2020 WSES guidelines for the detection and management of bile duct injury during cholecystectomy.

Bile duct injury (BDI) is a dangerous complication of cholecystectomy, with significant postoperative sequelae for the patient in terms of morbidity, mortality, and long-term quality of life. BDIs have an estimated incidence of 0.4-1.5%, but considering the number of cholecystectomies performed worldwide, mostly by laparoscopy, surgeons must be prepared to manage this surgical challenge. Most BDIs are recognized either during the procedure or in the immediate postoperative period. However, some BDIs may be discovered later during the postoperative period, and this may translate to delayed or inappropriate treatments. Providing a specific diagnosis and a precise description of the BDI will expedite the decision-making process and increase the chance of treatment success. Subsequently, the choice and timing of the appropriate reconstructive strategy have a critical role in long-term prognosis. Currently, a wide spectrum of multidisciplinary interventions with different degrees of invasiveness is indicated for BDI management. These World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) guidelines have been produced following an exhaustive review of the current literature and an international expert panel discussion with the aim of providing evidence-based recommendations to facilitate and standardize the detection and management of BDIs during cholecystectomy. In particular, the 2020 WSES guidelines cover the following key aspects: (1) strategies to minimize the risk of BDI during cholecystectomy; (2) BDI rates in general surgery units and review of surgical practice; (3) how to classify, stage, and report BDI once detected; (4) how to manage an intraoperatively detected BDI; (5) indications for antibiotic treatment; (6) indications for clinical, biochemical, and imaging investigations for suspected BDI; and (7) how to manage a postoperatively detected BDI

How future surgery will benefit from SARS-COV-2-related measures: a SPIGC survey conveying the perspective of Italian surgeons

COVID-19 negatively affected surgical activity, but the potential benefits resulting from adopted measures remain unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the change in surgical activity and potential benefit from COVID-19 measures in perspective of Italian surgeons on behalf of SPIGC. A nationwide online survey on surgical practice before, during, and after COVID-19 pandemic was conducted in March-April 2022 (NCT:05323851). Effects of COVID-19 hospital-related measures on surgical patients' management and personal professional development across surgical specialties were explored. Data on demographics, pre-operative/peri-operative/post-operative management, and professional development were collected. Outcomes were matched with the corresponding volume. Four hundred and seventy-three respondents were included in final analysis across 14 surgical specialties. Since SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, application of telematic consultations (4.1% vs. 21.6%; p < 0.0001) and diagnostic evaluations (16.4% vs. 42.2%; p < 0.0001) increased. Elective surgical activities significantly reduced and surgeons opted more frequently for conservative management with a possible indication for elective (26.3% vs. 35.7%; p < 0.0001) or urgent (20.4% vs. 38.5%; p < 0.0001) surgery. All new COVID-related measures are perceived to be maintained in the future. Surgeons' personal education online increased from 12.6% (pre-COVID) to 86.6% (post-COVID; p < 0.0001). Online educational activities are considered a beneficial effect from COVID pandemic (56.4%). COVID-19 had a great impact on surgical specialties, with significant reduction of operation volume. However, some forced changes turned out to be benefits. Isolation measures pushed the use of telemedicine and telemetric devices for outpatient practice and favored communication for educational purposes and surgeon-patient/family communication. From the Italian surgeons' perspective, COVID-related measures will continue to influence future surgical clinical practice

Safety and Efficacy of a Novel Double-Stapling Technique for Distal Esophageal Resection and Esophago-Jejunal Anastomosis

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate safety and efficacy of a new esophagojejunal anastomosis (EJA) technique allowing the insertion of the anvil of a common circular stapler without hand-sewn securing. METHODS: From August 2014 to May 2015, 20 consecutive patients with esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma underwent surgery. EJA was performed using a new technique; the free margins of the esophageal stump were suspended and the anvil of a circular stapler on a new dedicated and registered support bar (characterized by a push-rod making possible to hook-unhook the anvil of the circular stapler) was inserted into the lumen. Subsequently, the linear suturing stapler was closed over the bar and fired to suture the distal stump of the esophagus; the bar was retracted and the push-rod of the anvil was pulled out through the linear suture. Finally, the anastomosis was performed using a circular stapler. RESULTS: There were no intraoperative complications, and R0 resection was achieved in all cases. Postoperative course has been uneventful for 18 patients (90%). Only 1 patient (5%) developed fistula, conservatively treated. CONCLUSIONS: Our preliminary clinical experience suggested that this technique was safe and efficient (for all online suppl. material, see www.karger.com/doi/10.1159/000446856)

Novel double-stapling technique for distal oesophageal resection and oesophago-jejunal anastomosis

AIM: The restoration of the digestive tract by performing an esophago-jejunal anastomosis (EJA) is a crucial step of the total gastric and distal esophagus surgical resection for esophago-gastric junction (EGJ) cancer. We have already ideated and tested on a cadaver model an innovative technique which could be useful to minimize the risk of complications related to the phase of securing the anvil of the circular stapler prior to perform the EJA. This surgical technique was derived from the well-known "double-stapling Knight and Griffen" one that was described for the rectal resection. We used the following described technique in 20 patients with EGJ cancer and it is efficient, reliable, safe, easy to learn and easy to perform. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From August 2014 to May 2015, 20 patients (14 male and 6 female) underwent surgery for esophagogastric junction cancer: In all patients a distal esophageal resection and total gastrectomy was performed. Through the trans-hiatal access, the free margins of the esophageal stump were suspended and the anvil of a circular stapler on a new dedicated and registered support bar was inserted into the lumen. Subsequently, the linear suturing stapler is closed over the bar and then fired to suture the distal stump of the esophagus; after the confirmation of a negative margin, the bar is retracted and the push-rod of the anvil is pulled out through the linear suture. Finally, the anastomosis is performed with the classic technique by using a circular stapler. RESULTS: No postoperative mortality occurred; postoperative course has been uneventful for 18 patients. One patient developed anastomotic fistula that has been treated conservatively with endoscopic prothesis, removed after 20 days. One patient developed in 3 POD myocardial infarction Mean Hospital stay has been 14 days (range 7-20 days). CONCLUSIONS: The aim of our new procedure is the insertion the anvil of a common circular stapler without handsewn securing; this is to reduce the technical difficulties related to the hand-sewn securing into a deep and narrow anatomic location, typical of the trans-hiatal approach

A comparison of laparoscopic resection of posterior segments with formal laparoscopic right hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases: a single-institution study

INTRODUCTION: The benefit of by laparoscopic resection for lesions located in postero-superior segments is unclear. The present series aimed at comparing intraoperative and post-operative results in patients undergoing either laparoscopic RPS or laparoscopic RH for colorectal liver metastases located in the right postero-superior segments. METHODS: From 2000 to 2015, patients who underwent laparoscopic resection of segment 6 and/or 7 (RPS group) were compared with those with right hepatectomy (RH group) in terms of tumour characteristics, surgical treatment, and short-term outcomes. RESULTS: Among the 177 selected patients, 78 (44.1 %) had laparoscopic RPS and 99 (55.9 %) a laparoscopic RH. Among RPS patients, 26 (33.3 %) underwent anatomical resection of either segment 7, 8 or both. Three (3 %) patients undergoing RH died in the post-operative course and none in the RPS group. Sixty-three (35.5 %) patients experienced post-operative complications, including major complications in 24 (13.5 %) patients. Liver failure (17.1 vs. 0 %, p = 000.1), biliary leakage (6.0 vs. 1.2 %, p = 00.1), intra-abdominal collection (19.1 vs. 2.5 %, p = 000.1), and pulmonary complication (16.1 vs. 1.2 %, p = 000.1) were significantly increased in the RH group. CONCLUSION: The present series suggests that patients who underwent laparoscopic resection of CRLM located in the postero-superior segments developed significantly less complications than patients undergoing formal RH