Ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract (LIFT): a sphincter-saving technique for fistula-in-ano

PURPOSE: This study was designed to assess the total anal sphincter–saving technique of ligating the intersphincteric fistula tract for the treatment of fistulain-ano. METHODS: We performed a prospective observational study of patients with fistula-in-ano treated with the ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract technique from May 2007 through September 2008. All patients had fistulas arising from cryptoglandular infections. Recurrence rate, healing time, and morbidities related to the procedure were determined with a standard followup protocol. RESULTS: Forty-five patients with transsphincteric (n � 33) or complex (n � 12) fistulas were included in the study. Five patients (11.1%) had recurrent fistula-in-ano after prior surgery using other recognized treatment procedures. The median age was 41.5 (range, 27–56) years; median follow-up, 9 (range, 2–16) months. Primary healing was achieved in 37 patients (82.2%), with a median healing time of 7 (range, 4–10) weeks. Eight patients (17.7%) had recurrence of fistula between 3 and 8 months after the operation. No clinically significant morbidity was noted in any of the 45 patients. CONCLUSIONS: The ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract technique for fistula-in-ano surgery, which aims at total anal sphincter preservation, appears to be both safe and easy to perform, with encouraging early outcomes

Biofeedback therapy for anorectal functional disorder: Malaysian colorectal tertiary centre experience

Background: Anorectal functional disorder encompasses arrays of conditions including Obstructive Defecation Syndrome (ODS) and Fecal Incontinence (FI). Biofeedback Therapy (BFT) serves as first line therapy to re-train pelvic floor coordination, rectal sensation and strengthening pelvic floor muscle. The aim of this study is determining the efficacy of BFT in our centre. Methods: This is a retrospective observational cohort study of patients attended biofeedback therapy session from January 2013 to December 2018. Descriptive statistic was used to analyse the data. Result: Total 99 patients with mean age of 44.6 ± 18.1 with female 56% (n = 55) and male 44% (n = 44) attended BFT session. Overall, 77 had CC (77%) and 23 (23%) had FI. Mean number of sessions was 11.8. Overall improvement rate 42 (42%), no improvement 32 (32%) and defaulted 26 (26%). In patients with CC, 32 (41.6%) had improvement in symptoms, 23 (29.9%) had no improvements, 22 (28.6%) defaulted BFT. Patients with FI, 7 (30.4%) had Obstetric Sphincter Injury, 7 (30.4%) had traumatic anal injury, 3 (13.0%) has Low Anterior Resection Syndrome, 2 (8.7%) had sphincter injury following anal sepsis, 2 (13.0%) had rectocele repair and 1 (4.3%) were idiopathic. 9 patients (39.1%) had stoma created. Overall response rate was: 10 patients (43.5%) had improvement in symptoms, 9 patients (39.1%) had no improvement, 4 patients (17.4%) defaulted therapy. Conclusion: Our outcome rate is lower compared to published due the limited access and logistic restrictions. This issue should be given great consideration such as broadening the service and training

Global variation in postoperative mortality and complications after cancer surgery: a multicentre, prospective cohort study in 82 countries

© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 licenseBackground: 80% of individuals with cancer will require a surgical procedure, yet little comparative data exist on early outcomes in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). We compared postoperative outcomes in breast, colorectal, and gastric cancer surgery in hospitals worldwide, focusing on the effect of disease stage and complications on postoperative mortality. Methods: This was a multicentre, international prospective cohort study of consecutive adult patients undergoing surgery for primary breast, colorectal, or gastric cancer requiring a skin incision done under general or neuraxial anaesthesia. The primary outcome was death or major complication within 30 days of surgery. Multilevel logistic regression determined relationships within three-level nested models of patients within hospitals and countries. Hospital-level infrastructure effects were explored with three-way mediation analyses. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03471494. Findings: Between April 1, 2018, and Jan 31, 2019, we enrolled 15 958 patients from 428 hospitals in 82 countries (high income 9106 patients, 31 countries; upper-middle income 2721 patients, 23 countries; or lower-middle income 4131 patients, 28 countries). Patients in LMICs presented with more advanced disease compared with patients in high-income countries. 30-day mortality was higher for gastric cancer in low-income or lower-middle-income countries (adjusted odds ratio 3·72, 95% CI 1·70–8·16) and for colorectal cancer in low-income or lower-middle-income countries (4·59, 2·39–8·80) and upper-middle-income countries (2·06, 1·11–3·83). No difference in 30-day mortality was seen in breast cancer. The proportion of patients who died after a major complication was greatest in low-income or lower-middle-income countries (6·15, 3·26–11·59) and upper-middle-income countries (3·89, 2·08–7·29). Postoperative death after complications was partly explained by patient factors (60%) and partly by hospital or country (40%). The absence of consistently available postoperative care facilities was associated with seven to 10 more deaths per 100 major complications in LMICs. Cancer stage alone explained little of the early variation in mortality or postoperative complications. Interpretation: Higher levels of mortality after cancer surgery in LMICs was not fully explained by later presentation of disease. The capacity to rescue patients from surgical complications is a tangible opportunity for meaningful intervention. Early death after cancer surgery might be reduced by policies focusing on strengthening perioperative care systems to detect and intervene in common complications. Funding: National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit

Effects of hospital facilities on patient outcomes after cancer surgery: an international, prospective, observational study

© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 licenseBackground: Early death after cancer surgery is higher in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) compared with in high-income countries, yet the impact of facility characteristics on early postoperative outcomes is unknown. The aim of this study was to examine the association between hospital infrastructure, resource availability, and processes on early outcomes after cancer surgery worldwide. Methods: A multimethods analysis was performed as part of the GlobalSurg 3 study—a multicentre, international, prospective cohort study of patients who had surgery for breast, colorectal, or gastric cancer. The primary outcomes were 30-day mortality and 30-day major complication rates. Potentially beneficial hospital facilities were identified by variable selection to select those associated with 30-day mortality. Adjusted outcomes were determined using generalised estimating equations to account for patient characteristics and country-income group, with population stratification by hospital. Findings: Between April 1, 2018, and April 23, 2019, facility-level data were collected for 9685 patients across 238 hospitals in 66 countries (91 hospitals in 20 high-income countries; 57 hospitals in 19 upper-middle-income countries; and 90 hospitals in 27 low-income to lower-middle-income countries). The availability of five hospital facilities was inversely associated with mortality: ultrasound, CT scanner, critical care unit, opioid analgesia, and oncologist. After adjustment for case-mix and country income group, hospitals with three or fewer of these facilities (62 hospitals, 1294 patients) had higher mortality compared with those with four or five (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 3·85 [95% CI 2·58–5·75]; p<0·0001), with excess mortality predominantly explained by a limited capacity to rescue following the development of major complications (63·0% vs 82·7%; OR 0·35 [0·23–0·53]; p<0·0001). Across LMICs, improvements in hospital facilities would prevent one to three deaths for every 100 patients undergoing surgery for cancer. Interpretation: Hospitals with higher levels of infrastructure and resources have better outcomes after cancer surgery, independent of country income. Without urgent strengthening of hospital infrastructure and resources, the reductions in cancer-associated mortality associated with improved access will not be realised. Funding: National Institute for Health and Care Research

Delayed colorectal cancer care during covid-19 pandemic (decor-19). Global perspective from an international survey

Background The widespread nature of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been unprecedented. We sought to analyze its global impact with a survey on colorectal cancer (CRC) care during the pandemic. Methods The impact of COVID-19 on preoperative assessment, elective surgery, and postoperative management of CRC patients was explored by a 35-item survey, which was distributed worldwide to members of surgical societies with an interest in CRC care. Respondents were divided into two comparator groups: 1) ‘delay’ group: CRC care affected by the pandemic; 2) ‘no delay’ group: unaltered CRC practice. Results A total of 1,051 respondents from 84 countries completed the survey. No substantial differences in demographics were found between the ‘delay’ (745, 70.9%) and ‘no delay’ (306, 29.1%) groups. Suspension of multidisciplinary team meetings, staff members quarantined or relocated to COVID-19 units, units fully dedicated to COVID-19 care, personal protective equipment not readily available were factors significantly associated to delays in endoscopy, radiology, surgery, histopathology and prolonged chemoradiation therapy-to-surgery intervals. In the ‘delay’ group, 48.9% of respondents reported a change in the initial surgical plan and 26.3% reported a shift from elective to urgent operations. Recovery of CRC care was associated with the status of the outbreak. Practicing in COVID-free units, no change in operative slots and staff members not relocated to COVID-19 units were statistically associated with unaltered CRC care in the ‘no delay’ group, while the geographical distribution was not. Conclusions Global changes in diagnostic and therapeutic CRC practices were evident. Changes were associated with differences in health-care delivery systems, hospital’s preparedness, resources availability, and local COVID-19 prevalence rather than geographical factors. Strategic planning is required to optimize CRC care