Tissue engineering and regenerative medicine approaches in colorectal surgery.

Tissue engineering and regenerative medicine (TERM) is an emerging field that has provided new therapeutic opportunities by delivering innovative solutions. The development of nontraditional therapies for previously unsolvable diseases and conditions has brought hope and excitement to countless individuals globally. Many regenerative medicine therapies have been developed and delivered to patients clinically. The technology platforms developed in regenerative medicine have been expanded to various medical areas; however, their applications in colorectal surgery remain limited. Applying TERM technologies to engineer biological tissue and organ substitutes may address the current therapeutic challenges and overcome some complications in colorectal surgery, such as inflammatory bowel diseases, short bowel syndrome, and diseases of motility and neuromuscular function. This review provides a comprehensive overview of TERM applications in colorectal surgery, highlighting the current state of the art, including preclinical and clinical studies, current challenges, and future perspectives. This article synthesizes the latest findings, providing a valuable resource for clinicians and researchers aiming to integrate TERM into colorectal surgical practice.

Resection versus resection with ablation: Analysis from the colorectal liver operative metastasis international collaborative.

BACKGROUND: Thermal ablation has recently become a key therapy for the treatment of colorectal liver metastasis (CLM). However, the role of ablation in combination with resection has not yet been firmly established. We hypothesize that in patients with CLM, those who undergo liver resection with ablation (RA) have similar outcomes compared with those who undergo liver resection only. METHODS: We reviewed a multicenter international database of 906 surgical procedures for CLM from 5 high volume hepatobiliary surgical units. Patients undergoing RA (n = 63) were matched based on the number of lesions and tumor size using a 1:1 balanced propensity score analysis with those having resection only (n = 63). Our primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS: The mean age of our cohort was 58 ± 11 years, with 43% females. With a median follow-up of 70.8 months, patients in the resection and RA group had a median OS of 45.1 and 54.8 months (p = 0.71), respectively. The median DFS was 22.7 and 14.2 months (p = 0.045), respectively. Using a multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression model, the treatment approach was not associated with OS (p = 0.94) or DFS (p = 0.059). A higher number of lesions is independently associated with worse DFS (hazard ratio: 1.12, p < 0.01). When there was disease recurrence, the region of recurrence was similar between the RA versus resection only groups (p = 0.27), but there was a shorter time to recurrence in the RA group (p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: For CLM, the treatment approach was not significantly associated with OS or DFS, while tumor biology likely played an important role. Prospective research on the quality and effectiveness of thermal ablation combined with hepatic resection is warranted.

Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Committee II for the Optimization of Surgical Education and Training in the United States: The Surgical Trainee Perspective.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to appraise recommendations from an expert panel of surgical educators on optimizing surgical education and training in the setting of contemporary challenges. BACKGROUND: The Blue Ribbon Committee (BRC II), a group of surgical educators, was convened to make recommendations to optimize surgical training considering the current changes in the landscape of surgical education. Surgical trainees were recruited to assess their impressions of the recommendations. METHODS: A mixed-methods study design was employed, with a survey, followed by focus group interviews. Participating residents and fellows were recruited through a purposeful sampling approach. Descriptive statistics were applied to analyze the survey data, and a thematic data analysis on interview transcripts was employed. RESULTS: The majority of trainee respondents (n=16) thought that all of the subcommittee recommendations should be included in the final BRC II recommendations and paper. According to the interviews, overall, the feedback from the trainees was positive, with particular excitement around work-life integration, education support and faculty development, and funding pitfalls. Some themes about concerns included a lack of clarity about the recommendations, concern about some recommendations being in conflict with one another, and a disconnect between the initial BRC II survey and the subsequent recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: The residents gathered for this focus group were encouraged by the thought, effort, and intention that gathered the surgical leaders across the country to make the recommendations. While there were areas the trainees wanted clarity on, the overall opinion was in agreement with the recommendations.

Prognostic implications of margin status in association with systemic treatment in a cohort study of patients with resection of colorectal liver metastases.

BACKGROUND: This study investigates the impact of margin status after colorectal liver metastasis (CLM) resection on outcomes of patients after neoadjuvant treatment versus those who underwent upfront resection. METHODS: An international collaborative database of CLM patients who underwent surgical resection was used. Proportional hazard regression models were created for single and multivariable models to assess the relationship between independent measures and median overall survival (mOS). RESULTS: R1 was associated with worse OS in the neoadjuvant group (mOS: 51.8 m for R0 vs. 26.0 m for R1; HR: 2.18). In the patients who underwent upfront surgery, R1 was not associated with OS. (mOS: 46.7 m for R0 vs. 42.6 m for R1). When patients with R1 in each group were stratified by adjuvant treatment, there was no significant difference in the neoadjuvant group, while in the upfront surgery group with R1, adjuvant treatment was associated with significant improvement in OS (mOS: 42.6 m for adjuvant vs. 25.0 m for no adjuvant treatment; HR: 0.21). CONCLUSION: R1 is associated with worse outcomes in the patients who receive neoadjuvant treatment with no significant improvement with the addition of adjuvant therapy, likely representing an aggressive tumor biology. R1 did not impact OS in patients with upfront surgery who received postoperative chemotherapy.

Long-Term Survival in Patients Treated with Cytoreduction and Heated Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Peritoneal Mesothelioma at a Single High-Volume Center.

BACKGROUND: Malignant peritoneal mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare diagnosis with a dismal prognosis if untreated. Cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) is shown to significantly improve survival. Our institution is uniquely positioned to report long-term outcomes in MPM with CRS-HIPEC, due to our robust peritoneal surface disease program existing over the past three decades. METHODS: Our prospectively maintained, single-institution database of CRS-HIPEC cases was reviewed, identifying 111 consecutive patients with MPM over 28 years (1993-2021). Prognostic, operative, and pathologic factors were reviewed. Overall survival (OS) and conditional survival (CS) analyses were performed. RESULTS: The average age was 55.1 years; 58.6% of patients were male; 17 of 111 patients (15.3%) had a second CRS-HIPEC. At first CRS-HIPEC, the average PCI score was 18.7, and the perfusate drugs were platinum-based (72.1%) and mitomycin C (27.9%). The resection status at first CRS-HIPEC was R2a (46.4%), followed by R0-1 (29.1%), and R2b-c (24.5%). Median OS was 3.3 years for the entire cohort, with 75th and 25th percentiles at 10.7 months and 10.6 years. Median CS was improved if patients survived to the 1-year postoperative mark (4.9 years, p < 0.01) and trended toward further improvement with each passing year. If 3-year postoperative survival was achieved, the median CS improved to 6.1 years. CONCLUSIONS: This represents one of the largest and lengthiest, single-center, longitudinal, case series of peritoneal mesothelioma treated with CRS-HIPEC. The OS suggests efficacy for CRS-HIPEC for MPM. Long-term survival improves significantly after patients achieve the 1-year, postoperative mark.