Mesh-related complications and recurrence after ventral mesh rectopexy with synthetic versus biologic mesh:a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Ventral mesh rectopexy (VMR) is a widely accepted surgical treatment for rectal prolapse. Both synthetic and biologic mesh are used. No consensus exists on the preferred type of mesh material. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to establish an overview of the current literature on mesh-related complications and recurrence after VMR with synthetic or biologic mesh to aid evidence-based decision making in preferred mesh material. METHODS: A systematic search of the electronic databases of PubMed, Embase and Cochrane was performed (from inception until September 2020). Studies evaluating patients who underwent VMR with synthetic or biologic mesh were eligible. The MINORS score was used for quality assessment. RESULTS: Thirty-two studies were eligible after qualitative assessment. Eleven studies reported on mesh-related complications including 4001 patients treated with synthetic mesh and 762 treated with biologic mesh. The incidence of mesh-related complications ranged between 0 and 2.4% after synthetic versus 0–0.7% after biologic VMR. Synthetic mesh studies showed a pooled incidence of mesh-related complications of 1.0% (95% CI 0.5–1.7). Data of biologic mesh studies could not be pooled. Twenty-nine studies reported on the risk of recurrence in 2371 synthetic mesh patients and 602 biologic mesh patients. The risk of recurrence varied between 1.1 and 18.8% for synthetic VMR versus 0–15.4% for biologic VMR. Cumulative incidence of recurrence was found to be 6.1% (95% CI 4.3–8.1) and 5.8% (95% CI 2.9–9.6), respectively. The clinical and statistical heterogeneity was high. CONCLUSIONS: No definitive conclusions on preferred mesh type can be made due to the quality of the included studies with high heterogeneity amongst them

Body Composition Is a Predictor for Postoperative Complications After Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer:a Prospective Side Study of the LOGICA Trial

PURPOSE: There is a lack of prospective studies evaluating the effects of body composition on postoperative complications after gastrectomy in a Western population with predominantly advanced gastric cancer. METHODS: This is a prospective side study of the LOGICA trial, a multicenter randomized trial on laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Trial patients who received preoperative chemotherapy followed by gastrectomy with an available preoperative restaging abdominal computed tomography (CT) scan were included. The CT scan was used to calculate the mass (M) and radiation attenuation (RA) of skeletal muscle (SM), visceral adipose tissue (VAT), and subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT). These variables were expressed as Z-scores, depicting how many standard deviations each patient’s CT value differs from the sex-specific study sample mean. Primary outcome was the association of each Z-score with the occurrence of a major postoperative complication (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ 3b). RESULTS: From 2015 to 2018, a total of 112 patients were included. A major postoperative complication occurred in 9 patients (8%). A high SM-M Z-score was associated with a lower risk of major postoperative complications (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.28–0.78, p = 0.004). Furthermore, high VAT-RA Z-scores and SAT-RA Z-scores were associated with a higher risk of major postoperative complications (RR 2.82, 95% CI 1.52–5.23, p = 0.001 and RR 1.95, 95% CI 1.14–3.34, p = 0.015, respectively). VAT-M, SAT-M, and SM-RA Z-scores showed no significant associations. CONCLUSION: Preoperative low skeletal muscle mass and high visceral and subcutaneous adipose tissue radiation attenuation (indicating fat depleted of triglycerides) were associated with a higher risk of developing a major postoperative complication in patients treated with preoperative chemotherapy followed by gastrectomy. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11605-022-05321-0

Pain and Opioid Consumption After Laparoscopic Versus Open Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer:A Secondary Analysis of a Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial (LOGICA-Trial)

Background:Laparoscopic gastrectomy could reduce pain and opioid consumption, compared to open gastrectomy. However, it is difficult to judge the clinical relevance of this reduction, since these outcomes are reported in few randomized trials and in limited detail. Methods: This secondary analysis of a multicenter randomized trial compared laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for resectable gastric adenocarcinoma (cT1-4aN0-3bM0). Postoperative pain was analyzed by opioid consumption in oral morphine equivalents (OME, mg/day) at postoperative day (POD) 1–5, WHO analgesic steps, and Numeric Rating Scales (NRS, 0–10) at POD 1–10 and discharge. Regression and mixed model analyses were performed, with and without correction for epidural analgesia. Results: Between 2015 and 2018, 115 patients in the laparoscopic group and 110 in the open group underwent surgery. Some 16 patients (14%) in the laparoscopic group and 73 patients (66%) in the open group received epidural analgesia. At POD 1–3, mean opioid consumption was 131, 118, and 53 mg OME lower in the laparoscopic group, compared to the open group, respectively (all p &lt; 0.001). After correcting for epidural analgesia, these differences remained significant at POD 1–2 (47 mg OME, p = 0.002 and 69 mg OME, p &lt; 0.001, respectively). At discharge, 27% of patients in the laparoscopic group and 43% patients in the open group used oral opioids (p = 0.006). Mean highest daily pain scores were between 2 and 4 at all PODs, &lt; 2 at discharge, and did not relevantly differ between treatment arms. Conclusion: In this multicenter randomized trial, postoperative pain was comparable between laparoscopic and open gastrectomy. After laparoscopic gastrectomy, this was generally achieved without epidural analgesia and with fewer opioids. Trial Registration: NCT02248519.</p

Validation of ergonomic instructions in robot-assisted surgery simulator training

Background/Aim: Training in robot-assisted surgery focusses mainly on technical skills and instrument use. Training in optimal ergonomics during robotic surgery is often lacking, while improved ergonomics can be one of the key advantages of robot-assisted surgery. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess whether a brief explanation on ergonomics of the console can improve body posture and performance. Methods: A comparative study was performed with 26 surgical interns and residents using the da Vinci skills simulator (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA). The intervention group received a compact instruction on ergonomic settings and coaching on clutch usage, while the control group received standard instructions for usage of the system. Participants performed two sets of five exercises. Analysis was performed on ergonomic score (RULA) and performance scores provided by the simulator. Mental and physical load scores (NASA-TLX and LED score) were also registered. Results: The intervention group performed better in the clutch-oriented exercises, displaying less unnecessary movement and smaller deviation from the neutral position of the hands. The intervention group also scored significantly better on the RULA ergonomic score in both the exercises. No differences in overall performance scores and subjective scores were detected. Conclusion: The benefits of a brief instruction on ergonomics for novices are clear in this study. A single session of coaching and instruction leads to better ergonomic scores. The control group showed often inadequate ergonomic scores. No significant differences were found regarding physical discomfort, mental task load and overall performance scores

Efficiency in image-guided robotic and conventional camera steering: a prospective randomized controlled trial

Background: Robotic camera steering systems have been developed to facilitate endoscopic surgery. In this study, a randomized controlled trial was conducted to compare conventional human camera control with the AutoLap™ robotic camera holder in terms of efficiency and user experience when performing routine laparoscopic procedures. Novelty of this system relates to the steering method, which is image based. Methods: Patients undergoing an elective laparoscopic hemicolectomy, sigmoid resection, fundoplication and cholecystectomy between September 2016 and January 2018 were included. Stratified block randomization was used for group allocation. The primary aim of this study was to compare the efficiency of robotic and human camera control, measured with surgical team size and total operating time. Secondary outcome parameters were number of cleaning moments of the laparoscope and the post-study system usability questionnaire. Results: A total of 100 patients were randomized to have robotic (50) versus human (50) camera control. Baseline characteristics did not differ significantly between groups. In the robotic group, 49/50 (98%) of procedures were carried out without human camera control, reducing the surgical team size from four to three individuals. The median total operative time (60.0 versus 53.0 min, robotic vs. control) was not significantly different, p = 0.122. The questionnaire showed a positive user satisfaction and easy control of the robotic camera holder. Conclusion: Image-based robotic camera control can reduce surgical team size and does not result in significant difference in operative time compared to human camera control. Moreover, robotic image-guided camera control was associated with positive user experience