Practice variation and outcomes of minimally invasive minor liver resections in patients with colorectal liver metastases: a population-based study.

INTRODUCTION: In 2017, the Southampton guideline stated that minimally invasive liver resections (MILR) should considered standard practice for minor liver resections. This study aimed to assess recent implementation rates of minor MILR, factors associated with performing MILR, hospital variation, and outcomes in patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). METHODS: This population-based study included all patients who underwent minor liver resection for CRLM in the Netherlands between 2014 and 2021. Factors associated with MILR and nationwide hospital variation were assessed using multilevel multivariable logistic regression. Propensity-score matching (PSM) was applied to compare outcomes between minor MILR and minor open liver resections. Overall survival (OS) was assessed with Kaplan-Meier analysis on patients operated until 2018. RESULTS: Of 4,488 patients included, 1,695 (37.8%) underwent MILR. PSM resulted in 1,338 patients in each group. Implementation of MILR increased to 51.2% in 2021. Factors associated with not performing MILR included treatment with preoperative chemotherapy (aOR 0.61 CI:0.50-0.75, p < 0.001), treatment in a tertiary referral hospital (aOR 0.57 CI:0.50-0.67, p < 0.001), and larger diameter and number of CRLM. Significant hospital variation was observed in use of MILR (7.5% to 93.0%). After case-mix correction, six hospitals performed fewer, and six hospitals performed more MILRs than expected. In the PSM cohort, MILR was associated with a decrease in blood loss (aOR 0.99 CI:0.99-0.99, p < 0.01), cardiac complications (aOR 0.29, CI:0.10-0.70, p = 0.009), IC admissions (aOR 0.66, CI:0.50-0.89, p = 0.005), and shorter hospital stay (aOR CI:0.94-0.99, p < 0.01). Five-year OS rates for MILR and OLR were 53.7% versus 48.6%, p = 0.21. CONCLUSION: Although uptake of MILR is increasing in the Netherlands, significant hospital variation remains. MILR benefits short-term outcomes, while overall survival is comparable to open liver surgery.

Antibiotic prophylaxis for acute cholecystectomy: PEANUTS II multicentre randomized non-inferiority clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommending antibiotic prophylaxis at emergency cholecystectomy for cholecystitis were based on low-quality evidence. The aim of this trial was to demonstrate that omitting antibiotics is not inferior to their prophylactic use. METHODS: This multicentre, randomized, open-label, non-inferiority clinical trial randomly assigned adults with mild-to-moderate acute calculous cholecystitis (immediate cholecystectomy indicated) to 2 g cefazolin administered before incision or no antibiotic prophylaxis. The primary endpoint was a composite of all postoperative infectious complications in the first 30 days after surgery. Secondary endpoints included all individual components of the primary endpoint, other morbidity, and duration of hospital stay. RESULTS: Sixteen of 226 patients (7.1 per cent) in the single-dose prophylaxis group and 29 of 231 (12.6 per cent) in the no-prophylaxis group developed postoperative infectious complications (absolute difference 5.5 (95 per cent c.i. -0.4 to 11.3) per cent). With a non-inferiority margin of 10 per cent, non-inferiority of no prophylaxis was not proven. The number of surgical-site infections was significantly higher in the no-prophylaxis group (5.3 versus 12.1 per cent; P = 0.010). No differences were observed in the number of other complications, or duration of hospital stay. CONCLUSION: Omitting antibiotic prophylaxis is not recommended.

Multicenter Observational Study of Adhesion Formation After Open-and Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare adhesion formation after laparoscopic and open colorectal cancer resection. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: After colorectal surgery, most patients develop adhesions, with a high burden of complications. Laparoscopy seems to reduce adhesion formation, but evidence is poor. Trials comparing open- and laparoscopic colorectal surgery have never assessed adhesion formation. METHODS: Data on adhesions were gathered during resection of colorectal liver metastases. Incidence of adhesions adjacent to the original incision was compared between patients with previous laparoscopic- and open colorectal resection. Secondary outcomes were incidence of any adhesions, extent and severity of adhesions, and morbidity related to adhesions or adhesiolysis. RESULTS: Between March 2013 and December 2015, 151 patients were included. Ninety patients (59.6%) underwent open colorectal resection and 61 patients (40.4%) received laparoscopic colorectal resection. Adhesions to the incision were present in 78.9% after open and 37.7% after laparoscopic resection (P < 0.001). The incidence of abdominal wall adhesions and of any adhesion was significantly higher after open resection; the incidence of visceral adhesions did not significantly differ. The extent of abdominal wall and visceral adhesions and the median highest Zühlke score at the incision were significantly higher after open resection. There were no differences in incidence of small bowel obstruction during the interval between the colorectal and liver operations, the incidence of serious adverse events, and length of stay after liver surgery. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection is associated with a lower incidence, extent, and severity of adhesions to parietal surfaces. Laparoscopy does not reduce the incidence of visceral adhesions.