Hyperbaric oxygen treatment for late low colorectal anastomosis ischaemia: Case report.

INTRODUCTION: This report describes the use of hyperbaric oxygen treatment (HBOT) to treat a case of colorectal anastomosis ischaemia following colorectal surgery. CASE REPORT: A 47-year-old man developed post-operative colorectal anastomosis ischaemia with leak after laparoscopic low anterior resection for T3N0 adenocarcinoma of the rectum. The leak with concomitant ischaemia presented 17 days after surgery. HBOT was administrated in 11 sessions over three weeks and the patient followed endoscopically and radiologically for two months. At two months the anastomosis showed both endoscopic and radiological healing; therefore the ileostomy was closed. Anal function was satisfactory with no incontinence or evidence of sepsis. CONCLUSIONS: Intra-operative or late leak with concomitant ischaemia of a colorectal anastomosis is a challenging event in colorectal surgery. HBOT may be beneficial in promoting healing in selected patients. Further studies are needed to evaluate conservative treatments and the role of HBOT.

Predictive factors of mortality in open abdomen for abdominal sepsis: a retrospective cohort study on 113 patients.

Over the past few years, the open abdomen (OA) as a part of Damage Control Surgery (DCS) has been introduced as a surgical strategy with the intent to reduce the mortality of patients with severe abdominal sepsis. Aims of our study were to analyze the OA effects on patients with abdominal sepsis and identify predictive factors of mortality. Patients admitted to our institution with abdominal sepsis requiring OA from 2010 to 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Primary outcomes were mortality, morbidity and definitive fascial closure (DFC). Comparison between groups was made via univariate and multivariate analyses. On 1474 patients operated for abdominal sepsis, 113 (7.6%) underwent OA. Male gender accounted for 52.2% of cases. Mean age was 68.1 ± 14.3 years. ASA score was > 2 in 87.9%. Mean BMI, APACHE II score and Mannheim Peritonitis Index were 26.4 ± 4.9, 15.3 ± 6.3, and 22.6 ± 7.3, respectively. A negative pressure wound system technique was used in 47% of the cases. Overall, mortality was 43.4%, morbidity 76.6%, and DFC rate was 97.8%. Entero-atmospheric fistula rate was 2.2%. At multivariate analysis, APACHE II score (OR 1.18; 95% CI 1.05-1.32; p = 0.005), Frailty Clinical Scale (OR 4.66; 95% CI 3.19-6.12; p < 0.0001) and ASA grade IV (OR 7.86; 95% CI 2.18-28.27; p = 0.002) were significantly associated with mortality. OA seems to be a safe and reliable treatment for critically ill patients with severe abdominal sepsis. Nonetheless, in these patients, co-morbidity and organ failure remain the major obstacles to a better prognosis.

Laparoscopic Sleeve-Fundoplication for Morbidly Obese Patients with Gastroesophageal Reflux: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has rapidly become popular with excellent results. However, LSG may exacerbate or increase the risk of "de novo" gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Adding a fundoplication has been proposed to increase the lower esophageal sphincter competency. The aim of this study was to examine the current evidence and outcomes of sleeve-fundoplication (Sleeve-F). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Web of Science, PubMed, and Embase data sets were consulted. RESULTS: Six studies (485 patients) met the inclusion criteria. The age of the patient population ranged from 17 to 72 years old and 82% were females. All patients underwent sleeve-fundoplication. Rossetti, Collis-Nissen, and Nissen were the most commonly performed fundoplications. The estimated pooled prevalence of postoperative leak, gastric perforation, and overall complications were 1.0% (95% CI = 0.0-2.0%), 2.9% (95% CI = 0.0-8.3%), and 9.8% (95% CI = 6.7-13.4%), respectively. The pooled reoperation rate was 4.1% (95% CI = 1.3-10%). There was no mortality. At 12-month follow-up, the estimated pooled BMI and %EWL were 29.9 kg/m2 (95% CI = 28.5-31.2) and 66.2% (95% CI = 59.3-71.1), respectively, while esophagitis, PPI consumption, and GERD rates were 8.0% (95% CI 3-21%), 7.8% (95% CI 5-13%), and 11% (95% CI 4-26%). CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review and meta-analysis shows that current evidence for Sleeve-F is limited with high postoperative gastric perforation and overall complication rates. Weight loss and GERD resolution seem promising in the short term; however, further studies are warranted to explore long-term effects with instrumental investigations. Sleeve-F should be considered cautiously while future well-structured randomized trials are warranted.

Pulmonary lobectomy for cancer: Systematic review and network meta-analysis comparing open, video-assisted thoracic surgery, and robotic approach.

BACKGROUND: Although minimally invasive lobectomy has gained worldwide interest, there has been debate on perioperative and oncological outcomes. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes among open lobectomy, video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy, and robotic lobectomy. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases were consulted. A fully Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed. RESULTS: Thirty-four studies (183,426 patients) were included; 88,865 (48.4%) underwent open lobectomy, 79,171 (43.2%) video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy, and 15,390 (8.4%) robotic lobectomy. Compared with open lobectomy, video-assisted thoracic surgery, lobectomy and robotic lobectomy had significantly reduced 30-day mortality (risk ratio = 0.53; 95% credible intervals, 0.40-0.66 and risk ratio = 0.51; 95% credible intervals, 0.36-0.71), pulmonary complications (risk ratio = 0.70; 95% credible intervals, 0.51-0.92 and risk ratio = 0.69; 95% credible intervals, 0.51-0.88), and overall complications (risk ratio = 0.77; 95% credible intervals, 0.68-0.85 and risk ratio = 0.79; 95% credible intervals, 0.67-0.91). Compared with video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy, open lobectomy, and robotic lobectomy had a significantly higher total number of harvested lymph nodes (mean difference = 1.46; 95% credible intervals, 0.30, 2.64 and mean difference = 2.18; 95% credible intervals, 0.52-3.92) and lymph nodes stations (mean difference = 0.37; 95% credible intervals, 0.08-0.65 and mean difference = 0.93; 95% credible intervals, 0.47-1.40). Positive resection margin and 5-year overall survival were similar across treatments. Intraoperative blood loss, postoperative transfusion, hospital length of stay, and 30-day readmission were significantly reduced for minimally invasive approaches. CONCLUSION: Compared with open lobectomy, video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy, and robotic lobectomy seem safer with reduced 30-day mortality, pulmonary, and overall complications with equivalent oncologic outcomes and 5-year overall survival. Minimally invasive techniques may improve outcomes and surgeons should be encouraged, when feasible, to adopt video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy, or robotic lobectomy in the treatment of lung cancer.

Resleeve for failed laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Despite excellent long-term results, insufficient weight loss, weight regain, and pathologic gastroesophageal reflux disease may require revisional procedures after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). Resleeve gastrectomy (ReSG) for failed LSG, has been proposed as an alternative to more complex malabsorptive procedures. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to examine the current evidence on the therapeutic role and outcomes of ReSG for failed LSG. PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science data sets were consulted. A systematic review and Frequentist meta-analysis were performed. Ten studies published between 2010 and 2019 met the inclusion criteria for a total of 300 patients. The age of the patient population ranged from 20 to 66 years old and 80.5% were females. The elapsed time between the LSG and ReSG ranged from 9 to 132 months. The estimated pooled prevalence of postoperative leak and overall complications were 2.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] = .5%-4.7%) and 7.6% (95%CI = 3.1%-13.4%). The estimated pooled mean operative time and hospital length of stay were 51 minutes (95%CI = 49.4-52.6) and 3.3 days (95%CI = 3.13-3.51). The postoperative follow-up ranged from 12 to 36 months and the estimated pooled mean percentage excess weight loss was 61.46% (95%CI = 55.9-66.9). The overall mortality ranged from 0% to 2.2%. ReSG after failed LSG seems feasible and safe with acceptable postoperative leak rate, overall complications, and mortality. The effectiveness of ReSG in term of weight loss seems promising in the short-term but further studies are warranted to explore its effect on patients' quality of life, postoperative gastroesophageal reflux disease, and long-term weight loss.