscopic group; and (c) the mean cost for instruments was 6280 € for robotic group vs. 1504 € for laparoscopic group. The total mean cost of robotic right colectomy was 11,576 ± 1915 € vs. 6196 ± 1444 € for laparoscopic right colectomy. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, to date, robotic right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis does not provide any significant clinical advantages, which may justify the additional costs, as compared to its laparoscopic counterpart. Further evolution of robotic technology and experience may lead to a reduction of costs, especially if the robotic platform is used in an appropriate healthcare setting.