High tie versus low tie in rectal surgery: comparison of anastomotic perfusion

Item does not contain fulltextPURPOSE: Both "high tie" (HT) and "low tie" (LT) are well-known strategies in rectal surgery. The aim of this study was to compare colonic perfusion after HT to colonic perfusion after LT. METHODS: Patients undergoing rectal resection for malignancy were included. Colonic perfusion was measured with laser Doppler flowmetry, immediately after laparotomy on the antimesenterial side of the colon segment that was to become the afferent loop (measurement A). This measurement was repeated after rectal resection (measurement B). The blood flow ratios (B/A) were compared between the HT group and the LT group. RESULTS: Blood flow was measured in 33 patients, 16 undergoing HT and 17 undergoing LT. Colonic blood flow slightly decreased in the HT group whereas the flow increased in the LT group. The blood flow ratio was significantly higher in the LT group (1.48 vs. 0.91; p = 0.04), independent of the blood pressure. CONCLUSION: This study shows the blood flow ratio to be higher in the LT group. This suggests that anastomoses may benefit from better perfusion when LT is performed

Outcomes from elective colorectal cancer surgery during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic

This study aimed to describe the change in surgical practice and the impact of SARS-CoV-2 on mortality after surgical resection of colorectal cancer during the initial phases of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic

The impact of surgical delay on resectability of colorectal cancer: An international prospective cohort study

AIM: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has provided a unique opportunity to explore the impact of surgical delays on cancer resectability. This study aimed to compare resectability for colorectal cancer patients undergoing delayed versus non-delayed surgery. METHODS: This was an international prospective cohort study of consecutive colorectal cancer patients with a decision for curative surgery (January-April 2020). Surgical delay was defined as an operation taking place more than 4 weeks after treatment decision, in a patient who did not receive neoadjuvant therapy. A subgroup analysis explored the effects of delay in elective patients only. The impact of longer delays was explored in a sensitivity analysis. The primary outcome was complete resection, defined as curative resection with an R0 margin. RESULTS: Overall, 5453 patients from 304 hospitals in 47 countries were included, of whom 6.6% (358/5453) did not receive their planned operation. Of the 4304 operated patients without neoadjuvant therapy, 40.5% (1744/4304) were delayed beyond 4 weeks. Delayed patients were more likely to be older, men, more comorbid, have higher body mass index and have rectal cancer and early stage disease. Delayed patients had higher unadjusted rates of complete resection (93.7% vs. 91.9%, P = 0.032) and lower rates of emergency surgery (4.5% vs. 22.5%, P < 0.001). After adjustment, delay was not associated with a lower rate of complete resection (OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.90-1.55, P = 0.224), which was consistent in elective patients only (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.69-1.27, P = 0.672). Longer delays were not associated with poorer outcomes. CONCLUSION: One in 15 colorectal cancer patients did not receive their planned operation during the first wave of COVID-19. Surgical delay did not appear to compromise resectability, raising the hypothesis that any reduction in long-term survival attributable to delays is likely to be due to micro-metastatic disease

Elective cancer surgery in COVID-19-free surgical pathways during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: An international, multicenter, comparative cohort study

PURPOSE As cancer surgery restarts after the first COVID-19 wave, health care providers urgently require data to determine where elective surgery is best performed. This study aimed to determine whether COVID-19–free surgical pathways were associated with lower postoperative pulmonary complication rates compared with hospitals with no defined pathway. PATIENTS AND METHODS This international, multicenter cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery for 10 solid cancer types without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Participating hospitals included patients from local emergence of SARS-CoV-2 until April 19, 2020. At the time of surgery, hospitals were defined as having a COVID-19–free surgical pathway (complete segregation of the operating theater, critical care, and inpatient ward areas) or no defined pathway (incomplete or no segregation, areas shared with patients with COVID-19). The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, unexpected ventilation). RESULTS Of 9,171 patients from 447 hospitals in 55 countries, 2,481 were operated on in COVID-19–free surgical pathways. Patients who underwent surgery within COVID-19–free surgical pathways were younger with fewer comorbidities than those in hospitals with no defined pathway but with similar proportions of major surgery. After adjustment, pulmonary complication rates were lower with COVID-19–free surgical pathways (2.2% v 4.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86). This was consistent in sensitivity analyses for low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1/2), propensity score–matched models, and patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 preoperative tests. The postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was also lower in COVID-19–free surgical pathways (2.1% v 3.6%; aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.76). CONCLUSION Within available resources, dedicated COVID-19–free surgical pathways should be established to provide safe elective cancer surgery during current and before future SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks

Elective Cancer Surgery in COVID-19-Free Surgical Pathways During the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: An International, Multicenter, Comparative Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: As cancer surgery restarts after the first COVID-19 wave, health care providers urgently require data to determine where elective surgery is best performed. This study aimed to determine whether COVID-19-free surgical pathways were associated with lower postoperative pulmonary complication rates compared with hospitals with no defined pathway. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This international, multicenter cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery for 10 solid cancer types without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Participating hospitals included patients from local emergence of SARS-CoV-2 until April 19, 2020. At the time of surgery, hospitals were defined as having a COVID-19-free surgical pathway (complete segregation of the operating theater, critical care, and inpatient ward areas) or no defined pathway (incomplete or no segregation, areas shared with patients with COVID-19). The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, unexpected ventilation). RESULTS: Of 9,171 patients from 447 hospitals in 55 countries, 2,481 were operated on in COVID-19-free surgical pathways. Patients who underwent surgery within COVID-19-free surgical pathways were younger with fewer comorbidities than those in hospitals with no defined pathway but with similar proportions of major surgery. After adjustment, pulmonary complication rates were lower with COVID-19-free surgical pathways (2.2% v 4.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86). This was consistent in sensitivity analyses for low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1/2), propensity score-matched models, and patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 preoperative tests. The postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was also lower in COVID-19-free surgical pathways (2.1% v 3.6%; aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.76). CONCLUSION: Within available resources, dedicated COVID-19-free surgical pathways should be established to provide safe elective cancer surgery during current and before future SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks

A prolonged interval between deep intestinal ischemia and anastomotic construction does not impair wound strength in the rat.

Contains fulltext : 51827.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)INTRODUCTION: Transient intestinal ischemia can reduce anastomotic strength, which poses an increased risk of complications. The objective of this study is to establish if a prolonged interval between profound ischemia and construction of an anastomosis affects anastomotic strength. METHODS: Male Wistar rats were used: in experimental groups, profound mesenteric ischemia was induced by clamping both superior mesenteric artery and more distal arteries in the ileal mesentery. Resection and anastomosis in ileum and colon were performed immediately (IR0) or 24 h after releasing the clamps (IR24). In controls (C0 and C24), arteries were not clamped. After 5 days, anastomotic bursting pressure (BP), breaking strength (BS), and hydroxyproline were measured, and histological analysis was performed. RESULTS: Mortality and anastomotic dehiscence rates were significantly higher in IR0 compared to C0. In ileum, the BS was 34% lower (p<0.05) in IR0 compared to C0, while there were no significant differences in BS or BP between the IR24 and C24 groups. In colon anastomoses, although no differences in BS and BP were found, bursting site was at the anastomosis in 82% in group IR0 vs 30% in group C0, reflecting reduced anastomotic strength in the former. Again, after 24 h, there were no differences between IR and C group. Hydroxyproline and histology were not different between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Extending the interval between transient deep intestinal ischemia and construction of an anastomosis does not impair wound strength

Early anastomotic repair in the rat intestine is affected by transient preoperative mesenteric ischemia.

Contains fulltext : 80885.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)INTRODUCTION: During bowel surgery, perioperative blood loss and hypotension can lead to transient intestinal ischemia. Recent preclinical studies reveal that the strength of intestinal anastomoses can be compromised after reperfusion. So far, this phenomenon has not been investigated in the very first days of healing when wound strength is lowest. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Ischemia was induced in rats by clamping both the superior mesenteric artery and ileal branches for 30 min. Immediately after declamping, anastomoses were constructed in both terminal ileum and descending colon. The same was done in control groups after sham-ischemia. Anastomotic bursting pressure and breaking strength were measured immediately after operation (day 0) and after 1, 2, or 3 days. Anastomotic hydroxyproline content, gelatinase activity, and histology were analyzed. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: In ileal anastomoses, at day 1, both the breaking strength and bursting pressure were significantly (p < 0.05) lower in the ischemic group, while at day 2, this was the case for the bursting pressure only. In the colon, the bursting pressure in the ischemic group was lower at day 1. Anastomotic hydroxyproline content remained unchanged. Increased presence of the various gelatinase activities was found in ileum only at day 0 and in colon at days 1 and 2. Histological mucosal damage was found in ischemia-reperfusion groups. CONCLUSION: Transient mesenteric ischemia can negatively affect anastomotic strength during the very first days of healing, even if the tissue used for anastomotic construction looks vital