Does Adding a Fissurectomy to Botox Sphincterotomy Increase Success Rate or Just Cost?

BACKGROUND: While Botox sphincterotomy with or without fissurectomy has been proven effective in healing anal fissures, they have not been directly compared. We evaluated cost-effectiveness and outcomes between Botox sphincterotomies with and without fissurectomy. METHODS: A 5-year retrospective review was conducted comparing all patients undergoing Botox sphincterotomy for anal fissure with or without fissurectomy. Outcomes including recurrence/persistence, additional treatments, complications, and total charges were compared between study groups. RESULTS: Patients treated without fissurectomy (n = 53) had recurrent/persistent fissure more often (56.6 vs 31.0%, P = .001), and required more Botox treatments. Those treated with fissurectomy (n = 154) had more complications (13.5 vs 0%, P = .003). Patients initially treated without fissurectomy had a median total charge of $2 973, while median total charge for those initially treated with fissurectomy was $17 925 (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Botox sphincterotomy in an office without fissurectomy is a viable option. It may result in longer healing times but is associated with reduced cost, lower complication rates, and no need for anesthesia or operative intervention in most cases. But the choice of treatment route must be individualized.

Is Two Better Than One? A Retrospective Study on Colorectal Surgery Outcomes Using the Da Vinci® Dual-Console Robot.

Introduction: The da Vinci® surgical system has become standard in many specialties. The dual-console system has increased console time for residents during their training. This study evaluated patient outcomes using the single- versus dual-console system in resident training. Methods: A retrospective case-control study was conducted of patients who underwent various colorectal surgeries using either the single- or dual-console da Vinci® system. Patient demographics, comorbidities, and outcomes were collected. Results: Seventy-one patients (54.2%) utilized the single-console and 60 (45.8%) utilized the dual-console. There were no statistically significant differences in patient demographics, procedures performed, conversion to open, ICU admissions, total length of stay, need for blood transfusion, adequacy of surgical margin, number of lymph nodes harvested, anastomotic leak, discharge disposition, or readmission, wound infection, or need for reoperation within 30 days. There was a nonsignificant decrease in operative time with the dual-console system (200.6 vs. 220.2 minutes, p = 0.111). Conclusions: While this study showed no statistically significant differences between patient outcomes utilizing the single- versus dual-consoles, it showed that it is safe for use in training, and that more research is needed in this area.

A prospective, multicenter trial of a long-term bioabsorbable mesh with Sepra technology in cohort of challenging laparoscopic ventral or incisional hernia repairs (ATLAS trial).

BACKGROUND: This prospective, multicenter, single-arm, open-label study evaluated P4HB-ST mesh in laparoscopic ventral or incisional hernia repair (LVIHR) in patients with Class I (clean) wounds at high risk for Surgical Site Occurrence (SSO). METHODS: Primary endpoint was SSO requiring intervention <45 days. Secondary endpoints included: surgical procedure time, length of stay, SSO >45 days, hernia recurrence, device-related adverse events, reoperation, and Quality of Life at 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24-months. RESULTS: 120 patients (52.5% male), mean age of 55.0 ± 14.9 years, and BMI of 33.2 ± 4.5 kg/m2 received P4HB-ST mesh. Patient-reported comorbid conditions included: obesity (86.7%), active smoker (45.0%), COPD (5.0%), diabetes (16.7%), immunosuppression (2.5%), coronary artery disease (7.5%), chronic corticosteroid use (2.5%), hypoalbuminemia (0.8%), advanced age (10.0%), and renal insufficiency (0.8%). Hernia types were primary ventral (44.2%), primary incisional (37.5%), recurrent ventral (5.8%), and recurrent incisional (12.5%). Patients underwent LVIHR in laparoscopic (55.8%) or robotic-assisted cases (44.2%), mean defect size 15.7 ± 28.3 cm2, mean procedure time 85.9 ± 43.0 min, and mean length of stay 1.0 ± 1.4 days. There were no SSOs requiring intervention beyond 45 days, n = 38 (31.7%) recurrences, n = 22 (18.3%) reoperations, and n = 2 (1.7%) device-related adverse events (excluding recurrence). CONCLUSION: P4HB-ST mesh demonstrated low rates of SSO and device-related complications, with improved quality of life scores, and reoperation rate comparable to other published studies. Recurrence rate was higher than expected at 31.7%. However, when analyzed by hernia defect size, recurrence was disproportionately high in defects ≥7.1 cm2 (43.3%) compared to defects <7.1 cm2 (18.6%). Thus, in LVIHR, P4HB-ST may be better suited for small defects. Caution is warranted when utilizing P4HB-ST in laparoscopic IPOM repair of larger defects until additional studies can further investigate outcomes.