The Diverticular Disease Registry (DDR Trial) by the Advanced International Mini-Invasive Surgery Academy Clinical Research Network: Protocol for a Multicenter, Prospective Observational Study

Diverticular disease is an increasingly common issue, with a variety of clinical presentations and treatment options. However, very few prospective cohort studies explore outcomes between the different presentations and treatments. The Diverticular Disease Registry (DDR Trial) is a multicenter, prospective, observational cohort study on behalf of the Advanced International Mini-Invasive Surgery (AIMS) academy clinical research network. The DDR Trial aims to investigate the short-term postoperative and long-term quality of life outcomes in patients undergoing surgery or medical treatments for diverticular disease. DDR Trial is open to participation by all tertiary-care hospitals. DDR Trial has been registered at ClinicalTriats.gou (NCT 04907383). Data collection will be recorded on Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) starting on June 1 , 2021 and will end after 5 years of recruitment. All adult patients with imaging-proven colonic diverticular disease (i.e., symptomatic colonic diverticulosis including diverticular bleeding, diverticulitis, and Symptomatic Uncomplicated Diverticular Disease) will be included. The primary outcome of DDR Trial is quality of life assessment at 12-month according to the Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index (GIQLI). The secondary outcome is 30-day postoperative outcomes according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. DDR Trial will significantly advance in identifying the optimal care for patients with diverticular disease by exploring outcomes of different presentations and treatments

ICG fluorescence imaging in colorectal surgery: a snapshot from the ICRAL study group

Background: Fluorescence-guided visualization is a recently proposed technology in colorectal surgery. Possible uses include evaluating perfusion, navigating lymph nodes and searching for hepatic metastases and peritoneal spread. Despite the absence of high-level evidence, this technique has gained considerable popularity among colorectal surgeons due to its significant reliability, safety, ease of use and relatively low cost. However, the actual use of this technique in daily clinical practice has not been reported to date. Methods: This survey was conducted on April 2020 among 44 centers dealing with colorectal diseases and participating in the Italian ColoRectal Anastomotic Leakage (iCral) study group. Surgeons were approximately equally divided based on geographical criteria from multiple Italian regions, with a large proportion based in public (89.1%) and nonacademic (75.7%) centers. They were invited to answer an online survey to snapshot their current behaviors regarding the use of fluorescence-guided visualization in colorectal surgery. Questions regarding technological availability, indications and techniques, personal approaches and feelings were collected in a 23-item questionnaire. Results: Questionnaire replies were received from 37 institutions and partially answered by 8, as this latter group of centers do not implement fluorescence technology (21.6%). Out of the remaining 29 centers (78,4%), fluorescence is utilized in all laparoscopic colorectal resections by 72.4% of surgeons and only for selected cases by the remaining 27.6%, while 62.1% of respondents do not use fluorescence in open surgery (unless the perfusion is macroscopically uncertain with the naked eye, in which case 41.4% of them do). The survey also suggests that there is no agreement on dilution, dosing and timing, as many different practices are adopted based on personal judgment. Only approximately half of the surgeons reported a reduced leak rate with fluorescence perfusion assessment, but 65.5% of them strongly believe that this technique will become a minimum requirement for colorectal surgery in the future. Conclusion: The survey confirms that fluorescence is becoming a widely used technique in colorectal surgery. However, both the indications and methods still vary considerably; furthermore, the surgeons' perceptions of the results are insufficient to consider this technology essential. This survey emphasizes the need for further research to reach recommendations based on solid scientific evidence. Keywords: Colon cancer; Fluorescence guided surgery; ICG; Laparoscopy; Rectal cancer

Colorectal surgery in Italy during the Covid19 outbreak: a survey from the iCral study group

Background The COVID19 pandemic had a deep impact on healthcare facilities in Italy, with profound reorganization of surgical activities. The Italian ColoRectal Anastomotic Leakage (iCral) study group collecting 43 Italian surgical centers experienced in colorectal surgery from multiple regions performed a quick survey to make a snapshot of the current situation. Methods A 25-items questionnaire was sent to the 43 principal investigators of the iCral study group, with questions regard- ing qualitative and quantitative aspects of the surgical activity before and after the COVID19 outbreak. Results Two-thirds of the centers were involved in the treatment of COVID19 cases. Intensive care units (ICU) beds were partially or totally reallocated for the treatment of COVID19 cases in 72% of the hospitals. Elective colorectal surgery for malignancy was stopped or delayed in nearly 30% of the centers, with less than 20% of them still scheduling elective colo- rectal resections for frail and comorbid patients needing postoperative ICU care. A significant reduction of the number of colorectal resections during the time span from January to March 2020 was recorded, with significant delay in treatment in more than 50% of the centers. Discussion Our survey confirms that COVID19 outbreak is severely affecting the activity of colorectal surgery centers partici- pating to iCral study group. This could impact the activity of surgical centers for many months after the end of the emergency

Early Postoperative Low Compliance to Enhanced Recovery Pathway in Rectal Cancer Patients

Early postoperative low compliance to enhanced recovery protocols has been associated with morbidity following colon surgery. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the possible causes of early postoperative low compliance to the enhanced recovery pathway and its relationship with morbidity following rectal surgery for cancer. A total of 439 consecutive patients who underwent elective surgery for rectal cancer have been included in the study. Compliance to enhanced recovery protocol on postoperative day (POD) 2 was evaluated in all patients. Indicators of compliance were naso-gastric tube and urinary catheter removal, recovery of both oral feeding and mobilization, and the stopping of intravenous fluids. Low compliance on POD 2 was defined as non- adherence to two or more items. One-third of patients had low compliance on POD 2. Removal of urinary catheter, intravenous fluids stop, and mobilization were the items with lowest adherence. Advanced age, duration of surgery, open surgery and diverting stoma were predictive factors of low compliance at multivariate analysis. Overall morbidity and major complications were significantly higher (p < 0.001) in patients with low compliance on POD 2. At multivariate analysis, failure to remove urinary catheter on POD 2 (OR = 1.83) was significantly correlated with postoperative complications. Low compliance to enhanced recovery protocol on POD 2 was significantly associated with morbidity. Failure to remove the urinary catheter was the most predictive indicator. Advanced age, long procedure, open surgery and diverting stoma were independent predictive factors of low compliance

ICG fuorescence imaging in colorectal surgery: a snapshot from the ICRAL study group

Background: Fluorescence-guided visualization is a recently proposed technology in colorectal surgery. Possible uses include evaluating perfusion, navigating lymph nodes and searching for hepatic metastases and peritoneal spread. Despite the absence of high-level evidence, this technique has gained considerable popularity among colorectal surgeons due to its significant reliability, safety, ease of use and relatively low cost. However, the actual use of this technique in daily clinical practice has not been reported to date. Methods: This survey was conducted on April 2020 among 44 centers dealing with colorectal diseases and participating in the Italian ColoRectal Anastomotic Leakage (iCral) study group. Surgeons were approximately equally divided based on geographical criteria from multiple Italian regions, with a large proportion based in public (89.1%) and nonacademic (75.7%) centers. They were invited to answer an online survey to snapshot their current behaviors regarding the use of fluorescence-guided visualization in colorectal surgery. Questions regarding technological availability, indications and techniques, personal approaches and feelings were collected in a 23-item questionnaire. Results: Questionnaire replies were received from 37 institutions and partially answered by 8, as this latter group of centers do not implement fluorescence technology (21.6%). Out of the remaining 29 centers (78,4%), fluorescence is utilized in all laparoscopic colorectal resections by 72.4% of surgeons and only for selected cases by the remaining 27.6%, while 62.1% of respondents do not use fluorescence in open surgery (unless the perfusion is macroscopically uncertain with the naked eye, in which case 41.4% of them do). The survey also suggests that there is no agreement on dilution, dosing and timing, as many different practices are adopted based on personal judgment. Only approximately half of the surgeons reported a reduced leak rate with fluorescence perfusion assessment, but 65.5% of them strongly believe that this technique will become a minimum requirement for colorectal surgery in the future. Conclusion: The survey confirms that fluorescence is becoming a widely used technique in colorectal surgery. However, both the indications and methods still vary considerably; furthermore, the surgeons' perceptions of the results are insufficient to consider this technology essential. This survey emphasizes the need for further research to reach recommendations based on solid scientific evidence

ICG fluorescence imaging in colorectal surgery: a snapshot from the ICRAL study group

Background: Fluorescence-guided visualization is a recently proposed technology in colorectal surgery. Possible uses include evaluating perfusion, navigating lymph nodes and searching for hepatic metastases and peritoneal spread. Despite the absence of high-level evidence, this technique has gained considerable popularity among colorectal surgeons due to its significant reliability, safety, ease of use and relatively low cost. However, the actual use of this technique in daily clinical practice has not been reported to date. Methods: This survey was conducted on April 2020 among 44 centers dealing with colorectal diseases and participating in the Italian ColoRectal Anastomotic Leakage (iCral) study group. Surgeons were approximately equally divided based on geographical criteria from multiple Italian regions, with a large proportion based in public (89.1%) and nonacademic (75.7%) centers. They were invited to answer an online survey to snapshot their current behaviors regarding the use of fluorescence-guided visualization in colorectal surgery. Questions regarding technological availability, indications and techniques, personal approaches and feelings were collected in a 23-item questionnaire. Results: Questionnaire replies were received from 37 institutions and partially answered by 8, as this latter group of centers do not implement fluorescence technology (21.6%). Out of the remaining 29 centers (78,4%), fluorescence is utilized in all laparoscopic colorectal resections by 72.4% of surgeons and only for selected cases by the remaining 27.6%, while 62.1% of respondents do not use fluorescence in open surgery (unless the perfusion is macroscopically uncertain with the naked eye, in which case 41.4% of them do). The survey also suggests that there is no agreement on dilution, dosing and timing, as many different practices are adopted based on personal judgment. Only approximately half of the surgeons reported a reduced leak rate with fluorescence perfusion assessment, but 65.5% of them strongly believe that this technique will become a minimum requirement for colorectal surgery in the future. Conclusion: The survey confirms that fluorescence is becoming a widely used technique in colorectal surgery. However, both the indications and methods still vary considerably; furthermore, the surgeons' perceptions of the results are insufficient to consider this technology essential. This survey emphasizes the need for further research to reach recommendations based on solid scientific evidence

ERAS program adherence-institutionalization, major morbidity and anastomotic leakage after elective colorectal surgery: the iCral2 multicenter prospective study

Background Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs influence morbidity rates and length of stay after colorectal surgery (CRS), and may also impact major complications and anastomotic leakage rates. A prospective multicenter observational study to investigate the interactions between ERAS program adherence and early outcomes after elective CRS was carried out. Methods Prospective enrolment of patients submitted to elective CRS with anastomosis in 18 months. Adherence to 21 items of ERAS program was measured upon explicit criteria in every case. After univariate analysis, independent predictors of primary endpoints [major morbidity (MM) and anastomotic leakage (AL) rates] were identified through logistic regression analyses including all significant variables, presenting odds ratios (OR). Results Institutional ERAS protocol was declared by 27 out of 38 (71.0%) participating centers. Median overall adherence to ERAS program items was 71.4%. Among 3830 patients included in the study, MM and AL rates were 4.7% and 4.2%, respectively. MM rates were independently influenced by intra- and/or postoperative blood transfusions (OR 7.79, 95% CI 5.46-11.10; p < 0.0001) and standard anesthesia protocol (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.48-0.96; p = 0.028). AL rates were independently influenced by male gender (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.06-2.07; p = 0.021), intra- and/or postoperative blood transfusions (OR 4.29, 95% CI 2.93-6.50; p < 0.0001) and non-standard resections (OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.01-2.22; p = 0.049). Conclusions This study disclosed wide room for improvement in compliance to several ERAS program items. It failed to detect any significant association between institutionalization and/or adherence rates to ERAS program with primary endpoints. These outcomes were independently influenced by gender, intra- and postoperative blood transfusions, non-standard resections, and standard anesthesia protocol

Antithrombotic strategies in the catheterization laboratory for patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions: Insights from the EmploYEd antithrombotic therapies in patients with acute coronary Syndromes HOspitalized in Italian cardiac care units Registry

Aims: In the last decades, several new therapies have emerged for the treatment of acute coronary syndromes (ACS). We sought to describe real-world patterns of use of antithrombotic treatments in the catheterization laboratory for ACS patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). Methods: EmploYEd antithrombotic therapies in patients with acute coronary Syndromes HOspitalized in Italian cardiac care units was a nationwide, prospective registry aimed to evaluate antithrombotic strategies employed in ACS patients in Italy. Results: Over a 3-week period, a total of 2585 consecutive ACS patients have been enrolled in 203 cardiac care units across Italy. Among these patients, 1755 underwent PCI (923 with ST-elevation myocardial infarction and 832 with non-ST-elevation ACS). In the catheterization laboratory, unfractioned heparin was the most used antithrombotic drug in both ST-elevation myocardial infarction (64.7%) and non-ST-elevation ACS (77.5%) undergoing PCI and, as aspirin, bivalirudin and glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPIs) more frequently employed before or during PCI compared with the postprocedural period. Any crossover of heparin therapy occurred in 36.0% of cases, whereas switching from one P2Y12 inhibitor to another occurred in 3.7% of patients. Multivariable analysis yielded several independent predictors of GPIs and of bivalirudin use in the catheterization laboratory, mainly related to clinical presentation, PCI complexity and presence of complications during the procedure. Conclusion: In our contemporary, nationwide, all-comers cohort of ACS patients undergoing PCI, antithrombotic therapies were commonly initiated before the catheterization laboratory. In the periprocedural period, the most frequently employed drugs were unfractioned heparin, leading to a high rate of crossover, followed by GPIs and bivalirudin, mainly used during complex PCI