LAPAROSCOPIA PER DIVERTICOLITE HINCHEY II “NON RESPONDER”: SIGMOIDECTOMIA O LAVAGGIO PERITONEALE?

Obiettivi: In letteratura, non esiste un chiaro consenso riguardo al ruolo del lavaggio e drenaggio laparoscopico (LDL) rispetto alla sigmoidectomia laparoscopica (SL) nelle diverticoliti acute complicate di grado II Hinchey “non responder” al trattamento conservativo in quanto non drenabili per via percutanea nè controllabili con sola terapia antibiotica. Lo scopo di questo studio è confrontare i pazienti sottoposti a queste due procedure chirurgiche ed analizzare i risultati postoperatori. Materiali e metodi: Abbiamo considerato nel periodo 2013-2016, 9 pazienti (Gruppo A) sottoposti a SL e 7 pazienti (Gruppo B) a LDL per diverticolite acuta di grado Hinchey II “non responder”.I seguenti parametri sono stati analizzati e comparati: età media, BMI, Mannheim Peritonitis Index (MPI), ASA Score, tempo medio operatorio, durata media della degenza post-operatoria, morbilità, tasso di re-intervento e mortalità. Il t-test di Student e il test corretto di Fisher sono stati utilizzati per l’analisi statistica. Il p <0,05 è stato considerato signi"cativo. Risultati: Il gruppo A e il gruppo B non sono risultati significativamente differenti per età media (62 vs 60 anni; p = 0.80), BMI (25,82 vs 28,86 kg/m2; p = 0.31), MPI (9,66 vs 14,00; p = 0.26) ed ASA score (2,37 vs 2; p = 0.60). Anche il tasso di complicanze (11% vs 57%; p = 0.10), il tasso di re-intervento (0 vs 28%; p = 0,18) e la durata media della degenza post-operatoria (8 vs 13 gg, p = 0.09) non sono risultati signi"cativamente dissimili tra i due gruppi. In effetti, 2 pazienti inizialmente sottoposti a LDL hanno successivamente necessitato di SL per insuf"ciente controllo dell’infezione. Il tempo operatorio medio è risultato signi"cativamente più lungo nel gruppo A (195 min vs 64 min; p < 0.05). Nessun decesso è stato identi"cato nei due gruppi. Conclusioni: Sebbene retrospettivo e con una popolazione limitata, questo studio dimostra che l’ LDL può avere un ruolo nel trattamento delle diverticoliti acute di grado II Hinchey “non responder”. Questa procedura, in casi selezionati, può rappresentare un opzione ef"cace e sicura nel trattamento dell’infezione addominale diverticolare. L’eventuale insuccesso del LDL non pregiudica la possibilità di ricorrere successivamente ad un intervento resettivo

Correction to: The decrease of non-complicated acute appendicitis and the negative appendectomy rate during pandemic (European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery, (2021), 10.1007/s00068-021-01663-7)

The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake. The Acknowledgement with the members of the Appendicitis- COVID study group is missing. The correct version of is given below. Acknowledgements Members of the Appendicitis-COVID study group: Monza: Marco Nizzardo, Luca Nespoli, Luca Fattori, Luca Degrate, Stefano Perrone, Marco Cereda Bergamo: Michele Pisano, Elia Poiasina, Paolo Bertoli Lodi: Michele Ballabio, Stefano Braga Pavia: Giorgio Graziano Pisa: DarioTartaglia, Francesco Arces Lecco: Marco Mariani, Fulvio Tagliabue Parma: Gennaro Perrone, Alfredo Annicchiarico, Mario Giuffrida Legnano: Giovanni Ferrari, Antonio Benedetti, Niccolò Allievi Ponte San Pietro: Michele Ciocca, Enrico Pinotti, Mauro Montuori San Raffaele: Michele Carlucci, Valentina Tomajer Cesena: Paola Fugazzola The original article has been corrected

The decrease of non-complicated acute appendicitis and the negative appendectomy rate during pandemic

Background: During pandemic, admissions for surgical emergencies dropped down dramatically. Also acute appendicitis decreased. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the change in volume and clinical presentation of patients with acute appendicitis during pandemic and the variation in treatment. Methods: This is a retrospective study of patients admitted in 11 Italian hospital for acute appendicitis during the lockdown period (March–April 2020) compared with the same period of the previous 2&nbsp;years (2018–2019). The number and the rate of complicated and non-complicated acute appendicitis were recorded and compared between the two study periods; non-operative vs operative treatment and negative appendectomy rate were also recorded. Results: The study included 532 patients, 112 in the study period and 420 in the control period; Hospital admission for acute appendicitis dropped by 46% (OR 0.516 95% CI 0.411–0.648 p &lt; 0.001) during the 2020 lockdown. The number of complicated acute appendicitis did not change (− 18%, OR 0.763 95% CI 0.517–1.124 p = 0.1719), whereas the number of non-complicated acute appendicitis significantly decreased (− 56%, OR 0.424 95% CI 0.319–0.564 p &lt; 0.001). Non-operative treatment rate remained similar (12.1% vs. 11.6% p = 0.434). The negative appendectomy rate also significantly decreased (6.1% vs. 17.3%, p = 0.006). Conclusions: The present study found a significant reduction of both admissions for non-complicated acute appendicitis and negative appendectomy rate during the pandemic period. Conversely, admissions for complicated acute appendicitis did not change. Trial registration: NCT04649996

Right Colectomy with Intracorporeal Anastomosis: A European Multicenter Propensity Score Matching Retrospective Study of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Procedures

Background: This study aimed to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of robotic (RRC-IA) versus laparoscopic (LRC-IA) right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis using a propensity score matching (PSM) analysis based on a large European multicentric cohort of patients with nonmetastatic right colon cancer. Methods: Elective curative-intent RRC-IA and LRC-IA performed between 2014 and 2020 were selected from the MERCY Study Group database. The two PSM-groups were compared for operative and postoperative outcomes, and survival rates. Results: Initially, 596 patients were selected, including 194 RRC-IA and 402 LRC-IA patients. After PSM, 298 patients (149 per group) were compared. There was no statistically significant difference between RRC-IA and LRC-IA in terms of operative time, intraoperative complication rate, conversion to open surgery, postoperative morbidity (19.5% in RRC-IA vs. 26.8% in LRC-IA; p = 0.17), or 5-yr survival (80.5% for RRC-IA and 74.7% for LRC-IA; p = 0.94). R0 resection was obtained in all patients, and &gt; 12 lymph nodes were harvested in 92.3% of patients, without group-related differences. RRC-IA procedures were associated with a significantly higher use of indocyanine green fluorescence than LRC-IA (36.9% vs. 14.1%; OR: 3.56; 95%CI 2.02–6.29; p &lt; 0.0001). Conclusion: Within the limitation of the present analyses, there is no statistically significant difference between RRC-IA and LRC-IA performed for right colon cancer in terms of short- and long-term outcomes

Impact of operation duration on postoperative outcomes of minimally-invasive right colectomy

Aim: Operation time (OT) is a key operational factor influencing surgical outcomes. The present study aimed to analyse whether OT impacts on short-term outcomes of minimally-invasive right colectomies by assessing the role of surgical approach (robotic [RRC] or laparoscopic right colectomy [LRC]), and type of ileocolic anastomosis (i.e., intracorporal [IA] or extra-corporal anastomosis [EA]). Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of the Minimally-invasivE surgery for oncological Right ColectomY (MERCY) Study Group database, which included adult patients with nonmetastatic right colon adenocarcinoma operated on by oncological RRC or LRC between January 2014 and December 2020. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used. Results: The study sample was composed of 1549 patients who were divided into three groups according to the OT quartiles: (1) First quartile, &lt;135 min (n&nbsp;=&nbsp;386); (2) Second and third quartiles, 135–199 min (n&nbsp;=&nbsp;731); and (3) Fourth quartile ≥200 min (n&nbsp;=&nbsp;432). The majority (62.7%) were LRC-EA, followed by LRC-IA (24.3%), RRC-IA (11.1%), and RRC-EA (1.9%). Independent predictors of an OT ≥ 200 min included male gender, age, obesity, diabetes, use of indocyanine green fluorescence, and IA confection. An OT ≥ 200 min was significantly associated with an increased risk of postoperative noninfective complications (AOR: 1.56; 95% CI: 1.15–2.13; p&nbsp;=&nbsp;0.004), whereas the surgical approach and the type of anastomosis had no impact on postoperative morbidity. Conclusion: Prolonged OT is independently associated with increased odds of postoperative noninfective complications in oncological minimally-invasive right colectomy

Patients with Crohn's disease have longer post-operative in-hospital stay than patients with colon cancer but no difference in complications' rate

BACKGROUNDRight hemicolectomy or ileocecal resection are used to treat benign conditions like Crohn's disease (CD) and malignant ones like colon cancer (CC).AIMTo investigate differences in pre- and peri-operative factors and their impact on post-operative outcome in patients with CC and CD.METHODSThis is a sub-group analysis of the European Society of Coloproctology's prospective, multi-centre snapshot audit. Adult patients with CC and CD undergoing right hemicolectomy or ileocecal resection were included. Primary outcome measure was 30-d post-operative complications. Secondary outcome measures were post-operative length of stay (LOS) at and readmission.RESULTSThree hundred and seventy-five patients with CD and 2,515 patients with CC were included. Patients with CD were younger (median = 37 years for CD and 71 years for CC (P &lt; 0.01), had lower American Society of Anesthesiology score (ASA) grade (P &lt; 0.01) and less comorbidity (P &lt; 0.01), but were more likely to be current smokers (P &lt; 0.01). Patients with CD were more frequently operated on by colorectal surgeons (P &lt; 0.01) and frequently underwent ileocecal resection (P &lt; 0.01) with higher rate of de-functioning/primary stoma construction (P &lt; 0.01). Thirty-day post-operative mortality occurred exclusively in the CC group (66/2515, 2.3%). In multivariate analyses, the risk of post-operative complications was similar in the two groups (OR 0.80, 95%CI: 0.54-1.17; P = 0.25). Patients with CD had a significantly longer LOS (Geometric mean 0.87, 95%CI: 0.79-0.95; P &lt; 0.01). There was no difference in re-admission rates. The audit did not collect data on post-operative enhanced recovery protocols that are implemented in the different participating centers.CONCLUSIONPatients with CD were younger, with lower ASA grade, less comorbidity, operated on by experienced surgeons and underwent less radical resection but had a longer LOS than patients with CC although complication's rate was not different between the two groups

The impact of stapling technique and surgeon specialism on anastomotic failure after right?sided colorectal resection: an international multicentre, prospective audit

Aim There is little evidence to support choice of technique and configuration for stapled anastomoses after right hemicolectomy and ileocaecal resection. This study aimed to determine the relationship between stapling technique and anastomotic failure. Method Any unit performing gastrointestinal surgery was invited to contribute data on consecutive adult patients undergoing right hemicolectomy or ileocolic resection to this prospective, observational, international, multicentre study. Patients undergoing stapled, side?to?side ileocolic anastomoses were identified and multilevel, multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to explore factors associated with anastomotic leak. Results One thousand three hundred and forty?seven patients were included from 200 centres in 32 countries. The overall anastomotic leak rate was 8.3%. Upon multivariate analysis there was no difference in leak rate with use of a cutting stapler for apical closure compared with a noncutting stapler (8.4% vs 8.0%, OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.54–1.53, P = 0.72). Oversewing of the apical staple line, whether in the cutting group (7.9% vs 9.7%, OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.52–1.46, P = 0.60) or noncutting group (8.9% vs 5.7%, OR 1.40, 95% CI 0.46–4.23, P = 0.55) also conferred no benefit in terms of reducing leak rates. Surgeons reporting to be general surgeons had a significantly higher leak rate than those reporting to be colorectal surgeons (12.1% vs 7.3%, OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.04–2.64, P = 0.04). Conclusion This study did not identify any difference in anastomotic leak rates according to the type of stapling device used to close the apical aspect. In addition, oversewing of the anastomotic staple lines appears to confer no benefit in terms of reducing leak rates. Although general surgeons operated on patients with more high?risk characteristics than colorectal surgeons, a higher leak rate for general surgeons which remained after risk adjustment needs further exploration

Relationship between method of anastomosis and anastomotic failure after right hemicolectomy and ileo-caecal resection: an international snapshot audit

Aim: The anastomosis technique used following right-sided colonic resection is widely variable and may affect patient outcome. This study aimed to assess the association between leak and anastomosis technique (stapled vs handsewn). Method: This was a prospective, multicentre, international audit including patients undergoing elective or emergency right hemicolectomy or ileo-caecal resection operations over a 2-month period in early 2015. The primary outcome measure was the presence of anastomotic leak within 30\ua0days of surgery, determined using a prespecified definition. Mixed effects logistic regression models were used to assess the association between leak and anastomosis method, adjusting for patient, disease and operative cofactors, with centre included as a random-effect variable. Results: This study included 3208 patients, of whom 78.4% (n\ua0=\ua02515) underwent surgery for malignancy and 11.7% (n\ua0=\ua0375) underwent surgery for Crohn's disease. An anastomosis was performed in 94.8% (n\ua0=\ua03041) of patients, which was handsewn in 38.9% (n\ua0=\ua01183) and stapled in 61.1% (n\ua0=\ua01858). Patients undergoing handsewn anastomosis were more likely to be emergency admissions (20.5% handsewn vs 12.9% stapled) and to undergo open surgery (54.7% handsewn vs 36.6% stapled). The overall anastomotic leak rate was 8.1% (245/3041), which was similar following handsewn (7.4%) and stapled (8.5%) techniques (P\ua0=\ua00.3). After adjustment for cofactors, the odds of a leak were higher for stapled anastomosis (adjusted OR\ua0=\ua01.43; 95% CI: 1.04\u20131.95; P\ua0=\ua00.03). Conclusion: Despite being used in lower-risk patients, stapled anastomosis was associated with an increased anastomotic leak rate in this observational study. Further research is needed to define patient groups in whom a stapled anastomosis is safe