Robot-Assisted Colonic Resections for Cancer

Minimally invasive surgery for colon cancer, if compared with open surgery, has shown similar oncologic outcomes, and it has become the standard management for malignant colonic disease. Its benefits appear yet in early post-operative period such as less postoperative pain, earlier recovery of gastrointestinal functions and shorter hospital stay. Robotic surgery was born in the attempt to overcome the intrinsic limitations of laparoscopic technique. It offers the possibility to have a tridimensional magnified view of surgical field and to use wristed instrument to perform an accurate dissection and lymphadenectomy. It provides the possibility to rotate at 360 degrees the instruments, facilitating considerably the performance of intracorporeal ileo-colic anastomosis in right colectomy. We want to illustrate the feasibility and technique to carry out right and left colectomy in a robotic-assisted way and its advantages with respect to laparoscopic surgery

Nationwide analysis of laparoscopic groin hernia repair in Italy from 2015 to 2020

Since its introduction, the minimally invasive treatment of groin hernias has become widely accepted as a viable alternative to open surgery. Still, the rates and reasons for its adoption vary highly among countries and the regions within a country. After almost thirty years since its introduction, its spread is still limited. The present study, conducted under the auspices of AGENAS (Italian National Agency for Regional Services), aims at giving a snapshot of the spreading of minimally invasive and robotic techniques for the treatment of groin hernia in Italy. This study is retrospective, with data covering the period from 1st January 2015 to 31st December 2020. AGENAS provided data using the operation and diagnosis codes used at discharge and reported in the International Classification of Diseases 9th revision (ICD9 2002 version). Admissions performed on an outpatient basis, i.e., without an overnight stay of at least one night in hospital, were excluded. A total of 33,925 laparoscopic hernia repairs were performed during the considered period. Overall, a slight increase in the number of procedures performed was observed from 2015 to 2019, with a mean annual change of 8.60% (CI: 6.46-10.74; p < 0.0001). The number of laparoscopic procedures dropped in 2020, and when considering the whole period, the mean annual change was - 0.98% (CI: - 7.41-5.45; p < 0.0001). Urgent procedures ranged from 335 in 2015 to 508 in 2020 referring to absolute frequencies, and from 0.87% to 9.8% in relative frequencies of overall procedures in 2017 and 2020, respectively (mean = 4.51%; CI = 3.02%-6%; p < 0.001). The most relevant observation that could be made according to our analysis was that the adoption of the laparoscopic approach knew a slow but steady increase from 2015 onward

Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery after the attempt of endoscopic removal of rectal polyps

none6The incidence of rectal polyps has steadily increased in recent decades and will continue to rise. [1] The introduction of endoscopic screening programs has probably contributed to the improved detection of rectal polyps and early malignant lesions [2, 3]. With the aim to reduce morbidity and mortality of rectal surgery, in 1983, Gerhard Buess introduced Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery (TEM) [4]. He conceived a novel endoscopic technology to facilitate the excision of rectal polyps through the anus [5]. This revolutionary technique enabled superfcial or full-thickness excision of large adenomatous lesions. It soon became apparent that indications to TEM could be successfully extended to early malignant polyps [6, 7]. However, in the late nineties, endoscopy was advocated as a diagnostic technique and a therapeutic method. First, large piecemeal snare ablations were reported. Then, the use of endoscopic electrosurgical knives made it possible to achieve en bloc resection, known as Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection (ESD) [8–11]. The sharp increase in endoscopic resection of rectal polyps made the indications for TEM questioned [12]. This unresolved debate confuses the choice of the optimal treatment for complex rectal polyps. Concerns mainly arise where there is uncertainty around early malignancy or where complete resection of an adenomatous polyp is not obtained following endoscopic attempts [13–15]. Accurate prognostic information is not always available after endoscopic removal, mainly when the specimen is fragmented. [16] Additionally, fbrotic tissue growth at the polypectomy site could invalidate the already sub-optimal accuracy of pre-operative imaging techniques. Therefore, endoscopic ultrasound and/or Magnetic Resonance Imaging staging are often misleading [17]. The indication to resect the site of a previous endoscopic resection with a full-thickness technique has been recommended in cases of unexpected malignancy. However, the overall beneft remains unclear [13, 18]. This study aims to evaluate the outcomes of TEM following endoscopic resection of rectal polyps performed at two diferent centres, assess the value of further local excision, and identify features that may contribute to the decisionmaking process.openMonica Ortenzi, Alberto Arezzo, Roberto Ghiselli, Marco Ettore Allaix, Mario Guerrieri, Mario MorinoOrtenzi, Monica; Arezzo, Alberto; Ghiselli, Roberto; Ettore Allaix, Marco; Guerrieri, Mario; Morino, Mari

Nationwide analysis of inpatient laparoscopic ventral hernia repair in Italy from 2015 to 2020

Since 2010, several guidelines and consensus papers have been proposed to support surgeons in the decision-making process (Cuccurullo et al. in Hernia 17(5):557-566, 2013; Silecchia et al. in Surg Endosc 29:2463-2484, 2015; Bittner et al. in Surg Endosc 33(11):3511-3549, 2015) with the conclusion that laparoscopic repair (LR) has gained popularity in the treatment of IH.To date, however, it is not yet clear as to the uptake of LR for IH on national basis. Only dated studies encompassing of all types of incisional hernia repairs are available in literature (Bisgaard et al. in Br J Surg 96:1452-1457, 2009). The aim of our study is to present a snapshot of Italian data for LR of ventral hernias, over a 6 years period, including volume of LR, procedural features and major postoperative outcomes. Data were extracted from the Italian Hospital Information System (HIS) that collects clinical and administrative information regarding each hospital admission of every patient discharged from any hospital in Italy. Using Hospital Discharge records regional Databases (HDD), all laparoscopic ventral hernia procedures carried out in public and private hospitals between 2015 and 2020, in patients over 18 years and resident in Italy, were collected based on diagnosis and procedure codes. The National Agency for Regional Health Services (AgeNaS) oversees the management and analysis of data. All hospital admissions that occurred between 2015 and 2020 were analyzed.A total of 154,546 incisional hernia repairs were performed in Italy from 2015 to 2020. Of these, 20,789 (13.45%) were minimally invasive repairs. The number of procedures performed increased significantly over time, constituting 11.96 and 15.24% of all procedures performed in 2015 and 2020 respectively. However, considering the whole period, the mean annual change was-5.58% (CI - 28.6% to 17.44%; p < 0.0001).Urgent minimally invasive repairs were performed in 1968 cases (1.27%). The absolute rate of laparoscopically treated patients needing an urgent surgical procedure increased overtime (from 7.36% in 2015 to 13.418% in 2020). The mean annual change registered over the whole period was 7.42%. 92% (CI - 0.03 to 14.09%; p < 0.0001). However, when considering the period from 2015 to 2019, the mean annual change was 10.42% (CI 6.35 to 14.49%; p < 0.0001). To our knowledge this is the first nationwide Italian report presenting the national workload of surgical units and the main perioperative features of minimally invasive surgery for ventral hernia repairs

A novel high accuracy model for automatic surgical workflow recognition using artificial intelligence in laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair (TEP)

Introduction: Artificial intelligence and computer vision are revolutionizing the way we perceive video analysis in minimally invasive surgery. This emerging technology has increasingly been leveraged successfully for video segmentation, documentation, education, and formative assessment. New, sophisticated platforms allow pre-determined segments chosen by surgeons to be automatically presented without the need to review entire videos. This study aimed to validate and demonstrate the accuracy of the first reported AI-based computer vision algorithm that automatically recognizes surgical steps in videos of totally extraperitoneal (TEP) inguinal hernia repair. Methods: Videos of TEP procedures were manually labeled by a team of annotators trained to identify and label surgical workflow according to six major steps. For bilateral hernias, an additional change of focus step was also included. The videos were then used to train a computer vision AI algorithm. Performance accuracy was assessed in comparison to the manual annotations. Results: A total of 619 full-length TEP videos were analyzed: 371 were used to train the model, 93 for internal validation, and the remaining 155 as a test set to evaluate algorithm accuracy. The overall accuracy for the complete procedure was 88.8%. Per-step accuracy reached the highest value for the hernia sac reduction step (94.3%) and the lowest for the preperitoneal dissection step (72.2%). Conclusions: These results indicate that the novel AI model was able to provide fully automated video analysis with a high accuracy level. High-accuracy models leveraging AI to enable automation of surgical video analysis allow us to identify and monitor surgical performance, providing mathematical metrics that can be stored, evaluated, and compared. As such, the proposed model is capable of enabling data-driven insights to improve surgical quality and demonstrate best practices in TEP procedures

Low-pressure versus standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Introduction: It has been previously demonstrated that the rise of intra-abdominal pressures and prolonged exposure to such pressures can produce changes in the cardiovascular and pulmonary dynamic which, though potentially well tolerated in the majority of healthy patients with adequate cardiopulmonary reserve, may be less well tolerated when cardiopulmonary reserve is poor. Nevertheless, theoretically lowering intra-abdominal pressure could reduce the impact of pneumoperitoneum on the blood circulation of intra-abdominal organs as well as cardiopulmonary function. However, the evidence remains weak, and as such, the debate remains unresolved. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to demonstrate the current knowledge around the effect of pneumoperitoneum at different pressures levels during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Materials and methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis were reported according to the recommendations of the 2020 updated Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, and the Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Results: This systematic review and meta-analysis included 44 randomized controlled trials that compared different pressures of pneumoperitoneum in the setting of elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Length of hospital, conversion rate, and complications rate were not significantly different, whereas statistically significant differences were observed in post-operative pain and analgesic consumption. According to the GRADE criteria, overall quality of evidence was high for intra-operative bile spillage (critical outcome), overall complications (critical outcome), shoulder pain (critical outcome), and overall post-operative pain (critical outcome). Overall quality of evidence was moderate for conversion to open surgery (critical outcome), post-operative pain at 1 day (critical outcome), post-operative pain at 3 days (important outcome), and bleeding (critical outcome). Overall quality of evidence was low for operative time (important outcome), length of hospital stay (important outcome), post-operative pain at 12 h (critical outcome), and was very low for post-operative pain at 1 h (critical outcome), post-operative pain at 4 h (critical outcome), post-operative pain at 8 h (critical outcome), and post-operative pain at 2 days (critical outcome). Conclusions: This review allowed us to draw conclusive results from the use of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum with an adequate quality of evidence

Endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy versus appendectomy or antibiotics in the modern approach to uncomplicated acute appendicitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction: Endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy has been proposed as an alternative strategy for treating appendicitis, but debate exists on its role compared with conventional treatment. Methods: This systematic review was performed on MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and EMBASE. The last search was in April of 2023. The risk ratio with a 95% confidence interval was calculated for dichotomous variables, and the mean difference with a 95% confidence interval for continuous variables. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool (randomized controlled trials) and the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Intervention tool (non-randomized controlled trials).Results: Six studies met the eligibility criteria. Four studies compared endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy (n = 236 patients) and appendectomy (n = 339) and found no differences in technical success during index admission (risk ratio 0.97, 95% confidence interval [0.92,1.02]). Appendectomy showed superior outcomes for recurrence at 1-year follow-up (risk ratio 11.28, 95% confidence interval [2.61,48.73]). Endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy required shorter procedural time (mean difference -14.38, 95% confidence interval [-20.17, -8.59]) and length of hospital stay (mean difference -1.19, 95% confidence interval [-2.37, -0.01]), with lower postintervention abdominal pain (risk ratio 0.21, 95% confidence interval [0.14,0.32]). Two studies compared endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy (n = 269) and antibiotic treatment (n = 280). Technical success during admission (risk ratio 1.11, 95% confidence interval [0.91,1.35]) and appendicitis recurrence (risk ratio 1.07, 95% confidence interval [0.08,14 .87]) did not differ, but endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy decreased the length of hospitalization (mean difference -1.91, 95% confidence interval [-3.18, -0.64]).Conclusion: This meta-analysis did not identify significant differences between endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy and appendectomy or antibiotics regarding technical success during index admission and treatment efficacy at 1-year follow-up. However, a high risk of imprecision limits these results. The advantages of endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy in terms of reduced procedural times and shorter lengths of stay must be balanced against the increased risk of having an appendicitis recurrence at one year

Minimally invasive approach to incisional hernia in elective and emergency surgery: a SICE (Italian Society of Endoscopic Surgery and new technologies) and ISHAWS (Italian Society of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery) online survey

Minimally invasive abdominal wall surgery is growing worldwide, with a constant and fast improvement of surgical techniques and surgeons' confidence in treating both primary and incisional hernias (IH). The Italian Society of Endoscopic Surgery and new technologies (SICE) and the ISHAWS (Italian Society of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery) worked together to investigate state of the art in IH treatment in elective and emergency settings in Italy. An online open survey was designed, and Italian surgeons interested in abdominal wall surgery were invited to fill out a 20-point questionnaire on IH surgical procedures performed in their departments. Surgeons were asked to express their points of view on specific questions about technical and clinical variables in IH treatment. Preferred approach in elective IH surgery was minimally invasive (59.7%). Open surgery was the preferred approach in 40.3% of the responses. In emergency settings, open surgery was the preferred approach (65.4%); however, 34.5% of the involved surgeons declare to prefer the laparoscopic/endoscopic approach. Most respondents opted for conversion to open surgery in case of relevant surgical field contamination, with a non-mesh repair of abdominal wall defects. Among those that used the laparoscopic approach in the emergent setting, the majority (74%) used the size of the defect of 5 cm as a decisional cut-off. The spread of minimally invasive approaches to IH repair in emergency surgery in Italy is gaining relevance. Code-sharing through scientific societies can improve clinical practice in different departments and promote a tailored approach to IH surgery