Robot-assisted laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy for early-stage gastric cancer: Case series of initial experience

Background: In the last decade's robotic gastrectomy (RG) has increasingly widespread as a valid minimally invasive option for treatment of gastric cancer. In literature, evidence of its routine use is not yet well established. The aims of this study are to report our initial experience and to present possible advantages of our hybrid operative technique for subtotal gastrectomy. Materials and methods: Retrospectively, we analyzed data from 41 patients (22 male and 19 female) who underwent robot-assisted laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy (RALG) with D2 lymphadenectomy using the da Vinci XI robotic system. Inclusion criteria were gastric cancer in the middle or lower portion of the stomach amenable of radical subtotal gastrectomy without preoperative suspicion of positive lymph-nodes or other organs involving and distant metastasis. All the procedures were performed by attending surgeons. Results: The mean operative time was 270 min with one case of conversion to open surgery. The mean age was 71.4 (IQR 68.2-76.8) with 43.9% of patients classified as ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists) score ≥3. The median of lymph-nodes retrieved was 25 (IQR 19-35). No intra-operative complications occurred. Time to resume a soft diet was 5 days. Patients were hospitalized a median of 7 days. According to pathological AJCC-TNM, 21 patients were classified as advanced gastric cancer. Post-operative morbidity was recorded in 9 patients (21.9%) with major complications requiring surgical operation in 4 patients (9.8%). Elevated ASA score, fewer lymph-nodes retrieved and ICU recovery requirements were significant increased in patients with major complications. Conclusion: The preliminary results demonstrated that robot-assisted laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy is safe and feasible. In particular, we found that the da Vinci platform improves surgeon abilities to perform an adequate lymphadenectomy and digestive reconstruction. Further studies are necessary to better clarify the role of this high-cost technology in minimally invasive treatment of gastric cancer

Laparoscopic treatment of unicentric Castleman's disease with abdominal localization

We report a case of unicentric Castleman's disease (angiofollicular lymph node hyperplasia) with abdominal localization, that was treated laparoscopically. The patient, a 23-year-old male, was referred to our unit for subtle symptoms of recurrent palpitations and vague abdominal pain. His physician had prescribed an abdominal echtomograph, which showed a mass located at the lower and anterior lower splenic pole. In order to reach a definite diagnosis and prescribe adequate treatment, a diagnostic laparoscopy was performed. Exploration of the abdominal cavity helped detect a well-vascularized solid round mass at the level of the left hypochondrium, with a vascular pedicle; the lesion was detached, and the pedicle sectioned using an Endo-GIA 40. The postoperative course was regular and the patient was discharged on postoperative day 2. The laparoscopic approach enabled the resection of the lesion (with consequent histological diagnosis) and exploration of the peritoneal cavity with the advantages of minimal invasiveness, magnified images, and more rapid recovery). The pathology was totally resolved, with satisfactory results in terms of recovery, postoperative pain, and cosmesis

Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: Experience of 22 cases

Abstract BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic pancreatic surgery has gradually expanded its applications to include pancreaticoduodenectomy. However, the benefits of the laparoscopic approach are still debated. This article aims to present data regarding the efficacy of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy in a single center. METHODS: From March 2003 to June 2010, a total of 22 patients underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy with a totally laparoscopic approach, using a five-trocar technique. Reconstruction of the digestive tract was adapted to the aspect of the pancreatic stump, with 6 patients having Wirsung duct occlusion and 16 patients pancreaticodigestive anastomosis. Patient selection, short-term outcomes, oncologic results, and technical issues were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: Mean operative time was 392 (range, 327-570) min. Conversion was required in 2 patients (9.1 %) as a result of bleeding and difficult dissection. Major intraoperative complications included an injury to the right hepatic artery (4.5 %). Postoperative mortality was 4.5 %. Surgery-related morbidity occurred in 14 patients (63.6 %) and included bleeding (n = 5), pancreatic fistula (n = 6), biliary fistula (n = 2), and dumping syndrome (n = 1). Pancreatic fistulas occurred in 4 patients with duct occlusion and in 2 patients with pancreaticojejunostomy, and they all healed with conservative treatment. Mean hospital stay was 23 (range, 12-35) days. Pathologic diagnoses were pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (n = 11), ampullary adenocarcinoma (n = 8), and duodenal adenocarcinoma (n = 3). The resection margins were all free from disease; the mean number of collected lymph nodes was 15 (range, 14-20). CONCLUSIONS: The complexity of pancreaticoduodenectomy entails some issues, including patient selection and management of the pancreatic stump, that are not related to the approach used. Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy is feasible, safe, and oncologically adequate, but only if performed in selected cases by highly skilled laparoscopic surgeons. Laparoscopy does not provide any significant advantage over traditional surgery, but it may improve postoperative outcomes in the so-called excellence centers, once the learning curve has been overcome. Multicenter randomized trials are needed

Short- and long-term outcomes in ypT2 rectal cancer patients after neoadjuvant therapy and local excision: a multicentre observational study

Although local excision (LE) after neoadjuvant treatment (NT) has achieved encouraging oncological outcomes in selected patients, radical surgery still remains the rule when unfavorable pathology occurs. However, there is a risk of undertreating patients not eligible for radical surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of patients with pathological incomplete response (ypT2) in a multicentre cohort of patients undergoing LE after NT and to compare them with ypT0-is-1 rectal cancers

Current status on the adoption of high energy devices in Italy: An Italian Society for Endoscopic Surgery and New Tecnologies (SICE) national survey

Background: In the past three decades, different High Energy Devices (HED) have been introduced in surgical practice to improve the efficiency of surgical procedures. HED allow vessel sealing, coagulation and transection as well as an efficient tissue dissection. This survey was designed to verify the current status on the adoption of HED in Italy. Methods: A survey was conducted across Italian general surgery units. The questionnaire was composed of three sections (general information, elective surgery, emergency surgery) including 44 questions. Only one member per each surgery unit was allowed to complete the questionnaire. For elective procedures, the survey included questions on thyroid surgery, lower and upper GI surgery, proctologic surgery, adrenal gland surgery, pancreatic and hepatobiliary surgery, cholecystectomy, abdominal wall surgery and breast surgery. Appendectomy, cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis and bowel obstruction due to adhesions were considered for emergency surgery. The list of alternatives for every single question included a percentage category as follows: “ < 25%, 25–50%, 51–75% or > 75%”, both for open and minimally-invasive surgery. Results: A total of 113 surgical units completed the questionnaire. The reported use of HED was high both in open and minimally-invasive upper and lower GI surgery. Similarly, HED were widely used in minimally-invasive pancreatic and adrenal surgery. The use of HED was wider in minimally-invasive hepatic and biliary tree surgery compared to open surgery, whereas the majority of the respondents reported the use of any type of HED in less than 25% of elective cholecystectomies. HED were only rarely employed also in the majority of emergency open and laparoscopic procedures, including cholecystectomy, appendectomy, and adhesiolysis. Similarly, very few respondents declared to use HED in abdominal wall surgery and proctology. The distribution of the most used type of HED varied among the different surgical interventions. US HED were mostly used in thyroid, upper GI, and adrenal surgery. A relevant use of H-US/RF devices was reported in lower GI, pancreatic, hepatobiliary and breast surgery. RF HED were the preferred choice in proctology. Conclusion: HED are extensively used in minimally-invasive elective surgery involving the upper and lower GI tract, liver, pancreas and adrenal gland. Nowadays, reasons for choosing a specific HED in clinical practice rely on several aspects, including surgeon’s preference, economic features, and specific drawbacks of the energy employed

High-energy devices in different surgical settings: lessons learnt from a full health technology assessment report developed by SICE (Società Italiana di Chirurgia Endoscopica)

The present paper aims at evaluating the potential benefits of high-energy devices (HEDs) in the Italian surgical practice, defining the comparative efficacy and safety profiles, as well as the potential economic and organizational advantages for hospitals and patients, with respect to standard monopolar or bipolar devices

Complications and mortality in a cohort of patients undergoing emergency and elective surgery with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection: an Italian multicenter study. Teachings of Phase 1 to be brought in Phase 2 pandemic

Since the beginning of the pandemic due to the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and its related disease, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), several articles reported negative outcomes in surgery of infected patients. Aim of this study is to report results of patients with COVID-19-positive swab, in the perioperative period after surgery. Data of COVID-19-positive patients undergoing emergent or oncological surgery, were collected in a retrospective, multicenter study, which involved 20 Italian institutions. Collected parameters were age, sex, body mass index, COVID-19-related symptoms, patients' comorbidities, surgical procedure, personal protection equipment (PPE) used in operating rooms, rate of postoperative infection among healthcare staff and complications, within 30-postoperative days. 68 patients, who underwent surgery, resulted COVID-19-positive in the perioperative period. Symptomatic patients were 63 (92.5%). Fever was the main symptom in 36 (52.9%) patients, followed by dyspnoea (26.5%) and cough (13.2%). We recorded 22 (32%) intensive care unit admissions, 23 (33.8%) postoperative pulmonary complications and 15 (22%) acute respiratory distress syndromes. As regards the ten postoperative deaths (14.7%), 6 cases were related to surgical complications. One surgeon, one scrub nurse and two circulating nurses were infected after surgery due to the lack of specific PPE. We reported less surgery-related pulmonary complications and mortality in Sars-CoV-2-infected patients, than in literature. Emergent and oncological surgery should not be postponed, but it is mandatory to use full PPE, and to adopt preoperative screenings and strategies that mitigate the detrimental effect of pulmonary complications, mostly responsible for mortality

High-energy devices in different surgical settings: lessons learnt from a full health technology assessment report developed by SICE (Società Italiana di Chirurgia Endoscopica)

Background The present paper aims at evaluating the potential benefits of high-energy devices (HEDs) in the Italian surgical practice, defining the comparative efficacy and safety profiles, as well as the potential economic and organizational advantages for hospitals and patients, with respect to standard monopolar or bipolar devices. Methods A Health Technology Assessment was conducted in 2021 assuming the hospital perspective, comparing HEDs and standard monopolar/bipolar devices, within eleven surgical settings: appendectomy, hepatic resections, colorectal resections, cholecystectomy, splenectomy, hemorrhoidectomy, thyroidectomy, esophago-gastrectomy, breast surgery, adrenalectomy, and pancreatectomy. The nine EUnetHTA Core Model dimensions were deployed considering a multi-methods approach. Both qualitative and quantitative methods were used: (1) a systematic literature review for the definition of the comparative efficacy and safety data; (2) administration of qualitative questionnaires, completed by 23 healthcare professionals (according to 7-item Likert scale, ranging from - 3 to + 3); and (3) health-economics tools, useful for the economic evaluation of the clinical pathway and budget impact analysis, and for the definition of the organizational and accessibility advantages, in terms of time or procedures' savings. Results The literature declared a decrease in operating time and length of stay in using HEDs in most surgical settings. While HEDs would lead to a marginal investment for the conduction of 178,619 surgeries on annual basis, their routinely implementation would generate significant organizational savings. A decrease equal to - 5.25/-9.02% of operating room time and to - 5.03/-30.73% of length of stay emerged. An advantage in accessibility to surgery could be hypothesized in a 9% of increase, due to the gaining in operatory slots. Professionals' perceptions crystallized and confirmed literature evidence, declaring a better safety and effectiveness profile. An improvement in both patients and caregivers' quality-of-life emerged. Conclusions The results have demonstrated the strategic relevance related to HEDs introduction, their economic sustainability, and feasibility, as well as the potentialities in process improvement

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

Changes in surgicaL behaviOrs dUring the CoviD-19 pandemic. The SICE CLOUD19 Study

BACKGROUND: The spread of the SARS-CoV2 virus, which causes COVID-19 disease, profoundly impacted the surgical community. Recommendations have been published to manage patients needing surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic. This survey, under the aegis of the Italian Society of Endoscopic Surgery, aims to analyze how Italian surgeons have changed their practice during the pandemic.METHODS: The authors designed an online survey that was circulated for completion to the Italian departments of general surgery registered in the Italian Ministry of Health database in December 2020. Questions were divided into three sections: hospital organization, screening policies, and safety profile of the surgical operation. The investigation periods were divided into the Italian pandemic phases I (March-May 2020), II (June-September 2020), and III (October-December 2020).RESULTS: Of 447 invited departments, 226 answered the survey. Most hospitals were treating both COVID-19-positive and -negative patients. The reduction in effective beds dedicated to surgical activity was significant, affecting 59% of the responding units. 12.4% of the respondents in phase I, 2.6% in phase II, and 7.7% in phase III reported that their surgical unit had been closed. 51.4%, 23.5%, and 47.8% of the respondents had at least one colleague reassigned to non-surgical COVID-19 activities during the three phases. There has been a reduction in elective (>200 procedures: 2.1%, 20.6% and 9.9% in the three phases, respectively) and emergency (<20 procedures: 43.3%, 27.1%, 36.5% in the three phases, respectively) surgical activity. The use of laparoscopy also had a setback in phase I (25.8% performed less than 20% of elective procedures through laparoscopy). 60.6% of the respondents used a smoke evacuation device during laparoscopy in phase I, 61.6% in phase II, and 64.2% in phase III. Almost all responders (82.8% vs. 93.2% vs. 92.7%) in each analyzed period did not modify or reduce the use of high-energy devices.CONCLUSION: This survey offers three faithful snapshots of how the surgical community has reacted to the COVID-19 pandemic during its three phases. The significant reduction in surgical activity indicates that better health policies and more evidence-based guidelines are needed to make up for lost time and surgery not performed during the pandemic