Rectovaginal Fistula: What is the Role of Martius Flap and Gracilis Muscle Interposition in the Therapeutic Strategy?

BACKGROUND: While numerous treatments exist for management of rectovaginal fistula, none has demonstrated its superiority. The role of diverting stoma remains controversial. Few series include Martius flap in the armamentarium. OBJECTIVE: Determine the role of gracilis muscle interposition and Martius flap in the surgical management of rectovaginal fistula. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of a pooled prospectively maintained database from 3 centers. SETTINGS/PATIENTS: All consecutive eligible patients with rectovaginal fistula undergoing Martius flap and gracilis muscle interposition were included from 2001 to 2022. MAIN OUTCOMES: Success was defined by absence of stoma and rectovaginal fistula. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients were included with 55 Martius flap and 24 gracilis muscle interposition performed after failures of 164 initial procedures. Total length of stay was longer for gracilis muscle interposition by 2 days (p = 0.01) without a significant difference in severe morbidity (20% vs. 12%, p = 0.53). 27% of Martius flap were performed without stoma, without impact on overall morbidity (p = 0.763). Per-patient immediate success rates were not significantly different between groups (35% vs. 31%, p = 1.0). Success of gracilis muscle interposition after failure of Martius flap was not significantly different from an initial gracilis muscle interposition (p = 1.0). The immediate success rate rose to 49.4% (49% vs. 50%, p = 1.0) after simple perineal procedures. After a median follow-up of 23 months, there was no significant difference detected in success rate between the two procedures (69% vs. 69%, p = 1.0). Smoking was the only negative predictive factor (p = 0.02). LIMITATIONS: By its retrospective nature, this study is limited in its comparison. CONCLUSION: This novel comparison between Martius flap and gracilis muscle interposition suggests that Martius flap presents several advantages, including shorter length of stay, similar morbidity, and success. Proximal diversion via a stoma for Martius flap does not appear mandatory. Gracilis muscle interposition could be reserved as a salvage procedure after Martius flap failure. See Video Abstract.

Does an Ileoanal Anastomosis Decrease the Rate of Successful Pregnancy Compared With an Ileorectal Anastomosis? A National Study of 1491 Patients.

OBJECTIVE: Report the rate of successful pregnancy in a national cohort of women with either an ileal pouch anal (IPAA) or ileorectal (IRA) anastomosis constructed after colectomy for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) or polyposis. BACKGROUND: Fertility after IPAA is probably impaired. All available data are corroborated by only small sample size studies. It is not known whether construction of IPAA versus IRA influences the odds of subsequently achieving a successful pregnancy, especially with increased utilization of the laparoscopic approach. METHODS: All women (age: 12-45 y) undergoing IRA or IPAA in France for polyposis or IBD, between 2010-2020, were included. A control population was defined as women aged from 12 to 45 years undergoing laparoscopic appendicectomy during the same period. The odds of successful pregnancy were studied using an adjusted survival analysis. RESULTS: A total of 1491 women (IPAA=872, 58%; IRA=619, 42%) were included. A total of 220 deliveries (15%) occurred during the follow-up period of 71 months (39-100). After adjustment, the odds of successful pregnancy was not significantly associated with type of anastomosis (after IPAA: Hazard Ratio [HR]=0.79, 95% confidence interval=0.56-1.11, P =0.17). The laparoscopic approach increased the odds of achieving successful pregnancy (HR=1.79, 95% confidence interval=1.20-2.63, P =0.004). IRA and IPAA significantly impacted fertility when compared with the control population ( P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this large cohort study, total colectomy for polyposis or IBD was associated with reduced fertility compared with the general population. No difference in odds of achieving successful pregnancy was found between IRA and IPAA after adjustment. This analysis suggests laparoscopic surgery may be associated with greater likelihood of pregnancy.

Surgery for synchronous and metachronous colorectal cancer: segmental or extensive colectomy?

PURPOSE: To assess the impact of surgical approach on morbidity, mortality, and the oncological outcomes of synchronous (SC) and metachronous (MC) colorectal cancer (CRC). METHODS: All patients undergoing resection for double location CRC (SC or MC) between 2006 and 2020 were included. The exclusion criteria were polyposis or SC located on the same side. RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients (age, 64.8 years; male, 78%) with SC (n = 41; 61%) or MC (n = 26; 39%) were included. SC was treated with segmental colectomy (right and left colectomy/proctectomy; n = 19) or extensive colectomy (subtotal/total colectomy or restorative proctocolectomy with pouch; n = 22). Segmental colectomy was associated with a higher incidence of anastomotic leakage (47.4 vs. 13.6%; p = 0.04) and a higher rate of medical morbidity (47.4 vs. 16.6%; p = 0.04). The mean number of lymph nodes harvested was similar. For MC, the second cancer was treated by iterative colectomy (n = 12) or extensive colectomy (n = 14) and there was no significant difference in postoperative outcomes between the two surgical approaches. The median follow-up period was 42.4 ± 29.1 months. The 5-year overall and disease-free survival of the SC and MC groups did not differ to a statistically significant extent. CONCLUSIONS: Extensive colectomy should be preferred for SC to reduce morbidity and improve the prognosis. In contrast, iterative colectomy can be performed safely for patients with MC.

Effective initial management of anastomotic leak in the maintenance of functional colorectal or coloanal anastomosis.

PURPOSE: The present study assessed the factors associated with the maintenance of a functional anastomosis in a large consecutive series of patients with anastomotic leakage (AL). METHODS: All consecutive patients presenting with AL after colorectal or coloanal anastomosis (2012-2019) were analyzed. The primary end point was a functional anastomosis without a stoma at 1 year. RESULTS: A total of 156 patients were included. AL was initially treated by antibiotics (38%), drainage (43%) or urgent surgery (19%). Initial treatment of AL was not adequate in 24.3%, and reintervention in the form of drainage or surgery was required. A total of 60.9% of patients had a functional anastomosis without a stoma 1 year after surgery. Factors associated with the risk of anastomotic failure at 1 year were diabetes (odds ratio [OR] = 4.24 [95% confidence interval {CI} 1.39-14.24] p = 0.014), neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (OR = 3.03 [95% CI 1.14-8.63] p = 0.03) and Grade B (OR = 6.49 [95% CI 2.23-21.74] p = 0.001) or C leak (OR = 35.35 [95% CI 9.36-168.21] p < 0.001). Among patients treated initially by drainage, side-to-end or J-pouch anastomoses were significantly associated with revision of the anastomosis compared to end-to-end (OR = 12.90, p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: After acute AL following coloanal or colorectal anastomosis, 60.9% of patients had a functional anastomosis without a stoma at the 1 year of follow-up. The type of treatment of AL influenced the risk of anastomotic failure.

C-reactive protein values after surgery for inflammatory bowel disease: is it still a good marker for intra-abdominal complication? A retrospective cohort study of 347 procedures : CRP after inflammatory bowel disease surgery.

PURPOSE: C-reactive protein (CRP) is a useful predictive test to early detect abdominal complication after colorectal surgery. Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is responsible for chronic inflammation and abnormal basal CRP that could influence the interest of its management after abdominal surgery. The aim of this study is to evaluate CRP as an indicator of postoperative complication in a specific IBD population. METHODS: Retrospective study of patients undergoing ileocolic resection or ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for IBD between 2012 and 2019. RESULTS: Ileocolic resection represents 242 patients and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis 105 patients. CRP was significantly higher at an early (105.2 ± 56.0 vs 128.1 ± 69.8; p = 0.008) and late stage (112.9 ± 72.8 vs 185.3 ± 111.5; p < 0.0001) for patients having an intra-abdominal complication. A BMI > 25 kg/m2 (p = 0.04) and an open surgical approach (p = 0.009) were associated with higher CRP levels in the first postoperative days (POD). In multivariate analysis, preoperative steroid use (p = 0.06), CRP at POD 3 > 100 mg/L (p = 0.003), and a rise between CRP values (p = 0.007) at 48 h were significantly associated with intra-abdominal complication. A CRP at POD 1 < 75 mg/L was associated with a lower rate of intra-abdominal complication (p = 0.01). A score dividing patients into 3 groups according to these values showed significant differences in intra-abdominal complication and anastomotic leakage rates. CONCLUSION: CRP is a useful predictive marker to detect abdominal complication after surgery in IBD population. Measurement of CRP can help to reduce hospitalization stay and orientate towards complementary examinations.

Redo-surgery after failed colorectal or coloanal anastomosis: Morbidity, mortality and factors predictive of success. A retrospective study of 200 patients.

AIM: In cases of anastomotic failure after colorectal (CRA) or coloanal anastomosis (CAA), revision of the anastomosis is an ambitious surgical option that can be proposed in order to maintain bowel continuity. Our aim was to assess postoperative morbidity, risk of failure and risk factor for failure in patients after CRA or CAA. METHODS: All consecutive patients who underwent redo-CRA/CAA in our institution between 2007-2018 were retrospectively included. The success of redo-CRA/CAA was defined by the restoration of bowel continuity 12 months after the surgery. RESULTS: Two hundred patients (114 male: 57%) were analyzed. The indication for redo-CRA/CAA was chronic pelvic infection in 74 patients (37%), recto-vaginal or urinary fistula in 59 patients (30%), anastomotic stenosis in 36 patients (18%) and redo anastomosis after previous anastomosis takedown in 31 patients (15%). Twenty-three percent of the patients developed a severe postoperative complication. Anastomotic leakage was diagnosed in 39 patients (20%). One-year-success of the redo-CRA/CAA was obtained in 80% of patients. In multivariate analysis, only obesity was associated with redo-CRA/CAA failure (p = 0.042). We elaborated a pre-operative predictive score of success using the four variables: male sex, age > 60 years, obesity and history of pelvic radiotherapy. The success of redo-CRA/CAA was 92%, 86%, 80% and 62% for a preoperative predictive score value of 0, 1, 2 and ≥3, respectively (p = 0.010). CONCLUSIONS: In case of failure of primary CRA/CAA, bowel continuity can be saved in 4 out of 5 patients by redo-CRA/CAA despite 23% suffering severe postoperative morbidity.

Postoperative diagnostic revision for Crohn disease after subtotal colectomy for inflammatory bowel disease.

PURPOSE: Subtotal colectomy (STC) is performed for severe acute and refractory colitis. The diagnosis can be difficult even after the surgery when colectomy specimen has overlapping features of ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD). The aim of this study was to evaluate the rate of postoperative diagnostic revision to CD after surgery and determine predictor factors. METHODS: Retrospective study of 110 patients who underwent STC (2005-2018). RESULTS: Preoperative diagnosis comprised UC = 80 (73%), CD = 11 (10%), and unclassified colitis (IBDU = 19, 17%). Initial diagnosis of IBDU and UC was modified to CD in 6 patients (6%) after STC. The final diagnosis after the follow-up of 10 ± 6 years switched from CD for 8 patients (9%). The multivariate analysis showed that patients with a colitis evolving for less than 10 years and initial diagnosis of IBDU were the two independent factors associated with an increased risk of diagnosis change to CD (p = 0.03; p = 0.016). At the end of the follow-up, 15 patients (14%) had a definitive stoma. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with IBD, attention must be paid to determine the right restorative strategy to patients with an evolution of the disease less than 10 years or with IBDU who are more at risk to have a diagnosis change to CD after STC.

Can a Local Drainage Salvage a Failed Colorectal or Coloanal Anastomosis? A Prospective Cohort of 54 Patients.

BACKGROUND: Local drainages can be used to manage leakage in select patients without peritonitis. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of drainage procedures in maintaining a primary low anastomosis after anastomotic leakage. DESIGN: A retrospective observational study was performed on a prospectively maintained database. SETTINGS: The study was performed between 2014 and 2017 in a tertiary referral center. PATIENTS: Patients undergoing rectal resections with either a colorectal or coloanal anastomosis with diverting stoma were identified. Anastomotic leakages requiring a radiological or transanal drainage without peritonitis were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the maintenance of the primary anastomosis after local drainage of an anastomotic leakage and stoma reversal. RESULTS: A low anastomosis for rectal cancer with diverting stoma was performed in 326 patients. A total of 77 anastomotic leakages (24%) occurred, of which, 6 (8%) required abdominal surgery, 17 (22%) were treated conservatively (medical management), and 54 (70%) were managed by drainage. Surgical transanal drainage was performed in 21 patients (39%), with radiologic drainage procedures performed in 33 patients (61%). The median interval between surgery and drainage was 13 days (range, 9-21 d). Five patients (9%) required emergency abdominal surgery. Twenty-seven patients (50%) did not require any additional intervention after drainage procedure, whereas 21 patients (39%) underwent redo anastomotic surgery. Forty-three patients (80%) had no stoma at the end of follow-up. Failure to maintain the primary anastomosis after local drainage was associated with increased age (p = 0.04), a pelvic per-operative drainage (p = 0.05), a drainage duration >10 days (p = 0.002), the time between surgery and drainage >15 days (p = 0.03), a side-to-end or J-pouch anastomosis (p = 0.04), and surgical transanal drainage (p = 0.03). LIMITATIONS: The small sample size of the study was the main limitation. CONCLUSIONS: Local drainage procedures maintained primary anastomosis in 50% of cases after an anastomotic leakage. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B57. ¿PUEDE UN DRENAJE LOCAL SALVAR UNA ANASTOMOSIS COLORRECTAL O COLOANAL FALLIDA? UNA COHORTE PROSPECTIVO DE 54 PACIENTES: Los drenajes locales se pueden utilizar para controlar las fugas en pacientes seleccionados sin peritonitis.El objetivo de este estudio fue evaluar la eficacia de los procedimientos de drenaje, para mantener una anastomosis primaria baja, después de una fuga anastomótica.Se realizó un estudio observacional retrospectivo en una base de datos mantenida prospectivamente.El estudio se realizó entre 2014-2017, en un centro de referencia terciaria.Se identificaron pacientes sometidos a resecciones rectales con anastomosis colorrectal o coloanal y estoma de derivación. Se incluyeron fugas anastomóticas sin peritonitis, que requirieron drenaje radiológico o transanal.El resultado primario fue el mantenimiento de la anastomosis primaria, después del drenaje local de una fuga anastomótica y la reversión del estoma.Se realizó una anastomosis baja para cáncer rectal con estoma derivativo en 326 pacientes. Se produjeron 77 (24%) fugas anastomóticas, de las cuales 6 (8%) requirieron cirugía abdominal, 17 (22%) fueron tratadas de forma conservadora (tratamiento médico) y 54 (70%) fueron manejadas por drenaje. Se realizó drenaje transanal en 21 pacientes (39%) y procedimientos de drenaje radiológico en 33 pacientes (61%). La mediana del intervalo entre la cirugía y el drenaje fue de 13 días [9-21]. 5 (9%) pacientes requirieron cirugía abdominal de emergencia. Veintisiete (50%) pacientes no requirieron ninguna intervención adicional después del procedimiento de drenaje, mientras que 21 pacientes (39%) se sometieron a una reparación quirúrgica anastomótica. 43 pacientes (80%) no tuvieron estoma al final del seguimiento. El fracaso para mantener la anastomosis primaria después del drenaje local, se asoció con un aumento de la edad (p = 0.04), un drenaje pélvico preoperatorio (p = 0.05), una duración del drenaje >10 días (p = 0.002), el tiempo entre la cirugía y el drenaje >15 días (p = 0.03), anastomosis termino lateral o bolsa en J (p = 0.04) y drenaje quirúrgico transanal (p = 0.03).El pequeño tamaño de la muestra del estudio fue la principal limitación.Después de la fuga anastomótica, los procedimientos del drenaje local conservaron la anastomosis primaria en el 50% de los casos. Vea el Resumen del Video en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B57.

Prognostic value of tumor deposits in rectal cancer: A monocentric series of 505 patients.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: It has been suggested that tumor deposits (TDs) may have a worse prognosis in rectal cancer compared with colonic cancer. The aim of this study was to assess TDs prognosis in rectal cancer. METHODS: Patients who underwent total mesorectum excision for rectal adenocarcinoma (2011-2016) were included. A case-matched analysis was performed to assess the accurate impact of TDs for each pN category after exclusion of synchronous metastasis. RESULTS: A total of 505 patients were included. TDs were observed in 99 (19.6%) patients, (pN1c = 37 [7.3%]). TDs were associated with pT3-T4 stage (P = .037), synchronous metastasis (P = .003), lymph node (LN) invasion (P = .041), vascular invasion (P = .001), and perineural invasion (P < .001). TD was associated with a worse 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) among pN0 (51.2% vs 79.8%; P < .001); pN1 patients (35.2% vs 70.1%; P = .004) but not among pN2 patients (37.5% vs 44.7%; P = .499). After matching, pN1c patients had a worse 3-year DFS compared with pN0 patients (58.6% vs 82.4%; P = .035) and a tendency toward a worse DFS among N1 patients (40.1% vs 64.2%; P = .153). DFS was worse when one TD was compared with one invaded LN (40.8% vs 81.3%; P < .001). CONCLUSION: In rectal cancer, TDs have a metastatic risk comparable to a pN2 stage which may lead to changes in adjuvant treatment.

Can we classify ampullary tumours better? Clinical, pathological and molecular features. Results of an AGEO study.

BACKGROUND: Ampullary adenocarcinoma (AA) originates from either intestinal (INT) or pancreaticobiliary (PB) epithelium. Different prognostic factors of recurrence have been identified in previous studies. METHODS: In 91 AA patients of the AGEO retrospective multicentre cohort, we evaluated the centrally reviewed morphological classification, panel markers of Ang et al. including CK7, CK20, MUC1, MUC2 and CDX2, the 50-gene panel mutational analysis, and the clinicopathological AGEO prognostic score. RESULTS: Forty-three (47%) of the 91 tumours were Ang-INT, 29 (32%) were Ang-PB, 18 (20%) were ambiguous (Ang-AMB) and one could not be classified. Among these 90 tumours, 68.7% of INT tumours were Ang-INT and 78.2% of PB tumours were Ang-PB. MUC5AC expression was detected in 32.5% of the 86 evaluable cases. Among 71 tumours, KRAS, TP53, APC and PIK3CA were the most frequently mutated genes. The KRAS mutation was significantly more frequent in the PB subtype. In multivariate analysis, only AGEO prognostic score and tumour subtype were associated with relapse-free survival. Only AGEO prognostic score was associated with overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: Mutational analysis and MUC5AC expression provide no additional value in the prognostic evaluation of AA patients. Ang et al. classification and the AGEO prognostic score were confirmed as a strong prognosticator for disease recurrence.

C-Reactive Protein Values After Colorectal Resection: Can We Discharge a Patient With a C-Reactive Protein Value >100? A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: C-reactive protein is a useful negative predictive test for the development of anastomotic leakage following colorectal surgery. Evolution of procedures (laparoscopy, enhanced recovery program, early discharge, complex redo surgery) may influence C-reactive protein values; however, this is poorly studied to date. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to evaluate C-reactive protein as an indicator of postoperative complication and as a predictor for discharge. DESIGN: This is retrospective study of a consecutive monocentric cohort. SETTINGS: All patients undergoing a colorectal resection with anastomosis (2014-2015) were included. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: C-reactive protein, leukocytosis, type of resection, and postoperative course were the primary outcomes measured. RESULTS: A total of 522 patients were included. The majority had either a colorectal (n = 159, 31%) or coloanal anastomosis (n = 150, 29%). Overall morbidity was 29.3%. C-reactive protein was significantly higher among patient having intra-abdominal complications at an early stage (day 1-2) (164.6 vs 136.2; p = 0.0028) and late stage (day 3-4) (209.4 vs 132.1; p < 0.0001). In multivariate analysis, early C-reactive protein was associated with BMI (coefficient, 4.9; 95% CI, 3.2-6.5; p < 0.0001) and open surgical procedures (coefficient, 43.1; 95% CI, 27-59.1; p < 0.0001), while late C-reactive protein value was influenced by BMI (coefficient, 4.8; 95% CI, 2.5-7.0; p = 0.0024) and associated extracolonic procedures (coefficient, 34.2; 95% CI, 2.7-65.6; p = 0.033). Sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive values, and positive predictive values for intra-abdominal complication were 85.9%, 33.6%, 89.3%, and 27.1% for an early C-reactive protein <100 mg/L and 72.7%, 75.4%, 89.4%, and 49.2% for a late C-reactive protein <100 mg/L. Four hundred seven patients with an uneventful postoperative course were discharged at day 8 ± 6.4 with a mean discharge C-reactive protein of 83.5 ± 67.4. Thirty-eight patients (9.3%) were readmitted and had a significantly higher discharge C-reactive protein (138.6 ± 94.1 vs 77.8 ± 61.2, p = 0.0004). Readmission rate was 16.5% for patients with a discharge C-reactive protein >100 mg/L vs 6% with C-reactive protein <100 mg/L (p = 0.0008). For patients included in an enhanced recovery program (discharge at day 4 ± 2.4), the threshold should be higher because discharge is around day 3 or 4. With a C-reactive protein <140, readmission rate was 2% vs 19%, (p = 0.056). LIMITATIONS: This study includes retrospective data. CONCLUSION: C-reactive protein <100 mg/L is associated with a lower risk of intra-abdominal complication and readmission rates. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A749.

Metachronous colorectal cancer risk in Lynch syndrome patients-should the endoscopic surveillance be more intensive?

PURPOSE: Regular follow-up for patients with Lynch syndrome (LS) is vital due to the increased risk of colorectal (50-80%), endometrial (40-60%), and other cancers. However, there is an ongoing debate concerning the best interval between colonoscopies. Currently, no specific endoscopic follow-up has been decided for LS patients who already have an index colorectal cancer (CRC). The aim of this study was to evaluate the risk of metachronous cancers (MC) after primary CRC in a LS population and to determinate if endoscopic surveillance should be more intensive. METHODS: A prospective cohort of patients with a confirmed diagnosis of hereditary CRC since 2009 was included. Patients with LS and a primary CRC were the cohort of choice. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-one patients were included with a median age of 44 years(16-70). At least one MC occurred in 39 patients (32.2%), with a median interval of 67 months (6-300) from index cancer. Fifteen (38.5%) developed two or more MCs during follow-up, with a median number of two (2-6) tumors occurring. Metachronous CRC were diagnosed after a median interval of 24 (6-57) months since last colonoscopy and were more commonly seen in MSH2 mutation carriers (58 vs. 35%, p = 0.001). After a median follow-up of 52.9 (3-72) months, no cancer-related deaths were recorded. CONCLUSION: Patients with LS have an increased risk of MC, especially CRCs. With a median time period of 24 months between colonoscopy and metachronous CRC, the interval between surveillance colonoscopies following primary CRC should not exceed 18 months, especially in patients with MSH2 mutation.

Postoperative Peritonitis After Digestive Tract Surgery: Surgical Management and Risk Factors for Morbidity and Mortality, a Cohort of 191 Patients.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative peritonitis (POP) following gastrointestinal surgery is associated with significant morbidity and mortality, with no clear management option proposed. The aim of this study was to report our surgical management of POP and identify pre- and perioperative risk factors for morbidity and mortality. METHODS: All patients with POP undergoing relaparotomy in our department between January 2004 and December 2013 were included. Pre- and perioperative data were analyzed to identify predictors of morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 191 patients required relaparotomy for POP, of which 16.8% required >1 reinterventions. The commonest cause of POP was anastomotic leakage (66.5%) followed by perforation (20.9%). POP was mostly treated by anastomotic takedown (51.8%), suture with derivative stoma (11.5%), enteral resection and stoma (12%), drainage of the leak (8.9%), stoma on perforation (8.4%), duodenal intubation (7.3%) or intubation of the leak (3.1%). The overall mortality rate was 14%, of which 40% died within the first 48 h. Major complications (Dindo-Clavien > 2) were seen in 47% of the cohort. Stoma formation occurred in 81.6% of patients following relaparotomy. Independent risk factors for mortality were: ASA > 2 (OR = 2.75, 95% CI = 1.07-7.62, p = 0.037), multiorgan failure (MOF) (OR = 5.22, 95% CI = 2.11-13.5, p = 0.0037), perioperative transfusion (OR = 2.7, 95% CI = 1.05-7.47, p = 0.04) and upper GI origin (OR = 3.55, 95% CI = 1.32-9.56, p = 0.013). Independent risk factors for morbidity were: MOF (OR = 2.74, 95% CI = 1.26-6.19, p = 0.013), upper GI origin (OR = 3.74, 95% CI = 1.59-9.44, p = 0.0034) and delayed extubation (OR = 0.27, 95% CI = 0.14-0.55, p = 0.0027). CONCLUSION: Mortality following POP remains a significant issue; however, it is decreasing due to effective and aggressive surgical intervention. Predictors of poor outcomes will help tailor management options.

Hartmann's reversal after colonic perforation or anastomosis leakage, is it the same procedure? A retrospective study of 150 patients.

PURPOSE: The high morbidity rates reported might influence surgeons' decisions of whether to perform Hartmann's reversal (HR). Our aim was to report the results of HR after "primary" Hartmann's procedure (HP) or in redo surgery for failed anastomosis. METHODS: All patients operated between 2007 and 2015 were included. Data and postoperative course were obtained from a review of medical records and databases. RESULTS: One hundred fifty patients (age 60, range (20-91) years, 62% male) were included. Eighty-six patients (57%) were ASA ≥ 2. HP was mostly performed for diverticulitis (29.3%) and anastomotic leakage (24%). HR was possible in 145(97%) patients including six with previous failed attempt. Overall morbidity was 22.7% including 11.7% severe complications (Dindo 3-4). Operative blood loss and Charlson comorbidity index were the only significant risk factor for postoperative pelvic complications (p = 0.03; p = 0.0002, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In a colorectal tertiary center, HR was feasible in 97% with a low morbidity and a 3.4% anastomotic leakage rate.

Local excision of low rectal cancer treated by chemoradiotherapy: is it safe for all patients with suspicion of complete tumor response?

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to assess if local excision (LE) could be proposed if suspicion of complete tumor response (CR) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for low rectal cancer (LRC) and this despite a potential risk of nodes (N+) or other tumor deposits (OTD) left in place. The aim was to assess in patients with LRC treated by CRT: (a) pathologic results of LE and total mesorectal excision (TME) in case of preoperative suspicion of CR and (b) the risk of N+ or OTD on TME if ypT0-Tis-T1 tumor. PATIENTS: Among 202 patients with LRC after CRT, 33 (16 %) with suspicion of CR underwent LE (n = 20) because of comorbidities and/or indication of definitive stoma or TME (n = 13). Pathologic examination of LE and TME specimens and oncological outcomes were assessed. Furthermore, 40/202 patients with pathologic CR on TME specimen (ypT0-Tis-T1) were assessed for possible N+ or OTD. RESULTS: In the 33 patients with suspicion of CR: (a) after LE, tumor was ypT0-Tis-T1 in only 15/20 cases (75 %); (b) after TME, tumor was ypT0-Tis-T1 in only 7/13 cases (54 %). Among 40 patients with ypT0-Tis-T1 tumor on TME specimen, 4 (10 %) presented N+ and/or OTD. CONCLUSION: In LRC with suspicion of CR after CRT, LE deserves a word of caution: 25 % of patients have in fact ypT2-T3 tumors. Furthermore, in patients with ypT0-Tis or T1 on TME specimen, a 10 % risk of N+ and/or ODT is observed. Thus, patient with suspicion of CR after CRT and treated by LE is exposed to a possible incomplete oncologic treatment.

Perineal or Abdominal Approach First During Intersphincteric Resection for Low Rectal Cancer: Which Is the Best Strategy?

BACKGROUND: Intersphincteric resection during total mesorectal excision for low rectal cancer can be performed through a primary abdominal or a primary perineal approach. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the results of a primary perineal approach with those of a primary abdominal approach in patients undergoing laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for low rectal cancer. DESIGN: This was a case-matched retrospective study from a prospectively maintained database. SETTING: The study was conducted at a tertiary colorectal surgery referral center. PATIENTS: From 2005 to 2013, among 138 patients with low rectal cancer who underwent total mesorectal excision with intersphincteric resection, 34 patients with a primary abdominal approach (abdominal group) were matched with 51 identical patients with a primary perineal approach (6-cm perineal dissection along the mesorectal plane; perineal group), according to TNM stage, sex, BMI, and age. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Postoperative morbidity, oncologic outcomes, and 3-year overall and disease-free survivals were measured. RESULTS: The operative time was significantly shorter in the perineal group (269 minutes in perineal vs 240 minutes in abdominal group; p = 0.01). Overall morbidity (47% vs 47%; p = 1.00), severe morbidity (16% vs 15%; p = 0.90), and clinical anastomotic leakage (24% vs 12%; p = 0.17) rates showed no differences when comparing the 2 groups. The overall R1 resection rate was similar in the 2 groups (16% vs 9%; p = 0.36), including a 10% vs 9% positive circumferential margin (p = 0.88) and a 8% vs 0% positive distal margin (p = 0.15). After a median follow-up of 39 months, 3-year overall (100% vs 93% (95% CI, 88%-98%); p = 0.26) and disease-free (63% (95% CI, 56%-71%) vs 62% (95% CI, 53%-71%); p = 0.58) survival rates showed no differences between the 2 groups. LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by its nonrandomized nature and limited sample size. CONCLUSIONS: In cases of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer, the primary perineal approach appears to reduce operative time and is associated with similar short- and long-term outcomes as compared with the primary abdominal approach. The primary perineal approach should thus be considered as the standard strategy.

Risk factors for circumferential R1 resection after neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision: a study in 233 consecutive patients with mid or low rectal cancer.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to identify risk factors for circumferential R1 resection (R1c) after neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy (RCT) and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) for mid or low rectal cancer. Better knowledge of pre- or intraoperative risk factors could possibly help for the management of these patients. METHODS: Between 2005 and 2013, 233 consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic TME for low or mid rectal cancer after RCT were included. R1c resection was defined as a circumferential margin ≤ 1 mm. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify independent risk factors for R1c. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients had R1c resection (11%). In univariate analysis, low rectal cancer, anterior tumour, T4 on pretherapeutic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), T4 and/or N+ on post-RCT MRI and operative time > 240 min were associated with a significantly increased risk of R1c resection. In multivariate analysis, only T4 on post-RCT MRI (odds ratio (OR) = 6.02 [1.06-33]; p = 0.043) and operative time >240 min. (OR = 5.4 [1.01-28.9]; p = 0.049) were identified as independent risk factors for R1c resection. The risk of R1c resection was 3% (n = 3/88), 10% (n = 5/51) or 38% (n = 3/8) when 0, 1 or 2 risk factors were present in the same patient, respectively. CONCLUSION: Patients with T4 on MRI after RCT and/or operative time >240 min. seems to be at higher risk for R1c resection. In a pragmatic approach, we consider that systematic second MRI after RCT could help the surgeon, especially in area where circumferential margin is too short, in order to reduce this risk of R1 resection.

Endoscopic management of pancreatic fistula after enucleation of pancreatic tumors.

INTRODUCTION: Pancreatic fistula (PF) are frequent after pancreatic surgical resection, and particularly after enucleation. Endoscopic treatment might be proposed for postoperative PF, but has never been evaluated after pancreatic enucleation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From January 2000 to June 2012, 161 patients underwent pancreatic enucleation in our center. In case of PF in the postoperative period, conservative management (somatostatin analogs combined with enteral or parenteral nutrition and drainage) was proposed. If PF persisted after 20 days (output >50 cc/d), endoscopic treatment (pancreatic sphincterotomy and stent placement if evidence of main duct leakage) was proposed. Primary outcome was the delay of PF closure after endoscopic treatment. RESULTS: Ninety-one patients (56 %) developed postoperative PF. PF closed within 3 weeks with conservative management in 78 (86 %) patients. Endoscopic treatment was required in 7 (8 %) patients. Daily PF output was 240 (50-300) mL. Pancreatic sphincterotomy was performed in all patients. A pancreatic stent was inserted in 4 of 5 patients with main pancreatic duct leakage. One patient presented a stent migration requiring a second procedure. No complication of endoscopic treatment was reported. The closure of PF was obtained in all cases, after 13 (3-24) days. Pancreatic stents were removed after 2, 5, 5, and 8 months, respectively. Median postoperative follow-up was 46 (21-70) months. At study endpoint, two patients had small asymptomatic pancreatic collections, four had mild dilatation of main pancreatic duct upstream pancreatic duct leakage, and none developed exocrine pancreatic insufficiency, diabetes, or recurrence of pancreatic tumor. CONCLUSIONS: PF occurs in half patients after enucleation. Endoscopic treatment combining pancreatic sphincterotomy and stenting is safe and effective if conservative treatment fails, avoiding a complementary pancreatic resection.

Toward the end of abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer? An 8-year experience in 189 consecutive patients with low rectal cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To assess whether recent advances, such as intersphincteric resection (ISR) or local excision (LE) if a suspicion of complete tumor response after radiochemotherapy (RCT), could have modified the rate of end stoma (ES) in low rectal cancer treatment. BACKGROUND: ES rate remains around 30% to 50% in patients with low rectal cancer. METHODS: From 2005 to 2013, all patients with low rectal cancer undergoing laparoscopic total mesorectal excision, with or without neoadjuvant RCT, and patients undergoing LE after RCT were included. RESULTS: A total of 189 patients presented a low rectal cancer; 162 (86%) underwent RCT; total mesorectal excision was performed in 172 (90%), followed by stapled colorectal anastomosis (n=26; 15%), manual coloanal anastomosis with partial (n=92; 53%) or total ISR (n=32; 19%), or ES that included abdominoperineal resection (n=21; 12%) and low Hartmann procedure (n=1; 1%). LE after RCT was performed in 19 of 189 (10%) patients with a suspicion of complete tumor response. Among them 2 of 19 (11%) underwent immediate secondary total mesorectal excision (1 abdominoperineal resection and 1 coloanal anastomosis with total ISR) because of poor pathological criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Management of rectal cancer with colorectal anastomosis and coloanal anastomosis with partial ISR allowed to obtain a 38% ES rate (71/189); the additional use of total ISR decreased this rate to 22% (39/189). Selective use of LE reduced this rate to only 12% (22/189). Nowadays, recent advances lead to a paradigm shift, with only 12% ES rate in low rectal cancer.

Use of a bioprosthetic mesh in complex hernia repair: early results from a French multicenter pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Implantation of synthetic meshes for reinforcement of abdominal wall hernias can be complicated by mesh infection, which often requires mesh explantation. The risk of mesh infection is increased in a contaminated environment or in patients who have comorbidities such as diabetes or smoking. The use of biological prostheses has been advocated because of their ability to resist infection. Initial results, however, have shown high hernia recurrence rates and wound occurrences. The objective of the present study is to evaluate early and mid-term outcomes in the largest French series that included 43 consecutive complex abdominal hernias repaired with biological prostheses. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective observational study of a prospective collected data bank. Patient demographics, history of previous repairs, intraoperative findings and degree of contamination, associated procedures, postoperative prosthetic-related complications, and long-term results were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: There were 25 (58%) incisional, 14 parastomal, and 4 midline hernia repairs. Hernias were considered "clean" (n = 5), "clean-contaminated" (n = 19), "contaminated" (n = 12), or "dirty" (n = 7). Wound-related morbidity occurred in 17 patients; 4 patients needed reoperation for cutaneous necrosis or abscess. Smoking was the only risk factor associated with wound complication (P = .022). No postoperative wound events required removal of the prosthesis. There were 4 hernia recurrences (9%). A previous attempt at repair (P = .018) and no complete fascia closure (P = .033) were associated with hernia recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that the use of bioprothesis in complex hernia repair allowed successful single-stage reconstruction. Wound-related complications were frequent. Cost-benefit analyses are important to establish the validity of these findings.