Comparison between total weight loss and other metrics after bariatric surgery using a multilevel mixed-effects linear regression model.

BACKGROUND: Several tools are used to assess postoperative weight loss after bariatric surgery, including the percentage of excess body weight loss (%EWL), percentage of total weight loss (%TWL), and percentage of excess body mass index (BMI) loss (%EBMIL). A repeated series of measurements should be considered to assess weight loss as accurately as possible. This study aimed to test weight loss metrics. METHODS: Data were obtained from a prospective database of patients with obesity who underwent laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) between 2016 and 2017 in a French tertiary referral bariatric center. A multilevel mixed-effects linear regression model with repeated measures was used to analyze repeated weight measurements over time. RESULTS: A total of 435 patients underwent LRYGB (n = 266) or LSG (n = 169). At 2 years, the average %EWL, %EBMIL, and %TWL were 56.8%, 61.3%, and 26.6%, respectively. Patients who underwent LSG experienced lower weight loss (ß: - 4233 in %TWL model, ß: - 6437 in %EWL model, and ß: - 6989 in %EBMIL model) than those who underwent LRYGB. In multivariate mixed analysis, preoperative BMI was not significantly associated with %TWL at 2 years (ß, - 0.09 [- 0.22-0.03] p = 0.1). Preoperative BMI was negatively associated with both %EWL (ß, - 1.61 [- 1.84-- 1.38] p < 0.0001) and %EBMIL (ß, - 1.91 [- 2.16-- 1.66] p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: This is the first study to assess %TWL use for postoperative weight measurement, using a multilevel mixed-effects linear regression model %TWL is the measure of choice to assess weight loss following bariatric surgery.

Risk factors for emergency surgery for diverticulitis: A retrospective multicentric French study at 41 hospitals.

BACKGROUND: The observed increase in the incidence of complicated diverticulitis may lead to the performance of more emergency surgeries. This study aimed to assess the rate and risk factors of emergency surgery for sigmoid diverticulitis. METHOD: The primary outcomes were the rate of emergency surgery for sigmoid diverticulitis and its associated risk factors. The urgent or elective nature of the surgical intervention was provided by the surgeon and in accordance with the indication for surgical treatment. A mixed logistic regression with a random intercept after multiple imputations by the chained equation was performed to consider the influence of missing data on the results. RESULTS: Between 2010 and 2021, 6,867 patients underwent surgery for sigmoid diverticulitis in the participating centers, of which one-third (n = 2317) were emergency cases. In multivariate regression analysis with multiple imputation by chained equation, increasing age, body mass index <18.5 kg/m2, neurologic and pulmonary comorbidities, use of anticoagulant drugs, immunocompromised status, and first attack of sigmoid diverticulitis were independent risk factors for emergency surgery. The likelihood of emergency surgery was significantly more frequent after national guidelines, which were implemented in 2017, only in patients with a history of sigmoid diverticulitis attacks. CONCLUSION: The present study highlights a high rate (33%) of emergency surgery for sigmoid diverticulitis in France, which was significantly associated with patient features and the first attack of diverticulitis.

Impact of the first wave of COVID-19 epidemy on the surgical management of sigmoid diverticular disease in France: National French retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the surgical management of sigmoid diverticular disease (SDD) before, during, and after the first containment rules (CR) for the first wave of COVID-19. METHODS: From the French Surgical Association multicenter series, this study included all patients operated on between January 2018 and September 2021. Three groups were compared: A (before CR period: 01/01/18-03/16/20), B (CR period: 03/17/20-05/03/20), and C (post CR period: 05/04/20-09/30/21). RESULTS: A total of 1965 patients (A n = 1517, B n = 52, C n = 396) were included. The A group had significantly more previous SDD compared to the two other groups (p = 0.007), especially complicated (p = 0.0004). The rate of peritonitis was significantly higher in the B (46.1%) and C (38.4%) groups compared to the A group (31.7%) (p = 0.034 and p = 0.014). As regards surgical treatment, Hartmann's procedure was more often performed in the B group (44.2%, vs A 25.5% and C 26.8%, p = 0.01). Mortality at 90 days was significantly higher in the B group (9.6%, vs A 4% and C 6.3%, p = 0.034). This difference was also significant between the A and B groups (p = 0.048), as well as between the A and C groups (p = 0.05). There was no significant difference between the three groups in terms of postoperative morbidity. CONCLUSION: This study shows that the management of SDD was impacted by COVID-19 at CR, but also after and until September 2021, both on the initial clinical presentation and on postoperative mortality.

Influence of Hemorrhagic Complications of Pancreatoduodenectomy in Patients with Cancer on Short- and Long-Term Mortality.

BACKGROUND: With a mortality rate of up to 30%, post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH) remains a serious complication after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) for cancer. Little is known about the long-term survival of patients after PPH. This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the impact of PPH on long-term survival after PD. METHODS: The study included 830 patients (PPH, n = 101; non-PPH, n = 729) from two centers, who underwent PD for oncological indications. PPH was defined as any bleeding event occurring within 90 days after surgery. A flexible parametric survival model was used to determine the evolution of the risk of death over time. RESULTS: At postoperative day 90, PPH significantly increased the mortality rate (PPH vs. non-PPH: 19.8% vs. 3.7%, p < 0.0001) and severe postoperative complication rate (85.1% vs. 14.1%, p < 0.0001), and decreased median survival (18.6 months vs. 30.1 months, p = 0.0001). PPH was associated with an increased mortality risk until the sixth postoperative month. After this 6-month period, PPH had no more influence on mortality. CONCLUSIONS: PPH had a negative impact on the short-term overall survival beyond postoperative day 90 and up to six months after PD. However, compared to non-PPH patients, this adverse event had no impact on mortality after a 6-month period.

Survival variability across hospitals after resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A multilevel survival analysis on a high-resolution population-based study.

INTRODUCTION: Resection is the cornerstone of curative management for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Hospital surgical volume influence post-operative mortality. Few is known about impact on survival. METHODS: Population included 763 patients resected for PDAC within the 4 French digestive tumor registries between 2000 and 2014. Spline method was used to determine annual surgical volume thresholds influencing survival. A multilevel survival regression model was used to study center effect. RESULTS: Population was divided into three groups: low-volume (LVC) (<41 hepatobiliary/pancreatic procedures/year), medium-volume (MVC) (41-233) and high-volume centers (HVC) (>233). Patients in LVC were older (p = 0.02), had a lower rate of disease-free margins (76.7% vs. 77.2% and 69.5%, p = 0.028) and a higher post-operative mortality than in MVC and HVC (12.5% and 7.5% vs. 2.2%; p = 0.004). Median survival was higher in HVC than in other centers (25 vs. 15.2 months, p < 0.0001). Survival variance attributable to center effect accounted for 3.7% of total variance. In multilevel survival analysis, surgical volume explained the inter-hospital survival heterogeneity (non-significant variance after adding the volume to the model p = 0.3). Patients resected in HVC had a better survival than in LVC (HR 0.64 [0.50-0.82], p < 0.0001). There was no difference between MVC and HVC. CONCLUSION: Regarding center effect, individual characteristics had little impact on survival variability across hospitals. Hospital volume was a major contributor to the center effect. Given the difficulty of centralizing pancreatic surgery, it would be wise to determine which factors would indicate management in a HVC.

Comparison of alternative arterial anastomosis site during liver transplantation when the recipient's hepatic artery is unusable.

Background: Few studies have analyzed outcomes of liver transplantation (LT) when the recipient hepatic artery (HA) was not usable. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated the outcomes of LT performed using the different alternative sites to HA. Results: Between 2002 and 2017, 1,677 LT were performed in our institution among which 141 (8.4%) with unusable recipient HA were analyzed. Four groups were defined according to the site of anastomosis: the splenic artery (SA group, n=26), coeliac trunk (CT group, n=12), aorta using or not the donor's vessel (Ao group, n=91) and aorta using a vascular prosthesis (Ao-P group, n=12) as conduit. The median number of intraoperative red blood cell transfusions was significantly increased in the Ao and Ao-P groups (5, 5, 8.5 and 16 for SA, CT, Ao and Ao-P group respectively, P=0.002), as well as fresh frozen plasma (4.5, 2.5, 10, 17 for the SA, CT, Ao and Ao-P groups respectively, P=0.001). Hospitalization duration was also significantly increased in the Ao and Ao-P groups (15, 16, 24, 26.5 days for the SA, CT, Ao and Ao-P groups respectively, P<0.001). The occurrence of early allograft dysfunction (EAD) (P=0.07) or arterial complications (P=0.26) was not statistically different. Level of factor V, INR, bilirubin and creatinine during the 7th postoperative days (POD) was significantly improved in the SA group. No difference was observed regarding graft (P=0.18) and patient (P=0.16) survival. Conclusions: In case of unusable HA, intraoperative and postoperative outcomes are improved when using the SA or CT compared to aorta.

Focus on the use of maxillomandibular fixation in mandibular fracture oseosynthesis.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficiency of three methods of isolated mandibular fracture intraoperative reduction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This 6-year retrospective study included patients with isolated extra-articular mandibular fractures who would benefit from osteosynthesis. The endpoint was postoperative occlusion according to the type of intraoperative immobilization: screws, arch, or manual reduction. RESULTS: A total of 145 patients were included, with 233 fractures. Forty-five patients underwent manual reduction without maxillo-mandibular fixation (MMF), 51 MMF with screws, and 49 MMF with arch, with 11.1%, 5.9% and 4.1% of patients in these groups experiencing postoperative malocclusion, respectively. The overall malocclusion rate was 6.9%. There was no significant difference among the 3 methods according to univariate statistical analysis (p = 0.42) or after comparing MMF (grouping screws and arches) to manual reduction without MMF (p = 0.29). CONCLUSION: This study did not show a significant difference between the different methods of intraoperative reduction of isolated extra-articular mandibular fractures, even though intraoperative MMF was much more commonly used for complex fractures. However, there is a non-significant tendency to get a better post-operative occlusal result with MMF, which remains the reference traitement. Intraoperative manual reduction without MMF may be used within trained teams in some instances.

Same Chance of Accessing Resection? Impact of Socioeconomic Status on Resection Rates Among Patients with Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma-A Systematic Review.

Background: The incidence of pancreatic cancer is growing and the survival rate remains one of the worst in oncology. Surgical resection is currently a crucial curative option for pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PA). Socioeconomic factors could influence access to surgery. This article reviews the literature on the impact of socioeconomic status (SES) on access to curative surgery among patients with PA. Methods: The EMBASE, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were searched by three investigators to generate 16 studies for review. Results: Patients with the lowest SES are less likely to undergo surgery than high SES. Low income, low levels of education, not being insured, and living in deprived and rural areas have all been associated with decreased rates of surgical resection. Given the type of health care system and geographic disparities, results in North American populations are difficult to transpose to European countries. However, a similar trend is observed in difficulty for the poorest patients in accessing resection. Low SES seems to be less likely to be offered surgery and more likely to refuse it. Conclusions: Inequalities in insurance coverage and living in poor/lower educational level areas are all demonstrated factors of a lower likelihood of resection populations. It is important to assess the causal effect of socioeconomic deprivation to improve understanding of this disease and improve access to care.

What to Propose After Failed Adjustable Gastric Banding: One- or Two-step Procedure?

BACKGROUND: Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or sleeve gastrectomy (SG) can be proposed in case of failed laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB). The main question is whether the revisional procedure is carried out in one or two stages. OBJECTIVE: Postoperative outcomes between the one-step approach and the two-step approach of conversion of failed LAGB to RYGB or SG were, respectively, compared. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature published until June 2019 was conducted. All studies comparing one-step and two-step approaches after failed LAGB were included. Primary outcomes include both mortality and morbidity at 30 days postoperatively according to Dindo-Clavien classification. Among the studies included, a random effect model was used with Review Manager 5.3 (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK). RESULTS: A total of 3895 patients had conversion of failed LAGB to RYGB (n = 3214) or SG (n = 681), respectively. The conversion was carried out in one-step (n = 2767) or two-step (n = 1128) approaches. Meta-analysis did not show statistical difference for overall morbidity rate (OR = 1.01, 95%CI = 0.78-1.30, p = 0.96) whether it is for SG (OR = 1.25, 95%CI = 0.73-2.14, p = 0.42) or RYGB (OR = 0.94, 95%CI = 0.71-1.26, p = 0.69) and for major postoperative morbidity (OR = 0.96, 95%CI = 0.59-1.56, p = 0.87) whether it is for SG (OR = 0.66, 95%CI = 0.22-1.97, p = 0.46) or RYGB (OR = 1.05, 95%CI = 0.61-1.81, p = 0.86). Moreover, there was no statistical difference for specific morbidity rate including reoperation, leak, abscess, postoperative bleeding, and late postoperative complications. LIMITATIONS: Given the retrospective nature of the studies, these results should be interpreted with caution. CONCLUSION: This updated meta-analysis suggests that conversion of failed LAGB to RYGB or SG can be safely performed in one-step or two-step approaches.

Digestive and genitourinary sequelae in rectal cancer survivors and their impact on health-related quality of life: Outcome of a high-resolution population-based study.

BACKGROUND: With the rising number of rectal cancer survivors, more patients with sphincter-preserving surgery are having to live with a potentially impaired quality of life. The survey aimed to assess bowel and genitourinary sequelae and their impact on quality of life in an unselected registry-based population of rectal cancer survivors. METHODS: This cross-sectional cohort survey (registered at ClinicalTrials.gov; ID: NCT03459235) included patients with rectal cancer who underwent curative surgery with sphincter-preserving surgery from January 1, 2007 to January 31, 2015. Patients with recurrent disease, intestinal stoma, or cognitive disorders were excluded. Validated scoring system included the Urinary Symptom Profile in women and the International Prostate Symptom Score in men for urinary function, International Index for Erectile Function 5 in men and Female Sexual Function Index in women for sexual function, and Core 30/ Colo Rectal 29 questionnaires for quality of life and Low Anterior Resection Syndrome score for bowel function. The impact of functional sequelae on global quality of life was evaluated by multiple linear regression. RESULTS: Responders (45.3%, 92/203 patients) and nonresponders were comparable according to sex, age, tumor stage, and neoadjuvant chemoradiation. With a mean follow-up of 6.5 years, 65.2% of the rectal cancer survivors had bowel dysfunction, of whom 41.3% experienced major Low Anterior Resection Syndrome and 80% of rectal cancer survivors experienced genitourinary dysfunction. In multiple linear regression, poor bowel function was a significant predictor of global quality of life in men (P = .04) and women (P = .0003). CONCLUSION: This survey highlights the importance of sexual and bowel dysfunction in rectal cancer survivors and the strong correlation between high Low Anterior Resection Syndrome score and inferior quality of life. Further studies are needed to improve knowledge on how to predict bowel dysfunction and how to best support patients with bowel dysfunction.

Impact of socioeconomic status on survival in patients with ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Socioeconomic status may impact survival in cancer patients. This study assessed whether low socioeconomic status has an impact on survival in patients with ovarian cancer and investigated whether differences in survival may be explained by type of therapy received. METHODS: The study population comprised 318 patients with ovarian cancer diagnosed between 2011 and 2015 in the François Baclesse regional cancer care center in Caen, North-West France. Socioeconomic status was assessed by using the European deprivation index and overall survival was calculated at 3 years. RESULTS: The unadjusted 3-year overall survival rate was 52% (95% CI 47 to 58). In a multivariable logistic regression model, a low socioeconomic status was associated with a lower probability of surgical resection (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.74). A high socioeconomic status was associated with improved survival, adjusted for age, performance status, grade, and International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage (adjusted HR 1.53, 95% CI 1.04 to 2.26). When adjusting for treatment variables, there was no longer any significant difference in survival according to socioeconomic status (adjusted HR 1.24, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.84). CONCLUSIONS: Higher socioeconomic status is associated with a greater probability of undergoing surgical resection and with improved survival in patients with ovarian cancer.

Socioeconomic status impacts survival and access to resection in pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A high-resolution population-based cancer registry study.

BACKGROUND: Survival of patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PA) is very poor. Resection status is highly associated with prognosis but only 15%-20% are resectable. The aim of this study was to analyse the impact of socioeconomic deprivation on PA survival and to define which management steps are affected. METHODS: Between 01/01/2000 and 31/12/2014, 1451 incident cases of PA recorded in the digestive cancer registry of the French department of Calvados were included. The population was divided between less deprived areas (quintile 1) and more deprived areas (quintile 2,3,4,5 aggregated). RESULTS: Patients from less deprived areas were younger at diagnosis than those from more deprived areas (69.9 vs 72.3 years, p = 0.01). There was no difference in stage or comorbidities. Three- and 5-year survival rates were significantly higher for less deprived areas than more deprived areas: 10.5% vs 5.15% and 4.7% vs 1.7% respectively (p = 0.01). In univariate analysis, those living in less deprived areas had a better survival than those in more deprived areas (HR = 0.81 [0.69-0.95], p = 0.009) but not in multivariable analysis (HRa = 0.93 [0.79-1.11], p = 0.383) or analysis stratified on resection. In multivariable regression, less deprived areas had more access to surgery than more deprived areas (ORa = 1.73 [1.08-2.47], p = 0.013). No difference was observed on access to adjuvant chemotherapy (ORa = 0.95 [0.38-2.34], p = 0.681). CONCLUSION: The key to reducing survival inequalities in PA is access to resection, so future studies should investigate the factors impacting this issue.