Studio prospettico multicentrico di efficacia della chirurgia laparoscopica colorettale per patologia neoplastica nel paziente grande anziano

Aim: to evaluate the effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery (LCS) for the treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC) in the very elderly over 80 years of age Methods: we performed a prospective multicentric analysis comparing patients over 80 yo and patients between 60 and 69 yo undergoing LCS for cancer from January 2008 to December 2013. We considered laparoscopic right colectomies, left colectomies, anterior rectal resections and other procedurel including segmental resections and Miles’ procedures. Colon and rectal cancers were analyzed separately. Preoperative workup, surgical techniques and instruments, peri-operative cares were standardized. Data on the patients’ demographics, disease features, operative details and short-term follow up were recorded and analyzed through an appropriate statistical comparison. Comorbidity and complications were classified using the Charlson Comorbidity index (CCI) and the Clavien Dindo classification system (CDCS) respectively. Oncological parameters included tumor-free resection margins, number of lymph nodes harvested and circumferential resection margin. Results: Group A included 96 and 33 patients, Group B 220 and 82 for colon and rectal cancers respectively. Groups were similar except for ASA score and CCI, as expected. We recorded a significant number of colonic in situ tumors Group B (0 vs 6.4%) and rectal T2 tumors (18.2 vs 39.0%) in Group B, a greater number of rectal T3 tumors (60.6 vs 26.8%) in Group A. There was no significant difference in operative time [Colon; Rectum] (178,0 ± 42,0 vs 185,3 ± 43,2 min; NS - 190,3 ± 52,5 vs 201,4 ± 54,9 min; NS), estimated blood loss (59,9 ± 51,8 vs 63,3 ± 60,1 mL; NS - 78,3 ± 81,9 vs 61,0 ± 55,6 mL; NS) and conversion rate (2,1 vs 2,7%; NS – 3,0 vs 2,4%; NS). Timing of first stool (3,1 ± 1,3 vs 3,5 ± 1,8 gg; NS - 3,3 ± 1,2 vs 3,3 ± 1,7 gg; NS), length of hospital stay (7,4 ± 2,1 vs 7,2 ± 2,1 gg; NS - 8,5 ± 1,7 vs 8,5 ± 2,8 gg; NS) and 30 days readmission rate (1,0 vs 0,45%; NS – 6,1 vs 1,2%; NS) were similar. Tumour-free margins were appropriate and positivity of CRM is poor (6.1 vs 4.9; NS). We didn’t record statistically significant differences in CDCS complications rate (47,9 vs 43,6%; NS – 63,6 vs 52,4%; NS). Conclusions: Laparoscopic surgery is effective for the treatment of colorectal cancer even in the very elderly. Age is not a risk factor or a limitation for LCS

Outcomes of Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Cancer in Elderly Patients

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery appears to be feasible and safe in elderly patients with increased comorbidity

Patients with paediatric-onset multiple sclerosis are at higher risk of cognitive impairment in adulthood: an Italian collaborative study

Background: Patients with paediatric-onset multiple sclerosis (POMS) could be at an increased risk for cognitive impairment (CI), given the potential harmful effects of disease activity in neurodevelopment. However, there is scarce information on their long-term cognitive outcomes. Objective: To compare the prevalence and profile of CI between adults with a history of POMS and those with classic, adult-onset multiple sclerosis (AOMS). Methods: Cognitive performance was assessed through the Brief Repeatable Battery (BRB) and the Stroop Test in consecutive patients referred to six Italian MS centres. CI was defined as impairment in ⩾2 cognitive domains. Results: In all, 119 patients with POMS and 712 with AOMS were included in this analysis. The prevalence of CI was 48.0% in AOMS, 44.5% in POMS; with similar neuropsychological profile between the two groups. However, when adjusting for current age, we found a significantly increased risk for CI (odds ratio (OR) = 1.71; p = 0.02) and for impairment in information processing speed (OR = 1.86; p < 0.01) in patients with POMS. A higher Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) was also identified in POMS (p = 0.03) compared with AOMS patients.The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article: This study was in part financed through an FISM (Italian Federation of Multiple Sclerosis) research grant

Evolving trends in the management of acute appendicitis during COVID-19 waves. The ACIE appy II study

Background: In 2020, ACIE Appy study showed that COVID-19 pandemic heavily affected the management of patients with acute appendicitis (AA) worldwide, with an increased rate of non-operative management (NOM) strategies and a trend toward open surgery due to concern of virus transmission by laparoscopy and controversial recommendations on this issue. The aim of this study was to survey again the same group of surgeons to assess if any difference in management attitudes of AA had occurred in the later stages of the outbreak. Methods: From August 15 to September 30, 2021, an online questionnaire was sent to all 709 participants of the ACIE Appy study. The questionnaire included questions on personal protective equipment (PPE), local policies and screening for SARS-CoV-2 infection, NOM, surgical approach and disease presentations in 2021. The results were compared with the results from the previous study. Results: A total of 476 answers were collected (response rate 67.1%). Screening policies were significatively improved with most patients screened regardless of symptoms (89.5% vs. 37.4%) with PCR and antigenic test as the preferred test (74.1% vs. 26.3%). More patients tested positive before surgery and commercial systems were the preferred ones to filter smoke plumes during laparoscopy. Laparoscopic appendicectomy was the first option in the treatment of AA, with a declined use of NOM. Conclusion: Management of AA has improved in the last waves of pandemic. Increased evidence regarding SARS-COV-2 infection along with a timely healthcare systems response has been translated into tailored attitudes and a better care for patients with AA worldwide

Global disparities in surgeons’ workloads, academic engagement and rest periods: the on-calL shIft fOr geNEral SurgeonS (LIONESS) study

: The workload of general surgeons is multifaceted, encompassing not only surgical procedures but also a myriad of other responsibilities. From April to May 2023, we conducted a CHERRIES-compliant internet-based survey analyzing clinical practice, academic engagement, and post-on-call rest. The questionnaire featured six sections with 35 questions. Statistical analysis used Chi-square tests, ANOVA, and logistic regression (SPSS® v. 28). The survey received a total of 1.046 responses (65.4%). Over 78.0% of responders came from Europe, 65.1% came from a general surgery unit; 92.8% of European and 87.5% of North American respondents were involved in research, compared to 71.7% in Africa. Europe led in publishing research studies (6.6 ± 8.6 yearly). Teaching involvement was high in North America (100%) and Africa (91.7%). Surgeons reported an average of 6.7 ± 4.9 on-call shifts per month, with European and North American surgeons experiencing 6.5 ± 4.9 and 7.8 ± 4.1 on-calls monthly, respectively. African surgeons had the highest on-call frequency (8.7 ± 6.1). Post-on-call, only 35.1% of respondents received a day off. Europeans were most likely (40%) to have a day off, while African surgeons were least likely (6.7%). On the adjusted multivariable analysis HDI (Human Development Index) (aOR 1.993) hospital capacity &gt; 400 beds (aOR 2.423), working in a specialty surgery unit (aOR 2.087), and making the on-call in-house (aOR 5.446), significantly predicted the likelihood of having a day off after an on-call shift. Our study revealed critical insights into the disparities in workload, access to research, and professional opportunities for surgeons across different continents, underscored by the HDI

Diversity and ethics in trauma and acute care surgery teams: results from an international survey

Background Investigating the context of trauma and acute care surgery, the article aims at understanding the factors that can enhance some ethical aspects, namely the importance of patient consent, the perceptiveness of the ethical role of the trauma leader, and the perceived importance of ethics as an educational subject. Methods The article employs an international questionnaire promoted by the World Society of Emergency Surgery. Results Through the analysis of 402 fully filled questionnaires by surgeons from 72 different countries, the three main ethical topics are investigated through the lens of gender, membership of an academic or non-academic institution, an official trauma team, and a diverse group. In general terms, results highlight greater attention paid by surgeons belonging to academic institutions, official trauma teams, and diverse groups. Conclusions Our results underline that some organizational factors (e.g., the fact that the team belongs to a university context or is more diverse) might lead to the development of a higher sensibility on ethical matters. Embracing cultural diversity forces trauma teams to deal with different mindsets. Organizations should, therefore, consider those elements in defining their organizational procedures. Level of evidence Trauma and acute care teams work under tremendous pressure and complex circumstances, with their members needing to make ethical decisions quickly. The international survey allowed to shed light on how team assembly decisions might represent an opportunity to coordinate team member actions and increase performance

Correction to: Two years later: Is the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic still having an impact on emergency surgery? An international cross-sectional survey among WSES members

Background: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is still ongoing and a major challenge for health care services worldwide. In the first WSES COVID-19 emergency surgery survey, a strong negative impact on emergency surgery (ES) had been described already early in the pandemic situation. However, the knowledge is limited about current effects of the pandemic on patient flow through emergency rooms, daily routine and decision making in ES as well as their changes over time during the last two pandemic years. This second WSES COVID-19 emergency surgery survey investigates the impact of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on ES during the course of the pandemic. Methods: A web survey had been distributed to medical specialists in ES during a four-week period from January 2022, investigating the impact of the pandemic on patients and septic diseases both requiring ES, structural problems due to the pandemic and time-to-intervention in ES routine. Results: 367 collaborators from 59 countries responded to the survey. The majority indicated that the pandemic still significantly impacts on treatment and outcome of surgical emergency patients (83.1% and 78.5%, respectively). As reasons, the collaborators reported decreased case load in ES (44.7%), but patients presenting with more prolonged and severe diseases, especially concerning perforated appendicitis (62.1%) and diverticulitis (57.5%). Otherwise, approximately 50% of the participants still observe a delay in time-to-intervention in ES compared with the situation before the pandemic. Relevant causes leading to enlarged time-to-intervention in ES during the pandemic are persistent problems with in-hospital logistics, lacks in medical staff as well as operating room and intensive care capacities during the pandemic. This leads not only to the need for triage or transferring of ES patients to other hospitals, reported by 64.0% and 48.8% of the collaborators, respectively, but also to paradigm shifts in treatment modalities to non-operative approaches reported by 67.3% of the participants, especially in uncomplicated appendicitis, cholecystitis and multiple-recurrent diverticulitis. Conclusions: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic still significantly impacts on care and outcome of patients in ES. Well-known problems with in-hospital logistics are not sufficiently resolved by now; however, medical staff shortages and reduced capacities have been dramatically aggravated over last two pandemic years

Management of acute diverticulitis with pericolic free gas (ADIFAS). an international multicenter observational study

Background: There are no specific recommendations regarding the optimal management of this group of patients. The World Society of Emergency Surgery suggested a nonoperative strategy with antibiotic therapy, but this was a weak recommendation. This study aims to identify the optimal management of patients with acute diverticulitis (AD) presenting with pericolic free air with or without pericolic fluid. Methods: A multicenter, prospective, international study of patients diagnosed with AD and pericolic-free air with or without pericolic free fluid at a computed tomography (CT) scan between May 2020 and June 2021 was included. Patients were excluded if they had intra-abdominal distant free air, an abscess, generalized peritonitis, or less than a 1-year follow-up. The primary outcome was the rate of failure of nonoperative management within the index admission. Secondary outcomes included the rate of failure of nonoperative management within the first year and risk factors for failure. Results: A total of 810 patients were recruited across 69 European and South American centers; 744 patients (92%) were treated nonoperatively, and 66 (8%) underwent immediate surgery. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. Hinchey II-IV on diagnostic imaging was the only independent risk factor for surgical intervention during index admission (odds ratios: 12.5, 95% CI: 2.4-64, P =0.003). Among patients treated nonoperatively, at index admission, 697 (94%) patients were discharged without any complications, 35 (4.7%) required emergency surgery, and 12 (1.6%) percutaneous drainage. Free pericolic fluid on CT scan was associated with a higher risk of failure of nonoperative management (odds ratios: 4.9, 95% CI: 1.2-19.9, P =0.023), with 88% of success compared to 96% without free fluid ( P &lt;0.001). The rate of treatment failure with nonoperative management during the first year of follow-up was 16.5%. Conclusion: Patients with AD presenting with pericolic free gas can be successfully managed nonoperatively in the vast majority of cases. Patients with both free pericolic gas and free pericolic fluid on a CT scan are at a higher risk of failing nonoperative management and require closer observation

Goodbye Hartmann trial: a prospective, international, multicenter, observational study on the current use of a surgical procedure developed a century ago

Background: Literature suggests colonic resection and primary anastomosis (RPA) instead of Hartmann's procedure (HP) for the treatment of left-sided colonic emergencies. We aim to evaluate the surgical options globally used to treat patients with acute left-sided colonic emergencies and the factors that leading to the choice of treatment, comparing HP and RPA. Methods: This is a prospective, international, multicenter, observational study registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. A total 1215 patients with left-sided colonic emergencies who required surgery were included from 204 centers during the period of March 1, 2020, to May 31, 2020. with a 1-year follow-up. Results: 564 patients (43.1%) were females. The mean age was 65.9 ± 15.6&nbsp;years. HP was performed in 697 (57.3%) patients and RPA in 384 (31.6%) cases. Complicated acute diverticulitis was the most common cause of left-sided colonic emergencies (40.2%), followed by colorectal malignancy (36.6%). Severe complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3b) were higher in the HP group (P &lt; 0.001). 30-day mortality was higher in HP patients (13.7%), especially in case of bowel perforation and diffused peritonitis. 1-year follow-up showed no differences on ostomy reversal rate between HP and RPA. (P = 0.127). A backward likelihood logistic regression model showed that RPA was preferred in younger patients, having low ASA score (≤ 3), in case of large bowel obstruction, absence of colonic ischemia, longer time from admission to surgery, operating early at the day working hours, by a surgeon who performed more than 50 colorectal resections. Conclusions: After 100&nbsp;years since the first Hartmann's procedure, HP remains the most common treatment for left-sided colorectal emergencies. Treatment's choice depends on patient characteristics, the time of surgery and the experience of the surgeon. RPA should be considered as the gold standard for surgery, with HP being an exception