Systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term outcomes: robot-assisted versus laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer patients with visceral obesity.

The objective of this meta-analysis was to assess the comparative efficacy of robot-assisted and laparoscopic surgery in treating gastric cancer among patients characterized by a high visceral fat area (VFA). In April 2024, we conducted a comprehensive literature review using major international databases, such as PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar. We restricted our selection to articles written in English, excluding reviews, protocols without published data, conference abstracts, and irrelevant content. Our analysis focused on continuous data using 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and standard mean differences (SMDs), while dichotomous data were assessed with odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs. We set the threshold for statistical significance at P < 0.05. Data extraction included baseline characteristics, primary outcomes (such as operative time, major complications, lymph node yield, and anastomotic leakage), and secondary outcomes. The meta-analysis included three cohort studies totaling 970 patients. The robotic-assisted group demonstrated a significantly longer operative time compared to the laparoscopic group, with a weighted mean difference (WMD) of - 55.76 min (95% CI - 74.03 to - 37.50; P < 0.00001). This group also showed a reduction in major complications, with an odds ratio (OR) of 2.48 (95% CI 1.09-5.66; P = 0.03) and fewer occurrences of abdominal infections (OR 3.17, 95% CI 1.41-7.14; P = 0.005), abdominal abscesses (OR 3.83, 95% CI 1.53-9.57; P = 0.004), anastomotic leaks (OR 4.09, 95% CI 1.73-9.65; P = 0.001), and pancreatic leaks (OR 8.93, 95% CI 2.33-34.13; P = 0.001). However, no significant differences were observed between the groups regarding length of hospital stay, overall complications, estimated blood loss, or lymph node yield. Based on our findings, robot-assisted gastric cancer surgery in obese patients with visceral fat appears to be correlated with fewer major complications compared to laparoscopic surgery, while maintaining similar outcomes in other surgical aspects. However, it is important to note that robot-assisted procedures do tend to have longer operative times.

Stapled versus hand-sewn anastomoses after bowel resection in patients with crohn disease.

BACKGROUND: Anastomosis configuration is an essential step in treatment to restore continuity of the gastrointestinal tract following bowel resection in patients with Crohn's disease (CD). However, the association between anastomotic type and surgical outcome remains controversial. This retrospective study aimed to compare early postoperative complications and surgical outcome between stapler and handsewn anastomosis after bowel resection in Crohn's disease. METHODS: Between 2001 and 2018, a total of 339 CD patients underwent bowel resection with anastomosis. Patient characteristics, intraoperative data, early postoperative complications, and outcomes were analyzed and compared between two groups of patients. Group 1 consisted of patients with stapler anastomosis and group 2 with handsewn anastomosis. RESULTS: No significant difference was found in the incidence of postoperative surgical complications between the stapler and handsewn anastomosis groups (25% versus 24.4%, p = 1.000). Reoperation for complications and postoperative hospital stay were similar between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Our analysis showed that there were no differences in anastomotic leak, nor postoperative complications, mortality, reoperation for operative complications, or postoperative hospital stay between the stapler anastomosis and handsewn anastomosis groups.

Contemporary outcomes for resected type 1-3 gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: a single-center experience.

BACKGROUND: Surgical resection remains the mainstay of treatment for tumors of the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ). However, contemporary analyses of the Western experience for GEJ adenocarcinoma are sparsely reported. METHODS: Patients with GEJ adenocarcinoma undergoing resection between 2012 and 2022 at a single institution were grouped based on Siewert subtype and analyzed. Pathologic and treatment related variables were assessed with relation to outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 302 patients underwent resection: 161 (53.3%) with type I, 116 (38.4%) with type II, and 25 (8.3%) with type III tumors. Most patients received neoadjuvant therapy (86.4%); 86% of cases were performed in a minimally invasive fashion. Anastomotic leak occurred in 6.0% and 30-day mortality in only 0.7%. The rate of grade 3+ morbidity was lower for the last 5 years of the study than for the first 5 years (27.5% vs 49.3%, P < .001), as was median length of stay (7 vs 8 days, P < .001). There was a significantly greater number of signet ring type tumors among type III tumors (44.0%) than type I/II tumors (11.2/12.9%, P < .001). Otherwise, there was no difference in the distribution of pathologic features among Siewert subtypes. Notably, there was a significant difference in 3-year overall survival based on Siewert classification: type I 60.0%, type II 77.2%, and type III 86.3% (P = .011). Siewert type I remained independently associated with worse survival on multivariable analysis (hazard ratio, 4.5; P = .023). CONCLUSIONS: In this large, single-institutional series, operative outcomes for patients with resected GEJ adenocarcinoma improved over time. On multivariable analysis, type I tumors were an independent predictor of poor survival.

Feasibility of utilizing mediastinal drains alone following esophageal cancer surgery: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: It was typically necessary to place a closed thoracic drainage tube for drainage following esophageal cancer surgery. Recently, the extra use of thoracic mediastinal drainage after esophageal cancer surgery had also become more common. However, it had not yet been determined whether mediastinal drains could be used alone following esophageal cancer surgery. METHODS: A total of 134 patients who underwent esophageal cancer surgery in our department between June 2020 and June 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 34 patients received closed thoracic drainage (CTD), 58 patients received closed thoracic drainage combined with mediastinal drainage (CTD-MD), while 42 patients received postoperative mediastinal drainage (MD). The general condition, incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications, postoperative NRS score, and postoperative anastomotic leakage were compared. The Mann-Whitney U tests, Welch's t tests, one-way ANOVA, chi-square tests and Fisher's exact tests were applied. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative hyperthermia, peak leukocytes, total drainage, hospitalization days and postoperative pulmonary complications between MD group and the other two groups. Interestingly, patients in the MD group experienced significantly lower postoperative pain compared to the other two groups. Additionally, abnormal postoperative drainage fluid could be detected early in this group. Furthermore, there was no significant change in the incidence of postoperative anastomotic leakage and the mortality rate of patients after the occurrence of anastomotic leakage in the MD group compared with the other two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Using mediastinal drain alone following esophageal cancer surgery was equally safe. Furthermore, it could substantially decrease postoperative pain, potentially replacing the closed thoracic drain in clinical practice.

Complications associated with loop ileostomy: analysis of risk factors.

BACKGROUND: Loop ileostomy is a common surgical procedure but is associated with complications such as outlet obstruction (OO), parastomal hernia (PH), and high-output stoma (HOS). This study aimed to identify risk factors for these complications, as well as their causal relationships. METHODS: The study included 188 consecutive patients who underwent loop ileostomy between April 2016 and September 2021. Clinical factors and postoperative stoma-related complications (OO, HOS, and PH) were analyzed retrospectively. Stoma-related factors were evaluated using specific measurements from computed tomography (CT) scans. The incidence, clinical course, and risk factors for the stoma-related complications were investigated. RESULTS: OO was diagnosed in 28 cases (15.7%), PH in 60 (32%), and HOS in 57 (31.8%). A small longitudinal stoma diameter at the rectus abdominis level on CT and a right-sided stoma were significantly associated with OO. Creation of an ileostomy for anastomotic leakage was independently associated with HOS. Higher body weight and a large longitudinal stoma diameter at the rectus abdominis level on CT were significantly associated with PH. There was a significant relationship between the occurrence of OO and HOS. However, the association between OO and PH was marginal. CONCLUSION: This study identified key risk factors for OO, HOS, and PH as complications of loop ileostomy and their causal relationships. Our findings provide insights that may guide the prevention and management of complications related to loop ileostomy.

Controversies in IPAA for Ulcerative Colitis: A Systematic Review of Different Anastomotic Techniques.

BACKGROUND: Available techniques for IPAA in ulcerative colitis include handsewn, double-stapled, and single-stapled anastomoses. There are controversies, indications, and different outcomes regarding these techniques. OBJECTIVE: To describe technical details, indications, and outcomes of 3 specific types of anastomoses in restorative proctocolectomy. DATA SOURCE: Systematic literature review for articles in the PubMed database according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses criteria. STUDY SELECTION: Studies describing outcomes of the 3 different types of anastomoses, during pouch surgery, in patients undergoing restorative proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis. INTERVENTION: IPAA technique. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Postoperative outcomes (anastomotic leaks, overall complication rates, and pouch function). RESULTS: Twenty-one studies were initially included: 6 studies exclusively on single-stapled IPAA, 2 exclusively on double-stapled IPAA, 6 studies comparing single-stapled to double-stapled techniques, 6 comparing double-stapled to handsewn IPAA, and 1 comprising single-stapled to handsewn IPAA. Thirty-seven studies were added according to authors' discretion as complementary evidence. Between 1990 and 2015, most studies were related to double-stapled IPAA, either only analyzing the results of this technique or comparing it with the handsewn technique. Studies published after 2015 were mostly related to transanal approaches to proctectomy for IPAA, in which a single-stapled anastomosis was introduced instead of the double-stapled anastomosis, with some studies comparing both techniques. LIMITATIONS: A low number of studies with handsewn IPAA technique and a large number of studies added at authors' discretion were the limitations of this strudy. CONCLUSIONS: Handsewn IPAA should be considered if a mucosectomy is performed for dysplasia or cancer in the low rectum or, possibly, for re-do surgery. Double-stapled IPAA has been more widely adopted for its simplicity and for the advantage of preserving the anal transition zone, having lower complications, and having adequate pouch function. The single-stapled IPAA offers a more natural design, is feasible, and is associated with reasonable outcomes compared to double-stapled anastomosis. See video from symposium.

Total mesorectal excision in MRI-defined low rectal cancer: multicentre study comparing oncological outcomes of robotic, laparoscopic and transanal total mesorectal excision in high-volume centres.

BACKGROUND: The routine use of MRI in rectal cancer treatment allows the use of a strict definition for low rectal cancer. This study aimed to compare minimally invasive total mesorectal excision in MRI-defined low rectal cancer in expert laparoscopic, transanal and robotic high-volume centres. METHODS: All MRI-defined low rectal cancer operated on between 2015 and 2017 in 11 Dutch centres were included. Primary outcomes were: R1 rate, total mesorectal excision quality and 3-year local recurrence and survivals (overall and disease free). Secondary outcomes included conversion rate, complications and whether there was a perioperative change in the preoperative treatment plan. RESULTS: Of 1071 eligible rectal cancers, 633 patients with low rectal cancer were identified. Quality of the total mesorectal excision specimen (P = 0.337), R1 rate (P = 0.107), conversion (P = 0.344), anastomotic leakage rate (P = 0.942), local recurrence (P = 0.809), overall survival (P = 0.436) and disease-free survival (P = 0.347) were comparable among the centres. The laparoscopic centre group had the highest rate of perioperative change in the preoperative treatment plan (10.4%), compared with robotic expert centres (5.2%) and transanal centres (2.1%), P = 0.004. The main reason for this change was stapling difficulty (43%), followed by low tumour location (29%). Multivariable analysis showed that laparoscopic surgery was the only independent risk factor for a change in the preoperative planned procedure, P = 0.024. CONCLUSION: Centres with expertise in all three minimally invasive total mesorectal excision techniques can achieve good oncological resection in the treatment of MRI-defined low rectal cancer. However, compared with robotic expert centres and transanal centres, patients treated in laparoscopic centres have an increased risk of a change in the preoperative intended procedure due to technical limitations.

A real-world study was conducted to develop a nomogram that predicts the occurrence of anastomotic leakage in patients with esophageal cancer following esophagectomy.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of anastomotic leakage (AL) following esophagectomy is regarded as a noteworthy complication. There is a need for biomarkers to facilitate early diagnosis of AL in high-risk esophageal cancer (EC) patients, thereby minimizing its morbidity and mortality. We assessed the predictive abilities of inflammatory biomarkers for AL in patients after esophagectomy. METHODS: In order to ascertain the predictive efficacy of biomarkers for AL, Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves were generated. Furthermore, univariate, LASSO, and multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted to discern the risk factors associated with AL. Based on these identified risk factors, a diagnostic nomogram model was formulated and subsequently assessed for its predictive performance. RESULTS: Among the 438 patients diagnosed with EC, a total of 25 patients encountered AL. Notably, elevated levels of interleukin-6 (IL-6), IL-10, C-reactive protein (CRP), and procalcitonin (PCT) were observed in the AL group as compared to the non-AL group, demonstrating statistical significance. Particularly, IL-6 exhibited the highest predictive capacity for early postoperative AL, exhibiting a sensitivity of 92.00% and specificity of 61.02% at a cut-off value of 132.13 pg/ml. Univariate, LASSO, and multivariate logistic regression analyses revealed that fasting blood glucose ≥7.0mmol/L and heightened levels of IL-10, IL-6, CRP, and PCT were associated with an augmented risk of AL. Consequently, a nomogram model was formulated based on the results of multivariate logistic analyses. The diagnostic nomogram model displayed a robust discriminatory ability in predicting AL, as indicated by a C-Index value of 0.940. Moreover, the decision curve analysis provided further evidence supporting the clinical utility of this diagnostic nomogram model. CONCLUSIONS: This predictive instrument can serve as a valuable resource for clinicians, empowering them to make informed clinical judgments aimed at averting the onset of AL.

Predictors for temporary stomas non-closure among non-metastatic rectal cancer patients undergoing curative resection: a retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: The primary treatment for non-metastatic rectal cancer is curative resection. However, sphincter-preserving surgery may lead to complications. This study aims to develop a predictive model for stoma non-closure in rectal cancer patients who underwent curative-intent low anterior resection. METHODS: Consecutive patients diagnosed with non-metastatic rectal cancer between January 2005 and December 2017, who underwent low anterior resection, were retrospectively included in the Chang Gung Memorial Foundation Institutional Review Board. A comprehensive evaluation and analysis of potential risk factors linked to stoma non-closure were performed. RESULTS: Out of 956 patients with temporary stomas, 10.3% (n = 103) experienced non-closure primarily due to cancer recurrence and anastomosis-related issues. Through multivariate analysis, several preoperative risk factors significantly associated with stoma non-closure were identified, including advanced age, anastomotic leakage, positive nodal status, high preoperative CEA levels, lower rectal cancer presence, margin involvement, and an eGFR below 30 mL/min/1.73m2. A risk assessment model achieved an AUC of 0.724, with a cutoff of 2.5, 84.5% sensitivity, and 51.4% specificity. Importantly, the non-closure rate could rise to 16.6% when more than two risk factors were present, starkly contrasting the 3.7% non-closure rate observed in cases with a risk score of 2 or below (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Prognostic risk factors associated with the non-closure of a temporary stoma include advanced age, symptomatic anastomotic leakage, nodal status, high CEA levels, margin involvement, and an eGFR below 30 mL/min/1.73m2. Hence, it is crucial for surgeons to evaluate these factors and provide patients with a comprehensive prognosis before undergoing surgical intervention.

Small bowel anastomosis in emergency surgery.

BACKGROUND: Emergency laparotomy is associated with a high morbidity and mortality rate. The decision on whether to perform an anastomosis or an enterostomy in emergency small bowel resection is guided by surgeon preference alone, and not evidence based. We examined the risks involved in small bowel resection and anastomosis in emergency surgery. METHODS: A retrospective study from 2016 to 2019 in a university hospital in Denmark, including all emergency laparotomies, where small-bowel resections, ileocecal resections, right hemicolectomies and extended right hemicolectomies where performed. Demographics, operative data, anastomosis or enterostomy, as well as postoperative complications were recorded. Primary outcome was the rate of bowel anastomosis. Secondary outcomes were the anastomotic leak rate, mortality and complication rates. RESULTS: During the 3.5-year period, 370 patients underwent emergency bowel resection. Of these 313 (84.6%) received an anastomosis and 57 (15.4%) an enterostomy. The 30-day mortality rate was 12.7% (10.2% in patients with anastomosis and 26.3% in patients with enterostomy). The overall anastomotic leak rate was 1.6%, for small-bowel to colon 3.0% and for small-bowel to small-bowel 0.6%. CONCLUSION: A primary anastomosis is performed in more than eight out of 10 patients in emergency small bowel resections and is associated with a very low rate of anastomotic leak.

Predictors of anastomotic leak and conduit necrosis after oesophagectomy: Results from the oesophago-gastric anastomosis audit (OGAA).

BACKGROUND: Both anastomotic leak (AL) and conduit necrosis (CN) after oesophagectomy are associated with high morbidity and mortality. Therefore, the identification of preoperative, modifiable risk factors is desirable. The aim of this study was to generate a risk scoring model for AL and CN after oesophagectomy. METHODS: Patients undergoing curative resection for oesophageal cancer were identified from the international Oesophagogastric Anastomosis Audit (OGAA) from April 2018-December 2018. Definitions for AL and CN were those set out by the Oesophageal Complications Consensus Group. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify risk factors for both AL and CN. A risk score was then produced for both AL and CN using the derivation set, then internally validated using the validation set. RESULTS: This study included 2247 oesophagectomies across 137 hospitals in 41 countries. The AL rate was 14.2% and CN rate was 2.7%. Preoperative factors that were independent predictors of AL were cardiovascular comorbidity and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The risk scoring model showed insufficient predictive ability in internal validation (area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve [AUROC] = 0.618). Preoperative factors that were independent predictors of CN were: body mass index, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, previous myocardial infarction and smoking history. These were converted into a risk-scoring model and internally validated using the validation set with an AUROC of 0.775. CONCLUSION: Despite a large dataset, AL proves difficult to predict using preoperative factors. The risk-scoring model for CN provides an internally validated tool to estimate a patient's risk preoperatively.

A restrictive stoma policy after colorectal anastomosis in ovarian cancer based on ghost ileostomy use.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of anastomotic leak after colorectal anastomosis in ovarian cancer has been reported to be much lower than that in colorectal cancer patients. Regarding the use of protective manoeuvres (diverting ileostomy) as suggested by clinical guidelines, the goal should be the implementation of a restrictive stoma policy for ovarian cancer patients, given the low rate of anastomotic leakage in this population. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients who underwent cytoreduction surgery in a single centre (University Hospital La Fe, Valencia Spain) due to ovarian cancer between January 2010 and June 2023 were classified according to two groups: a non-restrictive stoma policy group (Group A) and a restrictive stoma policy group (Group B). RESULTS: A total of 256 patients were included in the analysis (group A 52 % vs group B 48 %). The use of protective diverting ileostomy was lower in the restrictive stoma policy group (14 % vs 6.6 %), and the use of ghost ileostomy was 32 % vs 87 % in groups A and B, respectively (p < 0.00001). No differences were found in the anastomotic leak rate, which was 5.2 % in the non-restrictive group and 3.2 % in the restrictive stoma policy group (p = 0.54). CONCLUSION: The use of a restrictive stoma policy based on the use of ghost ileostomy reduces the rate of diverting ileostomy in patients with ovarian cancer after colorectal resection and anastomosis. Furthermore, this policy is not associated with an increased rate of anastomotic leakage nor with an increased rate of morbi-mortality related to the leak.

Laparoscopic repair of duodenal atresia: systematic review and meta-analysis after consistent implementation of the technique in the past decade.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic repair of duodenal atresia (LRDA) remains a technically challenging procedure and its benefits ambiguous. To assess the safety and efficacy of LRDA, we performed a systematic review of techniques and material for LRDA and a meta-analysis comparing outcomes with open repair (OR). METHODS: Comprehensive search of EMBASSE, PubMed and Cochrane was performed from 2000 to 2023. Studies comparing LRDA with OR were identified and outcomes extracted included operative time, time to enteral feeds, length of hospitalisation, anastomotic leaks and stricture and total complications. χ2 was used to assess associations between complications and conversions rates of different LRDA approaches (laparoscopic technique, suturing technique). Comprehensive meta-analysis was used for Meta-analysis. RESULTS: Twelve studies were identified and 1731 patients were enrolled in the study (398 [LRDA] and 1325 [OR]). Total rate of complications and conversion for LRDA was 15.58% and 18.84%, respectively. Complication rates were not significantly affected by operative technique and suturing technique. Conversion rates were not significantly affected operative technique; using a combination of interrupted and running suturing was significantly higher than using running or interrupted (χ2 = 7.45, p < 0.05). Anastomotic leaks, strictures and total complications were equivocal between LRDA and OR (OR 1.672, 95% CI 0.796-3.514; OR 2.010, 95% CI 0.758-5.333; OR 1.172, 95% CI 0.195-7.03). Operative time was significantly greater for LRDA (SDM 1.035, 95% CI 0.574-1.495, p < 0.001). Time to initial and full enteral feeds and length of hospitalisation were shorter in the LRDA group (SDM - 0.493, 95% CI - 2.166 to 1.752, p = 0.466; SDM - 0.207, 95% CI - 1.807 to 0.822, p = 0.019; SDM - 0.111, 95% CI - 1.101 to 0.880, p = 0.466, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: LRDA showed equivalent complication rates compared to OR with an additional benefit of quicker establishment of feeds. There was no significant difference in complication and conversion rates between laparoscopic techniques. Despite a longer operative time, LRDA provides a safe minimal access approach for neonates after this consistent implementation of the technique in the past decade.

Transanal ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term outcomes.

AIM: Restorative proctocolectomy with transabdominal ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (abd-IPAA) has become the standard surgical treatment for medically refractory ulcerative colitis (UC). However, it requires a technically difficult distal anorectal dissection and anastomosis due to the bony confines of the deep pelvis. To address these challenges, the transanal IPAA approach (ta-IPAA) was developed. This novel approach may offer increased visibility and range of motion compared with abd-IPAA, although its postoperative benefits remain unclear. The aim of this work was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare and inform the frequency of postoperative outcomes between ta-IPAA and abd-IPAA for patients with UC. METHOD: Several databases were searched from inception until May 2022 for studies reporting postoperative outcomes of patients undergoing ta-IPAA. Reviewers, working independently and in duplicate, evaluated studies for inclusion and graded the risk of bias. Odds ratios (OR), mean differences (MD) and prevalence ratio (PR) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random-effects models. Sensitivity analysis was performed. RESULTS: Ten retrospective studies comprising 284 patients with ta-IPAA were included. Total mesorectal excision was performed in 61.8% of cases and close rectal dissection in 27.9%. There was no difference in the odds of Clavien-Dindo (CD) I-II complications, CD III-IV and anastomotic leak (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.27-3.40; OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.65-2.16; OR 1.37, 95% CI 0.58-3.23; respectively) between ta-IPAA and abd-IPAA. The ta-IPAA pooled CD I-II complication rate was 18% (95% CI 5%-35%) and for CD III-IV 10% (95% CI 5%-17%), and the anastomotic leak rate was 6% (95% CI 2%-10%). There were no deaths reported. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis compared the novel ta-IPAA procedure with abd-IPAA and found no difference in postoperative outcomes. While the need for randomized controlled trails and comparison of functional outcomes between both approaches remains, this evidence should assist colorectal surgeons to decide if ta-IPAA is a viable alternative.

Predictive performance of different measures of frailty (CFS, mFI-11, mFI-5) on postoperative adverse outcomes among colorectal cancer patients: a diagnostic meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To clarify the predictive performance of different measures of frailty, including Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), 11-factor modified Frailty Index (mFI-11), and 5-factor modified Frailty Index (mFI-5), on adverse outcomes. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and other databases were retrieved from the inception of each database to June 2023. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and the area under the summary receiver operating curve (SROC) values were analyzed to determine the predictive power of CFS, mFI-11, and mFI-5 for adverse outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 25 studies were included in quantitative synthesis. The pooled sensitivity values of CFS for predicting anastomotic leakage, total complications, and major complications were 0.39, 0.57, 0.45; pooled specificity values were 0.70, 0.58, 0.73; the area under SROC values were 0.58, 0.6, 0.66. The pooled sensitivity values of mFI-11 for predicting total complications and delirium were 0.38 and 0.64; pooled specificity values were 0.83 and 0.72; the area under SROC values were 0.64 and 0.74. The pooled sensitivity values of mFI-5 for predicting total complications, 30-day mortality, and major complications were 0.27, 0.54, 0.25; pooled specificity values were 0.82, 0.84, 0.81; the area under SROC values were 0.63, 0.82, 0.5. CONCLUSION: The results showed that CFS could predict anastomotic leakage, total complications, and major complications; mFI-11 could predict total complications and delirium; mFI-5 could predict total complications and 30-day mortality. More high-quality research is needed to support the conclusions of this study further.

The impact of stapled compared to handsewn repair on anastomotic outcomes in trauma patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Approach to enteric anastomotic technique has been a subject of debate, with no clear consensus as to whether handsewn or stapled techniques are superior in trauma settings, which are influenced by unique perturbances to important processes such as immune function, coagulation, wound healing and response to infection. This systematic review and meta-analysis compares the risk of anastomotic complications in trauma patients with gastrointestinal injury requiring restoration of continuity with handsewn versus staples approaches. METHODS: A comprehensive computer assisted search of electronic databases Medline, Embase and Cochrane Central was performed. Comparative studies evaluating stapled versus handsewn gastrointestinal anastomoses in trauma patients were included in this review. All anastomoses involving small intestine to small intestine, small to large intestine, and large intestine to large intestine were eligible. Anastomosis to the rectum was excluded. Outcomes evaluated were (1) anastomotic leak (AL) (2) a composite anastomotic complication (CAC) end point consisting of AL, enterocutaneous fistula (ECF) and deep abdominal abscess. RESULTS: Eight studies involving 931 patients were included and of these patients, data from 790 patients were available for analysis. There was no significant difference identified for anastomotic leak between the two groups (OR = 0.77; 95% CI 0.24-2.45; P = 0.66). There was no significant improvement in composite anastomotic complication; defined as a composite of anastomotic leak, deep intra-abdominal abscess and intra-abdominal fistula, in the stapled anastomosis group (OR = 1.05; 95% CI 0.53-2.09; P = 0.90). Overall, there was limited evidence to suggest superiority with handsewn or stapled anastomosis for improving AL or CAC, however this was based on studies of moderate to high risk of bias with poor control for confounders. DISCUSSION: This meta-analysis demonstrates no superiority improvement in anastomotic outcomes with handsewn or stapled repair. These findings may represent no effect in anastomotic outcome by technique for all situations. However, considering the paucity of information on potential confounders, perhaps there is a difference in outcome with overall technique or for specific subgroups that have not been described due to limited sample size and data on confounders. Currently, there is insufficient evidence to recommend an anastomotic technique in trauma.

Is mechanical bowel preparation mandatory for elective colon surgery? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Growing evidence demonstrates minimal impact of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) on reducing postoperative complications following elective colectomy. This study investigated the necessity of MBP prior to elective colonic resection. METHOD: A systematic literature review was conducted across PubMed, Ovid, and the Cochrane Library to identify studies comparing the effects of MBP with no preparation before elective colectomy, up until May 26, 2023. Surgical-related outcomes were compiled and subsequently analyzed. The primary outcomes included the incidence of anastomosis leakage (AL) and surgical site infection (SSI), analyzed using Review Manager Software (v 5.3). RESULTS: The analysis included 14 studies, comprising seven RCTs with 5146 participants. Demographic information was consistent across groups. No significant differences were found between the groups in terms of AL ((P = 0.43, OR = 1.16, 95% CI (0.80, 1.68), I2 = 0%) or SSI (P = 0.47, OR = 1.20, 95% CI (0.73, 1.96), I2 = 0%), nor were there significant differences in other outcomes. Subgroup analysis on oral antibiotic use showed no significant changes in results. However, in cases of right colectomy, the group without preparation showed a significantly lower incidence of SSI (P = 0.01, OR = 0.52, 95% CI (0.31, 0.86), I2 = 1%). No significant differences were found in other subgroup analyses. CONCLUSION: The current evidence robustly indicates that MBP before elective colectomy does not confer significant benefits in reducing postoperative complications. Therefore, it is justified to forego MBP prior to elective colectomy, irrespective of tumor location.

Fashioning esophagogastric anastomosis in robotic Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy: a multicenter experience.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study is to compare outcomes of the robotic hand-sewn, linear- and circular-stapled techniques performed to create an intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomosis in patients who underwent Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy. METHODS: Patients who underwent a planned Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy were retrospectively analysed from prospectively maintained databases. Only patients who underwent a robotic thoracic approach with the creation of an intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomosis were included in the study. Patients were divided into three groups: hand-sewn-, circular stapled-, and linear-stapled anastomosis group. Demographic information and surgery-related data were extracted. The primary outcome was the rate of anastomotic leakages (AL) in the three groups. Moreover, the rate of grade A, B and C anastomotic leakage were evaluated. In addition, patients of each group were divided in subgroups according to the characteristics of anastomotic fashioning technique. RESULTS: Two hundred and thirty patients were enrolled in the study. No significant differences were found between the three groups about AL rate (p = 0.137). Considering the management of the AL for each of the three groups, no significant differences were found. Evaluating the correlation between AL rate and the characteristics of anastomotic fashioning technique, no significant differences were found. CONCLUSIONS: No standardized anastomotic fashioning technique has yet been generally accepted. This study could be considered a call to perform ad hoc high-quality studies involving high-volume centers for upper gastrointestinal surgery to evaluate what is the most advantageous anastomotic technique.

Calcifications in the descending thoracic aorta predict postoperative anastomotic leakages after esophagectomy for cancer.

BACKGROUND: Anastomotic leak is one of the most feared complications of esophagectomy. Previous studies have suggested a potential link between aortic calcifications detected on routine preoperative CT scans and increased risk of anastomotic leak after esophagectomy. This study aims to investigate whether clinicians' assessment of aortic calcifications can predict the occurrence of anastomotic leaks in patients undergoing esophagectomy for cancer. METHODS: A long-term follow-up was conducted on consecutive patients with esophageal cancer who underwent elective open esophagectomy at a Finnish tertiary hospital. Aortic calcifications were evaluated based on CT scans and categorized on a 0-3 scale reflecting the number of calcifications in the affected segment of the aorta. Reviewers assessing the calcifications were blinded to clinical details and postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: The study included 97 patients (median age: 64 years and range: 43-78; 20% female), with a median follow-up time of 1307 (2-1540) days. Among them, 22 patients (23%) had postoperative anastomotic leak. We observed a significant association between calcifications in the descending aorta and a higher risk of anastomotic leak (p = 0.007), as well as an earlier occurrence of leak postoperatively (p = 0.013). However, there was no association between aortic calcifications and increased mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Presence of calcifications in the descending aorta is independently associated with an increased risk of anastomotic leaks following esophagectomy for cancer. Identifying patients at higher risk for this complication could facilitate appropriate pre- and postoperative interventions, as well as enable earlier diagnosis and treatment to mitigate the severity of the complication.

Preoperative beta blockers and other drugs in relation to anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer.

AIM: Previous research has indicated that preoperative beta blocker therapy is associated with a decreased risk of complications after surgery for rectal cancer. This is thought to arise because of the anti-inflammatory activity of the drug. These results need to be reproduced and analyses extended to other drugs with such properties, as this information might be useful in clinical decision-making. The main aim of this work was to replicate previous findings of beta blocker use as a prognostic marker for postoperative leakage. We also investigated whether drug exposure might induce anastomotic leaks. METHOD: This is a retrospective multicentre cohort study, comprising 1126 patients who underwent anterior resection for rectal cancer between 2014 and 2018. The use of any preoperative beta blocker was treated as the primary exposure, while anastomotic leakage within 12 months of surgery was the outcome. Secondary exposures comprised angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers, statins and metformin. Using multivariable regression, we performed a replication analysis with a predictive aim for beta blockers only, while adjustment for confounding was done in more causally oriented analyses for all drugs. We estimated incidence rate ratio (IRR) and relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Anastomotic leakage occurred in 20.6% of patients. Preoperative beta blockers were used by 22.7% of the cohort, while the leak distribution was almost identical between exposure groups. In the main replication analysis, no association could be detected (IRR 0.95, 95% CI 0.68-1.33). In the causally oriented analyses, only metformin affected the risk of leakage (RR 1.59, 95% Cl 1.31-1.92). CONCLUSION: While previous research has suggested that preoperative beta blocker use could be prognostic of anastomotic leakage, this study could not detect any such association. On the contrary, our results indicate that preoperative beta blocker use neither predicts nor causes anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer.