Mothership versus Drip-and-Ship for stroke in a rural area: A French prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: The availability of mechanical thrombectomy (MT) is limited. Thus, there are two paradigms for patients living closer to a primary stroke center (PSC) than a comprehensive stroke center (CSC) capable of MT: "Mothership" (direct referral to a CSC) and "Drip-and-Ship" (referral to a PSC for imaging and thrombolysis and transfer to a CSC for thrombectomy or monitoring). We aimed to compare the prognosis of patients at three months between the two paradigms in a rural area. MATERIALS: From September 2019 to March 2021, we prospectively included patients living closer to a PSC than the one CSC, regardless of the type of stroke or reperfusion treatment. The proportion of patients with a good functional outcome (Rankin≤2) at three months was compared between the two initial orientations for all patients and for subgroups: patients with ischemic stroke and patients treated by MT. RESULTS: Among the 206 patients included, 103 were admitted directly to the CSC (82.5% had an ischemic stroke and 24.3% a MT) and 103 initially admitted to a PSC and then transferred to the CSC (100% had an ischemic stroke and 52.4% a MT). The proportion of patients with a good outcome was comparable between the two groups (54.5% vs. 43.7%, P=0.22). Among the 79 patients who underwent MT, the prognosis at three months was better in the Mothership group (49.3% vs. 15.3%, P=0.01). CONCLUSION: The functional prognosis is comparable between Mothership and Drip-and-Ship paradigms in our setting, despite a trend towards a better prognosis for the Mothership. As has been shown in urban settings, the mothership paradigm also leads to a better prognosis for patients treated with MT in a rural setting.

A Comparison of the Short-term Outcomes of Three Flap Reconstruction Techniques Used After Beyond Total Mesorectal Excision Surgery for Anorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Surgery for advanced or recurrent pelvic malignancy can result in perineal defects that cannot be closed by wound edge approximation. Myocutaneous flaps can fill the defect and accelerate healing. No reconstruction has been proven to be superior to the others. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare 3 flap procedures after beyond total mesorectal excision surgery. DESIGN: This is a retrospective analysis of a prospective database, according to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement. SETTINGS: This study was performed at a tertiary hospital. PATIENTS: Consecutive series of patients who required flap reconstruction after beyond total mesorectal excision surgery between 2007 and 2016 were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Short-term outcomes after oblique rectus abdominis flap vs vertical rectus abdominis flap vs inferior gluteal artery perforator flap reconstruction were evaluated. RESULTS: Included are 65 (59%) oblique rectus abdominis flap, 30 (27.3%) vertical rectus abdominis flap, and 15 (13.7%) inferior gluteal artery perforator flap outcomes. Sacrectomy was performed in 12 (18.5%), 10 (33.3%), and 8 (53.3%) patients (p = 0.016). Preoperative radiotherapy was used in 60 (92.3%), 26 (86.7%), and 11 (73.3%) patients (p = 0.11). Flap infection and dehiscence occurred in 7 (10.8%), 1 (3.3%), and 4 (26.7%) patients. There was an increased risk of flap complication with inferior gluteal artery perforator flap vs vertical rectus abdominis flap (p = 0.036). Inferior gluteal artery perforator flap (OR, 6.26; p = 0.02) and obesity (OR, 4.96; p = 0.02) were associated with flap complications. Only complications of the oblique rectus abdominis flap decreased significantly over time (p = 0.03). The length of stay and complete (R0) resection rate were not different between the groups. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited because of its retrospective nature and because it was conducted at a single center. CONCLUSIONS: The techniques appear comparable. The approaches should be considered complementary, and the choice should be individualized. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B141. COMPARACIÓN DE RESULTADOS A CORTO PLAZO DE TRES TÉCNICAS DE RECONSTRUCCIÓN CON COLGAJO UTILIZADAS DESPUÉS DE LA CIRUGÍA DE ESCISIÓN MESORRECTAL TOTAL EXTENDIDA PARA EL CÁNCER ANORRECTAL: La cirugía para malignidad pélvica avanzada o recurrente puede provocar defectos perineales, que no pueden cerrarse por aproximación de los bordes de la herida. Los colgajos miocutáneos pueden llenar el defecto y acelerar la curación. Ninguna reconstrucción ha demostrado ser superior a las demás.Comparar tres procedimientos de colgajo después de una cirugía de escisión mesorrectal total extendida.Análisis retrospectivo de una base de datos prospectiva, de acuerdo con la Declaración de Fortalecimiento de los informes de estudios observacionales en epidemiología.Hospital de tercer nivel.Series consecutivas de pacientes que requirieron reconstrucción con colgajo después de una cirugía de escisión mesorrectal total extendida entre 2007 y 2016.Resultados a corto plazo después del colgajo oblicuo recto abdominal versus colgajo vertical recto abdominal versus reconstrucción del colgajo perforador de la arteria glútea inferior.Se incluyen 65 (59%) colgajo oblicuo recto abdominal oblicuo, 30 (27.3%) colgajo vertical recto abdominal y 15 (13.7%) colgajo perforador de la arteria glútea inferior. Sacrectomía se realizó en 12 (18.5%), 10 (33.3%) y 8 (53.3%) pacientes respectivamente (p = 0.016). La radioterapia preoperatoria se utilizó en 60 (92.3%), 26 (86.7%) y 11 (73.3%) (p = 0,11). La infección del colgajo y la dehiscencia ocurrieron en 7 (10.8%), 1 (3.3%) y 4 (26.7%). Hubo un mayor riesgo de complicación con el colgajo perforador de la arteria glútea inferior en comparación al colgajo vertical del recto abdominal (p = 0.036). El colgajo perforador de la arteria glútea inferior (OR 6.26, p = 0.02) y la obesidad (OR 4.96, p = 0.02) se asociaron con complicaciones del colgajo. Solo las complicaciones del colgajo oblicuo recto abdominal disminuyeron significativamente con el tiempo (p = 0.03). La duración de la estancia hospitalaria y la tasa de resección completa (R0) no fue diferente entre los grupos.Estudio retrospectivo en centro único.Las técnicas parecen comparables. Los enfoques deben considerarse complementarios y la elección individualizada. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B141.

Open Versus Laparoscopic Versus Robotic Versus Transanal Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To compare techniques for rectal cancer resection. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Different surgical approaches exist for mesorectal excision. METHODS: Systematic literature review and Bayesian network meta-analysis performed. RESULTS: Twenty-nine randomized controlled trials included, reporting on 6237 participants, comparing: open versus laparoscopic versus robotic versus transanal mesorectal excision. No significant differences identified between treatments in intraoperative morbidity, conversion rate, grade III/IV morbidity, reoperation, anastomotic leak, nodes retrieved, involved distal margin, 5-year overall survival, and locoregional recurrence. Operative blood loss was less with laparoscopic surgery compared with open, and with robotic surgery compared with open and laparoscopic. Robotic operative time was longer compared with open, laparoscopic, and transanal. Laparoscopic operative time was longer compared with open. Laparoscopic surgery resulted in lower overall postoperative morbidity and fewer wound infections compared with open. Robotic surgery had fewer wound infections compared with open. Time to defecation was longer with open surgery compared with laparoscopic and robotic. Hospital stay was longer after open surgery compared with laparoscopic and robotic, and after laparoscopic surgery compared with robotic. Laparoscopic surgery resulted in more incomplete or nearly complete mesorectal excisions compared with open, and in more involved circumferential resection margins compared with transanal. Robotic surgery resulted in longer distal resection margins compared with open, laparoscopic, and transanal. CONCLUSIONS: The different techniques result in comparable perioperative morbidity and long-term survival. The laparoscopic and robotic approaches may improve postoperative recovery, and the open and transanal approaches may improve oncological resection. Technique selection should be based on expected benefits by individual patient.

Incidence and Risk Factors for Anastomotic Failure in 1594 Patients Treated by Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision: Results From the International TaTME Registry.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence of anastomotic-related morbidity following Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision (TaTME) and identify independent risk factors for failure. BACKGROUND: Anastomotic leak and its sequelae are dreaded complications following gastrointestinal surgery. TaTME is a recent technique for rectal resection, which includes novel anastomotic techniques. METHODS: Prospective study of consecutive reconstructed TaTME cases recorded over 30 months in 107 surgical centers across 29 countries. Primary endpoint was "anastomotic failure," defined as a composite endpoint of early or delayed leak, pelvic abscess, anastomotic fistula, chronic sinus, or anastomotic stricture. Multivariate regression analysis performed identifying independent risk factors of anastomotic failure and an observed risk score developed. RESULTS: One thousand five hundred ninety-four cases with anastomotic reconstruction were analyzed; 96.6% performed for cancer. Median anastomotic height from anal verge was 3.0 ±â€Š2.0 cm with stapled techniques accounting for 66.0%. The overall anastomotic failure rate was 15.7%. This included early (7.8%) and delayed leak (2.0%), pelvic abscess (4.7%), anastomotic fistula (0.8%), chronic sinus (0.9%), and anastomotic stricture in 3.6% of cases. Independent risk factors of anastomotic failure were: male sex, obesity, smoking, diabetes mellitus, tumors >25 mm, excessive intraoperative blood loss, manual anastomosis, and prolonged perineal operative time. A scoring system for preoperative risk factors was associated with observed rates of anastomotic failure between 6.3% to 50% based on the cumulative score. CONCLUSIONS: Large tumors in obese, diabetic male patients who smoke have the highest risk of anastomotic failure. Acknowledging such risk factors can guide appropriate consent and clinical decision-making that may reduce anastomotic-related morbidity.

Primary Tumor Resection in Patients with Incurable Localized or Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: To assess the impact of primary tumor resection (PTR) on survival and morbidity in incurable colorectal cancer. METHODS: Systematic literature review and meta-analysis to compare PTR versus primary tumor intact (PTI). RESULTS: Seventy-seven studies were included, reporting on 159,991 participants (94,745 PTR; 65,246 PTI). PTR improved overall survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.59, P < 0.0001; mean difference [MD] 7.27 months, P < 0.0001), cancer-specific survival (HR 0.47, MD 10.80), and progression-free survival (HR 0.76, MD 1.67). Overall survival remained significantly improved during subgroup analysis of asymptomatic patients (HR 0.69, MD 3.86), elderly patients (HR 0.46, MD 7.71), patients diagnosed after 2000 (HR 0.62, MD 7.29), patients with colon (HR 0.58, MD 6.31) or rectal (HR 0.54, MD 6.88) primary tumor, patients undergoing resection of primary tumor versus non-resectional surgery (NRS) to treat primary tumor complications (HR 0.56, MD 8.72), and of studies with propensity score analysis (HR 0.65, MD 5.68). Overall survival per treatment strategy was: [PTI/chemotherapy] 14.30 months, [PTI/bevacizumab] 17.27 months, [PTR/chemotherapy] 21.52 months, [PTR/bevacizumab] 27.52 months. PTR resulted in 4.5% perioperative mortality and 22.4% morbidity (major adverse events 10.2%, minor 18.5%, reoperation 2.5%, intraabdominal collection/sepsis 2.2%). PTI had 21.7% morbidity (obstruction 14.4%, anemia 11.0%, hemorrhage 1.5%, perforation 0.6%, adverse events requiring surgery 15.8%). NRS resulted in 10.6% perioperative mortality and 21.7% morbidity (major 7.9%, minor 21.7%, reoperation 0.1%). CONCLUSIONS: PTR in patients with incurable colorectal cancer results in a limited improvement of survival without a significant increase in morbidity. PTR should be considered by the multidisciplinary team on an individual patient basis.

A systematic review of the literature reporting on randomised controlled trials comparing treatments for faecal incontinence in adults.

AIM: To perform a review of the literature reporting on randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing treatments for faecal incontinence (FI) in adults. METHODS: A literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded and Cochrane was performed in order to identify RCTs reporting on treatments for FI. RESULTS: The review included 60 RCTs reporting on 4838 patients with a mean age ranging from 36.8 to 88 years. From the included RCTs, 32 did not identify a significant difference between the treatments compared. Contradictory results were identified in RCTs comparing percutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation and transcutaneous tibial nerve stimulation versus sham stimulation, biofeedback-pelvic floor muscle training (BF-PFMT) versus PFMT, and between bulking agents such as PTQTM versus Durasphere®. In two separate RCTs, combination treatment of amplitude-modulated medium frequency stimulation and electromyography-biofeedback (EMG-BF), was noted to be superior to EMG-BF and low-frequency electrical stimulation alone. Combination of non-surgical treatments such as BF with sphincteroplasty significantly improved continence scores compared to sphincteroplasty alone. Surgical treatments were associated with higher rates of serious adverse events compared to non-surgical interventions. CONCLUSIONS: The current evidence has not identified significant differences between treatments for FI, and where differences were identified, the results were contradictory between RCTs.

Comparison of Western and Asian Guidelines Concerning the Management of Colon Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines are important to standardize treatments and optimize outcomes. Several societies have published authoritative guidelines for patients with colon cancer, and a certain degree of variation can be predicted. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to compare Western and Asian guidelines for the management of colon cancer. DATA SOURCES: A literature review was performed following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines for studies published between 2010 and 2017 by the online resources from the official Web sites of the societies/panels. Sources included guidelines by European Society of Medical Oncology, the Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum, and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network. STUDY SELECTION: Only full-text studies and the latest guidelines dealing with colon cancer were included. Studies and guidelines were separately assessed by 2 authors, who independently identified discrepancies and areas for further research. These were discussed and agreed with by all the authors. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The recommendations of the guidelines of each society were compared, seeking discrepancies and potential areas for improvement. RESULTS: Endoscopic techniques for the management of early colon cancer are discussed in detail in the Asian guidelines. Asian guidelines advocate extended (D3) lymphadenectomy on a routine basis in T3/T4 and in selected T2 patients, whereas such an approach is still under investigation in Western countries. Only US guidelines describe neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy. All the guidelines recommend adjuvant treatment in selected stage II patients, but agreement exists that this is performed without solid evidence, because better outcomes are hypothesized based on studies including stage III or stage II/III patients. The role of cytoreductive surgery with intra-abdominal chemotherapy is dubious, and European guidelines only recommend it in the setting of trials. Asian guidelines endorse an aggressive surgical approach to peritoneal disease. Only US guidelines include a patient advocate in the drafting panel. LIMITATIONS: Bias may have arisen from country-specific socioeconomic and cultural issues, and from the latest available updates. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical approaches to colon cancer differ significantly among Western and Asian guidelines, reflecting different concepts of treatment. The role of adjuvant treatment in node-negative disease and quality-of-life assessment need further research.

Sacral nerve stimulation versus percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation for faecal incontinence: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIMS: Percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS) and sacral nerve stimulation (SNS) are both second-line treatments for faecal incontinence (FI). To compare the clinical outcomes and effectiveness of SNS versus PTNS for treating FI in adults. METHOD: A literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded and Cochrane was performed in order to identify studies comparing SNS and PTNS for treating FI. A risk of bias assessment was performed using The Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool. A random effects model was used for the meta-analysis. RESULTS: Four studies (one randomised controlled trial and three nonrandomised prospective studies) reported on 302 patients: 109 underwent SNS and 193 underwent PTNS. All included studies noted an improvement in symptoms after treatment, without any significant difference in efficacy between SNS and PTNS. Meta-analysis demonstrated that the Wexner score improved significantly with SNS compared to PTNS (weighted mean difference 2.27; 95% confidence interval 3.42, 1.12; P < 0.01). Moreover, SNS was also associated with a significant reduction in FI episodes per week and a greater improvement in the Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life coping and depression domains, compared to PTNS on short-term follow-up. Only two studies reported on adverse events, reporting no serious adverse events with neither SNS nor PTNS. CONCLUSION: Current evidence suggests that SNS results in significantly improved functional outcomes and quality of life compared to PTNS. No serious adverse events were identified with either treatment. Further, high-quality, multi-centre randomised controlled trials with standardised outcome measures and long-term follow-up are required in this field.

A Systematic Review to Assess Resection Margin Status After Abdominoperineal Excision and Pelvic Exenteration for Rectal Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess resection margin status and its impact on survival after abdominoperineal excision and pelvic exenteration for primary or recurrent rectal cancer. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Resection margin is important to guide therapy and to evaluate patient prognosis. METHODS: A meta-analysis was performed to assess the impact of resection margin status on survival, and a regression analysis to analyze positive resection margin rates reported in the literature. RESULTS: The analysis included 111 studies reporting on 19,607 participants after abdominoperineal excision, and 30 studies reporting on 1326 participants after pelvic exenteration. The positive resection margin rates for abdominoperineal excision were 14.7% and 24.0% for pelvic exenteration. The overall survival and disease-free survival rates were significantly worse for patients with positive compared with negative resection margins after abdominoperineal excision [hazard ratio (HR) 2.64, P < 0.01; HR 3.70, P < 0.01, respectively] and after pelvic exenteration (HR 2.23, P < 0.01; HR 2.93, P < 0.01, respectively). For patients undergoing abdominoperineal excision with positive resection margins, the reported tumor sites were 57% anterior, 15% posterior, 10% left or right lateral, 8% circumferential, 10% unspecified. A significant decrease in positive resection margin rates was identified over time for abdominoperineal excision. Although positive resection margin rates did not significantly change with the size of the study, some small size studies reported higher than expected positive resection margin rates. CONCLUSIONS: Resection margin status influences survival and a multidisciplinary approach in experienced centers may result in reduced positive resection margins. For advanced anterior rectal cancer, posterior pelvic exenteration instead of abdominoperineal excision may improve resection margins.

Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision: International Registry Results of the First 720 Cases.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to report short-term clinical and oncological outcomes from the international transanal Total Mesorectal Excision (taTME) registry for benign and malignant rectal pathology. BACKGROUND: TaTME is the latest minimally invasive transanal technique pioneered to facilitate difficult pelvic dissections. Outcomes have been published from small cohorts, but larger series can further assess the safety and efficacy of taTME in the wider surgical population. METHODS: Data were analyzed from 66 registered units in 23 countries. The primary endpoint was "good-quality TME surgery." Secondary endpoints were short-term adverse events. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were used to identify independent predictors of poor specimen outcome. RESULTS: A total of 720 consecutively registered cases were analyzed comprising 634 patients with rectal cancer and 86 with benign pathology. Approximately, 67% were males with mean BMI 26.5 kg/m. Abdominal or perineal conversion was 6.3% and 2.8%, respectively. Intact TME specimens were achieved in 85%, with minor defects in 11% and major defects in 4%. R1 resection rate was 2.7%. Postoperative mortality and morbidity were 0.5% and 32.6% respectively. Risk factors for poor specimen outcome (suboptimal TME specimen, perforation, and/or R1 resection) on multivariate analysis were positive CRM on staging MRI, low rectal tumor <2 cm from anorectal junction, and laparoscopic transabdominal posterior dissection to <4 cm from anal verge. CONCLUSIONS: TaTME appears to be an oncologically safe and effective technique for distal mesorectal dissection with acceptable short-term patient outcomes and good specimen quality. Ongoing structured training and the upcoming randomized controlled trials are needed to assess the technique further.

Extended lymphadenectomy for locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to assess the value of extended (lateral) lymphadenectomy (EL) in the operative management of locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer. METHODS: Patients that underwent exenterative surgery for locally advanced or recurrent rectal cancer between 2006 and 2009 were included in the study. A decision for EL was taken at the local multidisciplinary meeting based on the radiological findings. Perioperative and oncological outcomes were assessed and compared between the EL and non-EL group prospectively. RESULTS: Forty-one consecutive patients were included in the study (EL = 17). The median age was 57 (40-71) for EL and 66 (39-81) years for non-EL. Of patients, 27 (EL = 13) and 14 (EL = 4) underwent pelvic exenteration and abdominosacral resection, respectively. Twelve (EL = 7) patients were diagnosed with locally advanced primary rectal cancer. Thirty-one (EL = 12) patients received neoadjuvant radiotherapy. The median intraoperative time, blood loss and hospital stay were 9 h (3-13), 1.5 l (0.3-7) and 14 days (12-72), respectively, for the EL group, and 8 h (4-15), 1.6 l (0.25-17) and 14 days (10-86), respectively, for the non-EL (p ≥ 0.394). Morbidity was similar between the two groups (EL = 4, non-EL = 9; p = 0.344). Complete tumour resection (R0) was achieved in 30 (73.17%) patients, 12 (70.58%) in the EL group and 18 (75%) in the non-EL group (p = 0.649). There was no significant difference in 5-year survival (EL = 60.7%, non-EL = 75.2%; p = 0.447), local recurrence (EL = 53.6%, non-EL = 65.4%; p = 0.489) and disease-free survival (EL = 53.6%, non-EL = 51.4%; p = 0.814). CONCLUSIONS: The present study demonstrated that EL does not provide a statistically significant advantage in survival or recurrence rates, for patients with locally advanced primary or recurrent rectal cancer.

A comparative study of short-term outcomes of colorectal cancer surgery in the elderly population.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal Cancer (CRC) is a disease of the elderly, and with an ageing population, oncological surgical procedures for CRC in the elderly is expected to increase. However, the balance between surgical benefits and risks associated with age and comorbidities in elderly patients is obscure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective database of consecutive patients who received CRC surgery was used to compare short-term surgical and oncological outcomes between patients aged ≥75 and <75 years old undergoing CRC resection. RESULTS: There were 54 patients (63.5%) in the <75 group and 31 patients (36.5%) in the ≥75 group. Overall, there were no differences between the <75 and ≥75 groups in postoperative HDU/ITU stay, median hospital LOS or 30-day mortality rates. Patients ≥75 had a higher preoperative performance status (25.9% versus 71.0%, p < .001), but no difference in ASA Grade and referral pattern, proportion of emergency operations, cancer staging, resection margins, achievement of curative resection or median lymph node yield. There was a significantly higher use of adjuvant chemotherapy in the <75 age group (48.1% versus 25.8%, p = .043). CONCLUSIONS: With adequate patient selection, CRC resection in elderly patients is not associated with higher postoperative mortality or worse short-term oncological benefits.

The Outcomes and Patterns of Treatment Failure After Surgery for Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the outcomes and patterns of treatment failure of patients who underwent pelvic exenteration surgery for recurrent rectal cancer. BACKGROUND: Despite advances in the management of rectal cancer, local recurrence still occurs. For appropriately selected patients, pelvic exenteration surgery can achieve long-term disease control. METHODS: Prospectively maintained databases of 5 high volume institutions for pelvic exenteration surgery were reviewed and data combined. We assessed the combined endpoints of overall 5-year survival, cancer-specific 5-year mortality, local recurrence, and the development of metastatic disease. RESULTS: Five hundred thirty-three patients who had undergone surgery for locally recurrent rectal cancer were identified. Five-year cancer-specific survival for patients with a complete (R0) resection is 44%, which was achieved in 59% of patients. For those with R1 and R2 resections, the 5-year survival was 26% and 10%, respectively. Radical resection required sacrectomy in 170 patients (32%), and total cystectomy in 105 patients (20%). Treatment failure included local recurrence alone in 75 patients (14%) and systemic metastases with or without local recurrence in 226 patients (42%). Chemoradiotherapy before exenteration was associated with a significant (P < 0.05) improvement in overall 5-year cancer-specific survival for those patients with an R0 resection. Postoperative chemotherapy did not alter outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: R0 resection of the pelvic recurrence is the most significant factor affecting overall and disease-free survival. The surgery is complex and often highly morbid, and where possible patients should be given perioperative chemoradiotherapy. Further investigations are required to determine the role of adjuvant chemotherapy.

A Systematic Review Assessing Medical Treatment for Rectovaginal and Enterovesical Fistulae in Crohn's Disease.

BACKGROUND: Rectovaginal and enterovesical fistulae are difficult to treat in patients with Crohn's disease. Currently, there is no consensus regarding their appropriate management. AIM OF THE STUDY: The aim of the study was to review the literature on the medical management of rectovaginal and enterovesical fistulae in Crohn's disease and to assess their response to treatment. METHOD: A literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, and Cochrane was performed. RESULTS: Twenty-three studies were identified, reporting on 137 rectovaginal and 44 enterovesical fistulae. The overall response rates of rectovaginal fistulae to medical therapy were: 38.3% complete response (fistula closure), 22.3% partial response, and 39.4% no response. For enterovesical fistulae the response rates to medical therapy were: 65.9% complete response, 20.5% partial response, and 13.6% no response. Specifically, response to anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy of 78 rectovaginal fistulae was: 41.0% complete response, 21.8% partial response, and 37.2% no response. Response of 14 enterovesical fistulae to anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy was: 57.1% complete response, 35.7% partial response, and 7.1% no response. The response to a combination of medical and surgical therapy in 43 rectovaginal fistulae was: 44.2% complete response, 20.9% partial response, and 34.9% no response. CONCLUSIONS: Medical therapy, alone or in combination with surgery, appears to benefit some patients with rectovaginal or enterovesical fistula. However, given the small size and low quality of the published studies, it is still difficult to draw conclusions regarding treatment. Larger, better quality studies are required to assess response to medical treatment and evaluate indications for surgery.

The prognostic significance of postchemoradiotherapy high-resolution MRI and histopathology detected extramural venous invasion in rectal cancer.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the prognostic significance of extramural venous invasion (EMVI) after chemoradiotherapy (CRT) by both magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (ymrEMVI) and histopathology (ypEMVI). BACKGROUND: EMVI is a prognostic factor in rectal cancer but whether this remains so after CRT preoperative is unknown. Histopathological definitions of EMVI are variable and lead to underreporting particularly after CRT. METHODS: All consecutive patients staged on initial MRI as EMVI-positive undergoing preoperative CRT and curative surgery between Jan 2006 and Jan 2012 were included. Posttreatment EMVI status (yEMVI) was reevaluated for both MRI and pathology. The primary endpoint of disease-free survival (DFS) for ymrEMVI and ypEMVI was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier product limit and compared with a Mantel-Cox log-rank test. A P < 0.05 was considered significant. Hazard ratios (HRs) for disease recurrence were generated using Cox proportional hazard regression for MRI and histopathology tumor characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 188 patients who had evidence of EMVI on initial baseline MRI staging were included. MRI detected significantly more patients with persistent EMVI than histopathology (53% vs 19%) but both were prognostic for worse survival-ymrEMVI (HR 1.97) and ypEMVI (HR 2.39). Patients with persistent ymrEMVI-positivity had significantly worse DFS at 3 years (42.7%) compared with ymrEMVI-negative tumors (79.8%); DFS for was 36.9% versus 65.9% positive and negative ypEMVI, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Detection of EMVI post-CRT is prognostically significant whether detected by MRI or histopathology. EMVI status after treatment may be used to counsel patients regarding ongoing risks of metastatic disease, implications for surveillance, and systemic chemotherapy.

Risks Factors Associated with the Development of Crohn's Disease After Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis for Ulcerative Colitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Following ileal pouch-anal anastomosis [IPAA] for ulcerative colitis [UC], up to 16% of patients develop Crohn's disease of the pouch [CDP], which is a major cause of pouch failure. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to identify preoperative characteristics and risk factors for CDP development following IPAA. METHODS: A literature search of the MEDLINE, EMBASE, EMCare and CINAHL databases was performed for studies that reported data on predictive characteristics and outcomes of CDP development in patients who underwent IPAA for UC between January 1990 and August 2022. Meta-analysis was performed using random-effect models and between-study heterogeneity was assessed. RESULTS: Seven studies with 1274 patients were included: 767 patients with a normal pouch and 507 patients with CDP. Age at UC diagnosis (weighted mean difference [WMD] -2.85; 95% confidence interval [CI] -4.39 to -1.31; p = 0.0003; I2 54%) and age at pouch surgery [WMD -3.17; 95% CI -5.27 to -1.07; p = 0.003; I2 20%) were significantly lower in patients who developed CDP compared to a normal pouch. Family history of IBD was significantly associated with CDP (odds ratio [OR] 2.43; 95% CI 1.41-4.19; p = 0.001; I2 31%], along with a history of smoking [OR 1.80; 95% CI 1.35-2.39; p < 0.0001; I2 0%]. Other factors such as sex and primary sclerosing cholangitis were found not to increase the risk of CDP. CONCLUSIONS: Age at UC diagnosis and pouch surgery, family history of IBD and previous smoking have been identified as potential risk factors for CDP post-IPAA. This has important implications towards preoperative counselling, planning surgical management and evaluating prognosis.