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

Evaluation of National Surgical Practice for Lateral Lymph Nodes in Rectal Cancer in an Untrained Setting

BACKGROUND: Involved lateral lymph nodes (LLNs) have been associated with increased local recurrence (LR) and ipsi-lateral LR (LLR) rates. However, consensus regarding the indication and type of surgical treatment for suspicious LLNs is lacking. This study evaluated the surgical treatment of LLNs in an untrained setting at a national level.METHODS: Patients who underwent additional LLN surgery were selected from a national cross-sectional cohort study regarding patients undergoing rectal cancer surgery in 69 Dutch hospitals in 2016. LLN surgery consisted of either 'node-picking' (the removal of an individual LLN) or 'partial regional node dissection' (PRND; an incomplete resection of the LLN area). For all patients with primarily enlarged (≥7 mm) LLNs, those undergoing rectal surgery with an additional LLN procedure were compared to those undergoing only rectal resection.RESULTS: Out of 3057 patients, 64 underwent additional LLN surgery, with 4-year LR and LLR rates of 26% and 15%, respectively. Forty-eight patients (75%) had enlarged LLNs, with corresponding recurrence rates of 26% and 19%, respectively. Node-picking (n = 40) resulted in a 20% 4-year LLR, and a 14% LLR after PRND (n = 8; p = 0.677). Multivariable analysis of 158 patients with enlarged LLNs undergoing additional LLN surgery (n = 48) or rectal resection alone (n = 110) showed no significant association of LLN surgery with 4-year LR or LLR, but suggested higher recurrence risks after LLN surgery (LR: hazard ratio [HR] 1.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.7-3.2, p = 0.264; LLR: HR 1.9, 95% CI 0.2-2.5, p = 0.874).CONCLUSION: Evaluation of Dutch practice in 2016 revealed that approximately one-third of patients with primarily enlarged LLNs underwent surgical treatment, mostly consisting of node-picking. Recurrence rates were not significantly affected by LLN surgery, but did suggest worse outcomes. Outcomes of LLN surgery after adequate training requires further research.</p