Thoracic Duct Embolization for Delayed Chyle Leak After Lewis-Tanner Esophagectomy

BACKGROUND Radical esophagectomy for cancer is a potentially curative treatment that requires two/three-field lymphadenectomy. Serious complications can occur, including chyle leak (CL). CL has an incidence rate of 1-9% and is associated with a higher rate of postsurgical morbidity and mortality. It usually occurs in the early postoperative period; delayed CL is less common and is thought to be due to an occult leak or late diagnosis. CASE REPORT A 54-year-old man with adenocarcinoma of the esophagus underwent Lewis-Tanner esophagectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy with FLOT. During en bloc lymphadenectomy, the main thoracic duct was identified, clipped, and divided. The postoperative course was uneventful. One month after hospital discharge, he was readmitted with severe abdominal, scrotal, and lower-limb edema. A chest-abdomen CT scan revealed massive pleural effusion with left shift and compression of the mediastinum. The patient was initially treated with fasting and fat-free total parenteral nutrition, and the drain output was 2800-3000 mL/dL. Lymphoscintigraphy with ethiodized oil eventually revealed a thoracic duct leak, and lymphatic embolization was successfully performed with a 4-mm metallic spiral and glue. Drain output dramatically reduced, and after 11 days the thoracic drain was removed and the patient was safely discharged. CONCLUSIONS Thoracic duct embolization seems be an effective therapy in treating high-output (>1000 mL/dL) CL that has occurred more than 2 weeks after esophagectomy. It can be considered as a first-line treatment due to its simplicity and effectiveness

Perforated gastric cancer. A critical appraisal

Gastric cancer perforation is a life-threatening condition that accounts for less than 5% of all gastric cancer patients and typically requires emergency surgery. However, preoperative diagnosis is difcult and management has a dual pur- pose: to treat peritonitis and to achieve a curative resection. The optimal surgical strategy is still unclear and prognosis remains poor. A search of the literature was performed using MEDLINE databases (Pubmed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane) using terms such as “perforated gastric cancer”, “perforated gastric cancer and surgery”, “perforated gastric tumour” and “gastric cancer perforated”. Case reports, other reviews, non-english written papers and papers written before 2010 were excluded. Eight articles published between 2010 and 2020 matched the inclusion criteria for this review. Perforated gastric cancer was more prevalent in elderly males. Distal stomach was most frequently involved. Preoperative diagnosis was uncommon. Mortality rates ranged from 2 to 46%. Patients able to receive an R0 resection demonstrated better long-term survival compared with patients who had simple closure procedures. Laparoscopic procedure was mentioned only in one study. In an emergency situation, curative RO resection should always be ofered in patients without multiple adverse factors. A surgical strategy using laparoscopic local repair as frst step of surgery to resolve the peritonitis followed by a radical open or laparoscopic gastrectomy with lymphadenectomy could be con- sidered. A balance between emergency and oncological needs should drive the surgical choice on a case by case basis

Bariatric Surgery Closure During COVID-19 Lockdown in Italy: The Perspective of Waiting List Candidates

Background: From the beginning of March 2020, lockdown regimens prevented patients with obesity from receiving bariatric surgery. Surgical emergencies and oncological procedures were the only operations allowed in public hospitals. Consequently, patients with morbid obesity were put in a standby situation. With the aim at exploring the viewpoint of our future bariatric surgery patients, we built a questionnaire concerning obesity and COVID-19.Method: A total of 116 bariatric surgery candidates were approached using a telephonic interview during the Italian lockdown.Results: Of the total sample, 73.8% were favorable to regular bariatric surgery execution. Forty percent were concerned about their own health status due to the COVID-19 emergency, and 61.1% were troubled by the temporary closure of the bariatric unit. The majority of the sample were eating more. Forty-five percent and the 27.5% of patients reported a worsening of the emotional state and physical health, respectively. Most of the patients (52.2%) considered themselves more vulnerable to COVID-19, especially individuals with class III obesity. Patients who reported an increased consumption of food were younger (43.44 +/- 12.16 vs. 49.18 +/- 12.66; F = 4.28, p = 0.042). No gender difference emerged.Conclusion: The lockdown had a negative result on Italian patients' psychological well-being and eating habits. The majority of patients would have proceeded with the surgery even during the COVID-19 emergency. Effective management and bariatric surgery should be restarted as soon as possible

Preoperative Immunonutrition vs. Standard Dietary Advice in Normo-Nourished Patients Undergoing Fast-Track Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery

Immunonutrition (IN) appears to reduce infective complications and in-hospital length of stay (LOS) after major gastrointestinal surgery, but its use in normo-nourished patients is still controversial. The primary aim of this comparative observational study was to evaluate if pre-operative IN reduces in-hospital stay in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal resection for cancer under an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program. The influence of IN on time to first bowel movements, time to full oral diet tolerance, number and type of complications, reasons of prolonged LOS and readmission rate was evaluated as secondary outcome. Patients undergoing ERAS laparoscopic colorectal resection between December 2016 and December 2019 were reviewed. Patients who have received preoperative IN (group A) were compared to those receiving standard dietary advice (group B). Mean in-hospital LOS was significantly shorter in patients receiving preoperative IN than standard dietary advice (4.85 ± 2.25 days vs. 6.06 ± 3.95 days; p < 0.0492). No differences in secondary outcomes were observed. Preoperative IN associated with ERAS protocol in normo-nourished patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection seems to reduce LOS

Preoperative Immunonutrition vs. Standard Dietary Advice in Normo-Nourished Patients Undergoing Fast-Track Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery

Immunonutrition (IN) appears to reduce infective complications and in-hospital length of stay (LOS) after major gastrointestinal surgery, but its use in normo-nourished patients is still controversial. The primary aim of this comparative observational study was to evaluate if pre-operative IN reduces in-hospital stay in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal resection for cancer under an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program. The influence of IN on time to first bowel movements, time to full oral diet tolerance, number and type of complications, reasons of prolonged LOS and readmission rate was evaluated as secondary outcome. Patients undergoing ERAS laparoscopic colorectal resection between December 2016 and December 2019 were reviewed. Patients who have received preoperative IN (group A) were compared to those receiving standard dietary advice (group B). Mean in-hospital LOS was significantly shorter in patients receiving preoperative IN than standard dietary advice (4.85 ± 2.25 days vs. 6.06 ± 3.95 days; p < 0.0492). No differences in secondary outcomes were observed. Preoperative IN associated with ERAS protocol in normo-nourished patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection seems to reduce LOS

The Italian version of the LARS score: cross-cultural adaptation and validation. An Italian Society of Surgical Oncology-Colorectal Cancer Network (SICO-CCN) collaborative study

Purpose: The LARS score is an internationally well-accepted questionnaire to assess low anterior resection syndrome, but currently there is no formally validated Italian version. The purpose of this study was to test the reliability and validity of the Italian version among Italian patients submitted to sphincter-sparing surgery for rectal cancer. Methods: The English version of the LARS score was translated into Italian following the forward-and-back translation process. A total of 147 patients filled out our version. Among them, 40 patients answered the questionnaire twice for the test-retest reliability phase. The validity of the LARS score was tested using convergent and discriminant validity indicators by correlating the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR29 questionnaires. The LARS score capability to differentiate groups of patients with different demographic or clinical features was also assessed. Results: The test-retest reliability was excellent in 87.5% of patients, remained in the same LARS category in both tests. The convergent validity phase showed a relevant relationship of the LARS score with the EORTC domains, which was significant for 7 of 15 EORTC QLQ-C30 subscales, and for 14 of 29 EORTC QLQ-CR29 subscales. The LARS score was able to discriminate patients who received radiotherapy (p = 0.0026), TME vs. PME (p = 0.0060), tumour site at < 10 cm from the anal verge (p = 0.0030) and history of protective stoma (p < 0.0001). Conclusion: The Italian version of the LARS score is a valid and reliable tool for measuring LARS in Italian patients after SSS for rectal cancer

Screening policies, preventive measures and in-hospital infection of COVID-19 in global surgical practices

Background: In a surgical setting, COVID-19 patients may trigger in-hospital outbreaks and have worse postoperative outcomes. Despite these risks, there have been no consistent statements on surgical guidelines regarding the perioperative screening or management of COVID-19 patients, and we do not have objective global data that describe the current conditions surrounding this issue. This study aimed to clarify the current global surgical practice including COVID-19 screening, preventive measures and in-hospital infection under the COVID-19 pandemic, and to clarify the international gaps on infection control policies among countries worldwide. Methods: During April 2-8, 2020, a cross-sectional online survey on surgical practice was distributed to surgeons worldwide through international surgical societies, social media and personal contacts. Main outcome and measures included preventive measures and screening policies of COVID-19 in surgical practice and centers' experiences of in-hospital COVID-19 infection. Data were analyzed by country's cumulative deaths number by April 8, 2020 (high risk, >5000; intermediate risk, 100-5000; low risk, <100). Results: A total of 936 centers in 71 countries responded to the survey (high risk, 330 centers; intermediate risk, 242 centers; low risk, 364 centers). In the majority (71.9%) of the centers, local guidelines recommended preoperative testing based on symptoms or suspicious radiologic findings. Universal testing for every surgical patient was recommended in only 18.4% of the centers. In-hospital COVID-19 infection was reported from 31.5% of the centers, with higher rates in higher risk countries (high risk, 53.6%; intermediate risk, 26.4%; low risk, 14.8%; P < 0.001). Of the 295 centers that experienced in-hospital COVID-19 infection, 122 (41.4%) failed to trace it and 58 (19.7%) reported the infection originating from asymptomatic patients/staff members. Higher risk countries adopted more preventive measures including universal testing, routine testing of hospital staff and use of dedicated personal protective equipment in operation theatres, but there were remarkable discrepancies across the countries. Conclusions: This large international survey captured the global surgical practice under the COVID-19 pandemic and highlighted the insufficient preoperative screening of COVID-19 in the current surgical practice. More intensive screening programs will be necessary particularly in severely affected countries/institutions

Synchronous liver and peritoneal metastases from colorectal cancer: Is cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy combined with liver resection a feasible option?

BackgroundTraditionally, synchronous liver resection (LR), cytoreductive surgery (CRS), and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for colorectal liver and peritoneal metastases have been contraindicated. Nowadays, clinical practice has promoted this aggressive treatment in selected cases. This study aimed to review surgical and survival results of an extensive surgical approach including CRS with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) and LR. MethodsPubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases were matched to find the available literature on this topic. The search period was limited to 10 years (January 2010-January 2021). A threshold of case series of 10 patients or more was applied. ResultsIn the search period, out of 114 studies found about liver and peritoneal metastases from colorectal cancer, we found 18 papers matching the inclusion criteria. Higher morbidity and mortality were reported for patients who underwent such an extensive surgical approach when compared with patients who underwent only cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC. Also, survival rates seem worse in the former than in the latter. ConclusionThe role of combined surgical strategy in patients with synchronous liver and peritoneal metastases from colorectal cancer remains controversial. Survival rates and morbidity and mortality seem not in favor of this option. A more accurate selection of patients and more restrictive surgical indications could perhaps help improve results in this subgroup of patients with limited curative options

Screening policies, preventive measures and in-hospital infection of COVID-19 in global surgical practices

none14siThis research was funded in part by the European Society of Degenerative Disease. The study was registered with an analysis plan on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04344197).Background In a surgical setting, COVID-19 patients may trigger in-hospital outbreaks and have worse postoperative outcomes. Despite these risks, there have been no consistent statements on surgical guidelines regarding the perioperative screening or management of COVID-19 patients, and we do not have objective global data that describe the current conditions surrounding this issue. This study aimed to clarify the current global surgical practice including COVID-19 screening, preventive measures and in-hospital infection under the COVID-19 pandemic, and to clarify the international gaps on infection control policies among countries worldwide.Methods During April 2-8, 2020, a cross-sectional online survey on surgical practice was distributed to surgeons worldwide through international surgical societies, social media and personal contacts. Main outcome and measures included preventive measures and screening policies of COVID-19 in surgical practice and centers' experiences of in-hospital COVID-19 infection. Data were analyzed by country's cumulative deaths number by April 8, 2020 (high risk, >5000; intermediate risk, 100-5000; low risk, <100).Results A total of 936 centers in 71 countries responded to the survey (high risk, 330 centers; intermediate risk, 242 centers; low risk, 364 centers). In the majority (71.9%) of the centers, local guidelines recommended preoperative testing based on symptoms or suspicious radiologic findings. Universal testing for every surgical patient was recommended in only 18.4% of the centers. In-hospital COVID-19 infection was reported from 31.5% of the centers, with higher rates in higher risk countries (high risk, 53.6%; intermediate risk, 26.4%; low risk, 14.8%; P<0.001). Of the 295 centers that experienced in-hospital COVID-19 infection, 122 (41.4%) failed to trace it and 58 (19.7%) reported the infection originating from asymptomatic patients/staff members. Higher risk countries adopted more preventive measures including universal testing, routine testing of hospital staff and use of dedicated personal protective equipment in operation theatres, but there were remarkable discrepancies across the countries.Conclusions This large international survey captured the global surgical practice under the COVID-19 pandemic and highlighted the insufficient preoperative screening of COVID-19 in the current surgical practice. More intensive screening programs will be necessary particularly in severely affected countries/institutions.openBellato, Vittoria; Konishi, Tsuyoshi; Pellino, Gianluca; An, Yongbo; Piciocchi, Alfonso; Sensi, Bruno; Siragusa, Leandro; Khanna, Krishn; Pirozzi, Brunella Maria; Franceschilli, Marzia; Campanelli, Michela; Efetov, Sergey; Sica, Giuseppe S; Feo, C;Bellato, Vittoria; Konishi, Tsuyoshi; Pellino, Gianluca; An, Yongbo; Piciocchi, Alfonso; Sensi, Bruno; Siragusa, Leandro; Khanna, Krishn; Pirozzi, Brunella Maria; Franceschilli, Marzia; Campanelli, Michela; Efetov, Sergey; Sica, Giuseppe S; Feo,