Clinical impact of TP53 functional mutations in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated with bevacizumab and chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Clinical and experimental studies indicate that the tumor protein p53 (TP53) gene loss of function due to missense mutations (MMs) may confer sensitivity to anti-angiogenics. This effect seems to be linked to cross-talk mechanisms among TP53, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), and VEGF receptors. We investigated whether specific TP53 MMs are associated with clinical outcomes of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with first-line chemotherapy plus Bevacizumab. The study focused on KRAS-mutated, liver-only mCRC cases as a homogeneous subgroup that may represent a relevant setting for exploring this association. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MMs were identified on primary tumors. MMs were classified by mutant-specific residual transcriptional activity scores (TP53RTAS) as transcriptionally inactive (TP53inactive = TP53RTAS 0%) or active (TP53active = TP53RTAS ≥ 1%) and used for stratifying patients in progression-free survival (PFS), response rate, and overall survival (OS) analyses. RESULTS: The study population consisted of 62 patients. MMs were found in 39 cases (62%) with 16 having TP53inactive and 23 TP53active MMs. Patients with TP53inactive MMs showed better PFS in comparison with the remaining groups (wild-type and TP53active). This effect was retained in the multivariate model. A similar clinical impact was observed in the OS analysis. There was a significant difference in the overall response rate and rate of post-treatment resection of liver metastases between the TP53inactive and the wild-type or TP53active MMs cases. CONCLUSIONS: Specific TP53 MMs may identify sub-groups of patients who benefit from Bevacizumab-based systemic therapy and these findings could lead to novel tailored treatment strategies in this setting.

Surgical Techniques and Related Perioperative Outcomes After Robot-assisted Minimally Invasive Gastrectomy (RAMIG): Results From the Prospective Multicenter International Ugira Gastric Registry.

OBJECTIVE: To gain insight in global practice of RAMIG and evaluated perioperative outcomes using an international registry. BACKGROUND: The techniques and perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted minimally invasive gastrectomy (RAMIG) for gastric cancer vary substantially in literature. METHODS: Prospectively registered RAMIG-cases for gastric cancer (≥10 per center) were extracted from 25 centers in Europe, Asia and South-America. Techniques for the resection, reconstruction, anastomosis and lymphadenectomy were analyzed, and related to perioperative surgical and oncological outcomes. Complications were uniformly defined by the Gastrectomy Complications Consensus Group. RESULTS: Between 2020-2023, 759 patients underwent total (n=272), distal (n=465) or proximal (n=22) gastrectomy (RAMIG). After total gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y-reconstruction, anastomotic leakage rates were 8% with hand-sewn (n=9/111) and 6% with linear stapled anastomoses (n=6/100). After distal gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y (67%) or Billroth-II-reconstruction (31%), anastomotic leakage rates were 3% with linear stapled (n=11/433) and 0% with hand-sewn anastomoses (n=0/26). Extent of lymphadenectomy consisted of D1+ (28%), D2 (59%) or D2+ (12%). Median nodal harvest yielded 31 nodes [IQR 21-47] after total and 34 nodes [IQR 24-47] after distal gastrectomy. R0-resection rates were 93% after total and 96% distal gastrectomy. Hospital stay was 9 days after total and distal gastrectomy, and was 3 days shorter without perianastomotic drains versus routine drain placement. Postoperative 30-day mortality was 1%. CONCLUSIONS: This large multicenter study provided a worldwide overview of current RAMIG-techniques with their respective perioperative outcomes. These outcomes demonstrated high surgical quality, set a quality standard for RAMIG and can be considered an international reference for surgical standardization.

Crohn's Disease and Jejunal Artery Aneurysms: A Report of the First Case and a Review of the Literature.

Background and Objectives: Jejunal artery (JA) and ileal artery (IA) aneurysms constitute less than 3% of all visceral artery aneurysms (VAAs), carrying a risk of rupture as high as 30%, and a mortality of 20%. Though many etiologies have been reported in the literature, no mention exists on a causal association between these aneurysms and inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). We present the first case of a JA aneurysm related to Crohn's Disease (CD) together with a review of the literature. Materials and Methods: A 74-year-old male presenting with CD intestinal relapse and an incidental finding at the computed tomography enterography (CTE) of a 53 × 47 × 25mm apparently intact JA pseudoaneurysm, arising from the first and second jejunal branches, underwent coil embolization followed by small bowel resection, with an uneventful outcome. We also included the review of literature on JA and IA aneurysms, analyzing all reports published in PubMed and Scopus from 1943 to July 2022. Results: 60 manuscripts with 103 cases of JA and IA aneurysms in 100 patients were identified. Among cases with available data, 34 (33.0%) presented acutely with rupture, 45 (43.7%) were described as non-ruptured. 83 (80.6%), and 14 (13.6%) were JA and IA aneurysms, respectively, having a median size of 15 (range:3.5-52) mm. Atherosclerosis (16.5%), infections (10.7%), and vasculitides/connective tissue disorders (9.7%) represented the main causes mentioned. Mean age was 53.6 (±19.2) years, male patients being 59.4%. One third of patients (32.4%) were asymptomatic. Overall, treatment was indicated in 63% of patients, with surgery and endovascular procedures performed in 61.9% and 38.1% cases, respectively. The technical success rate of endovascular treatment (EVT) was 95.8%. The mortality rate was 11.8%, being higher (21.2%) in the rupture group. Conclusions: The prompt treatment accomplished in our case granted a successful outcome. JA and IA aneurysms should be included among local complications of IBD. Considering their high potential for rupture, regardless of size, a low threshold for endovascular or surgical treatment should be applied.

The role of resection for melanoma metastases to the pancreas.

BACKGROUND: Among patients with distant metastatic melanoma, the site of metastases is the most significant predictor of survival and visceral-nonpulmonary metastases hold the highest risk of poor outcomes. However, studies demonstrate that a significant percentage of patients may be considered candidates for resection with improved survival over nonsurgical therapeutic modalities. We aimed at analyzing the results of resection in patients with melanoma metastasis to the pancreas by assessing the available evidence. METHODS: The PubMed/MEDLINE, WoS, and Embase electronic databases were systematically searched for articles reporting on the surgical treatment of pancreatic metastases from melanoma. Relevant data from included studies were assessed and analyzed. Overall survival was the primary endpoint of interest. Surgical details and oncological outcomes were also appraised. RESULTS: A total of 109 patients treated surgically for pancreatic metastases were included across 72 articles and considered for data extraction. Overall, patients had a mean age of 51.8 years at diagnosis of pancreatic disease. The cumulative survival was 71%, 38%, and 26% at 1, 3 and 5 years after pancreatectomy, with an estimated median survival of 24 months. Incomplete resection and concomitant extrapancreatic metastasis were the only factors which significantly affected survival. Patients in whom the pancreas was the only metastatic site who received curative resection exhibited significantly longer survival, with a 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year survival rates of 76%, 43%, and 41%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of a review of non-randomized reports, curative surgical resection confers a survival benefit in carefully selected patients with pancreatic dissemination of melanoma.

Management and 1-year outcomes of anastomotic leakage after elective colorectal surgery.

PURPOSE: To analyze different types of management and one-year outcomes of anastomotic leakage (AL) after elective colorectal resection. METHODS: All patients with anastomotic leakage after elective colorectal surgery with anastomosis (76/1,546; 4.9%), with the exclusion of cases with proximal diverting stoma, were followed-up for at least one year. Primary endpoints were as follows: composite outcome of one-year mortality and/or unplanned intensive care unit (ICU) admission and additional morbidity rates. Secondary endpoints were as follows: length of stay (LOS), one-year persistent stoma rate, and rate of return to intended oncologic therapy (RIOT). RESULTS: One-year mortality rate was 10.5% and unplanned ICU admission rate was 30.3%. Risk factors of the composite outcome included age (aOR = 1.08 per 1-year increase, p = 0.002) and anastomotic breakdown with end stoma at reoperation (aOR = 2.77, p = 0.007). Additional morbidity rate was 52.6%: risk factors included open versus laparoscopic reoperation (aOR = 4.38, p = 0.03) and ICU admission (aOR = 3.63, p = 0.05). Median (IQR) overall LOS was 20 days (14-26), higher in the subgroup of patients reoperated without stoma. At 1 year, a stoma persisted in 32.0% of patients, higher in the open (41.2%) versus laparoscopic (12.5%) reoperation group (p = 0.04). Only 4 out of 18 patients (22.2%) were able to RIOT. CONCLUSION: Mortality and/or unplanned ICU admission rates after AL are influenced by increasing age and by anastomotic breakdown at reoperation; additional morbidity rates are influenced by unplanned ICU admission and by laparoscopic approach to reoperation, the latter also reducing permanent stoma and failure to RIOT rates. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov # NCT03560180.

The use of indocyanine green fluorescence to define bowel microcirculation during laparoscopic surgery for acute small bowel obstruction.

AIM: Although there is growing evidence to support the feasibility of a minimally invasive approach for acute small bowel obstruction, the inability to adequately evaluate compromised bowel segments has been cited as a major limitation. The aim of this work is to report a novel application of extemporaneous indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence to assess bowel viability where there is a concern for ischaemic damage. METHOD: After the cause of obstruction has been identified and resolved, and where there are dubious signs of bowel ischaemia present, fluorescent selective angiography is undertaken. The segment of bowel in question is observed under both normal and fluorescent light to assess local microcirculation. The adequacy of both the arterial supply and the venous drainage is thus appraised to define bowel viability. RESULTS: Among 71 patients who have undergone surgery for acute small bowel obstruction with a laparoscopic approach, seven received extemporaneous ICG fluorescence assessment of bowel viability. Different presentations with their relevant management are described. CONCLUSIONS: Selective use of intraoperative fluorescent angiography may overcome some of the intrinsic limitations of laparoscopy in assessing bowel viability during surgery for acute small bowel obstruction.

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

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

Conventional Versus Minimally Invasive Hartmann Takedown: A Meta-analysis of the Literature.

Although end colostomy closure following Hartmann's procedure is a major surgery that is traditionally performed by conventional celiotomy, over the last decade there has been a growing interest toward the application of different minimally invasive techniques. We aimed at evaluating the relative outcomes of conventional surgery versus minimally invasive surgery by meta-analyzing the available data from the medical literature. The PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library and EMBASE electronic databases were searched through August 2018. Inclusion criteria considered eligible all comparative studies evaluating open versus minimally invasive procedures. Conventional laparoscopy, robotic and single-port laparoscopy were considered as minimally invasive techniques. Overall morbidity, rate of anastomotic failure, rate of wound complications and mortality were evaluated as primary outcomes. Perioperative details and surgical outcomes were also assessed. The data of a total of 13,740 patients from 26 studies were eventually included in the analysis. There were no significant differences on baseline characteristics such as age, BMI and proportion of high-risk patients between the two groups of patients. As compared to the conventional technique, minimally invasive surgery proved significantly superior in terms of postoperative morbidity, length of hospital stay and rate of incisional hernia. The current literature suggests that minimally invasive surgery should be considered in performing Hartmann's reversal, if technically viable. However, due to the low level of the available evidence it is impossible to draw definitive conclusions.

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Minimally Invasive Surgery for Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of elective rectal resection for rectal cancer in adults by robotic surgery compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Technological advantages of robotic surgery favor precise dissection in narrow spaces. However, the evidence base driving recommendations for the use of robotic surgery in rectal cancer primarily hinges on observational data. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL for randomized controlled trials (until August 2016) comparing robotic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery. Data on the following endpoints were evaluated: circumferential margin status, mesorectal grade, number of lymph nodes harvested, rate of conversion to open surgery, postoperative complications, and operative time. Data were summarized as relative risks (RR) or weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). Risk of bias of studies was assessed with standard methods. RESULTS: Five trials were eligible, including 334 robotic and 337 laparoscopic surgery cases. Meta-analysis showed that RS was associated with lower conversion rate (7.3%; 4 studies, 544 participants, RR 0.58; 95% CI 0.35-0.97, P = 0.04, I = 0%) and longer operating time (MD 38.43 minutes, 95% CI 31.84-45.01: P < 0.00001) compared with laparoscopic surgery. Perioperative mortality, rate of circumferential margin involvement (2 studies, 489 participants, RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.39-1.73), and lymph nodes collected (mean 17.4 Lymph Nodes; 5 trials, 674 patients, MD -0.35, 95% CI -1.83 to 1.12) were similar. The quality of the evidence was moderate for most outcomes. CONCLUSION: Evidence of moderate quality supports that robotic surgery for rectal cancer produces similar perioperative outcomes of oncologic procedure adequacy to conventional laparoscopic surgery. Robotic surgery portraits lower rate of conversion to open surgery, while operating time is significantly longer than by laparoscopic approach.

An innovative fast track solution for food bolus impaction due to Jackhammer esophagus in an emergency department: the "Nitro-Push Blind Technique" case report.

BACKGROUND: In the medical literature are described only few clinical cases of esophageal food bolus impaction due to esophageal motility disorders. Moreover, the management of this condition is highly variable with no evidence in the literature to strongly support a clear defined intervention. CASE PRESENTATION: In this paper we describe for the first time a case of 53-year-old male with food bolus impaction due to Jackhammer esophagus referred to emergency department. On the basis of the known esophageal past medical history as well as the absence of bones in the bolus, the patient was submitted to a new conservative treatment, the "Nitro-Push Blind Technique". CONCLUSIONS: The new technique performed with naso-gastric tube thrust after nitrates medication in definite clinical case supported by known functional disease, represents a safe and successful method, with short observational period to minimize exposure to potential morbidity and reduce the inpatient stay in emergency department. It should be recommended, once validated in a larger cohort, as the initial treatment of choice in the selected patients with food boneless bolus impaction in the emergency settings. Indeed, this management provides only minimal deviation from the current practice and is hence technically easy to learn and perform.

Robotic versus laparoscopic resections of posterosuperior segments of the liver: a propensity score-matched comparison.

BACKGROUND: Open parenchymal-preserving resection is the current standard of care for lesions in the posterosuperior liver segments. Laparoscopy and robot-assisted surgery are emergent surgical approaches for liver resections, even in posteriorly located lesions. The objective of this study was to compare robot-assisted to laparoscopic parenchymal-preserving liver resections for lesions located in segments 7, 8, 4a, and 1. METHODS: Demographics, comorbidities, clinicopathologic characteristics, surgical treatments, and outcomes from patients who underwent laparoscopic and robot-assisted liver resection in two centers for lesions in the posterosuperior segments between June 2008 and February 2014 were reviewed. A 1:2 matched propensity score analysis was performed by individually matching patients in the robotic cohort to patients in the laparoscopic cohort based on demographics, comorbidities, performance status, tumor stage, location, and type of resection. RESULTS: Thirty-six patients who underwent robot-assisted liver resection were matched with 72 patients undergoing laparoscopic liver resection. Matched patients displayed no significant differences in postoperative outcomes as measured by blood loss, hospital stay, R0 negative margin rate, and mortality. The overall morbidity according to the comprehensive complication index was also similar (34.6 ± 33 vs. 18.4 ± 11.3, respectively, for robotic and laparoscopic approach, p = 0.11). Patients undergoing robotic liver surgery had significantly longer inflow occlusion time (77 vs. 25 min, p = 0.001) as compared with their laparoscopic counterparts. CONCLUSIONS: Although number and severity of complications in the robotic group appears to be higher, robotic and laparoscopic parenchymal-preserving liver resections in the posterosuperior segments display similar safety and feasibility.

Laparoscopic Simultaneous Resection of Colorectal Primary Tumor and Liver Metastases: Results of a Multicenter International Study.

BACKGROUND: With the advance of modern laparoscopic technology, laparoscopic colorectal surgery and laparoscopic liver surgery are both worldwide accepted. Preliminary brief series have shown the feasibility of combined laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer (CRC) and synchronous colorectal liver metastases (SCRLM). We aim to report a large International multicenter series of laparoscopic simultaneous resection of CRC and SCRLM. METHODS: Between 1997 and 2013, 142 laparoscopic liver resections were performed with simultaneous colorectal surgery for SCRLM. The surgical and postoperative variables evaluated were the duration of the intervention, blood loss, transfusion rate, conversion rate, resection margin, specific and overall morbidity, perioperative mortality, length of hospital stay, and survival. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed examining postoperative morbidity in the all cohort of patients. RESULTS: The median number of liver lesions was 1 (1-9) and the median larger diameter at diagnosis was 28 (2-100) mm. The median operative time was 360 (120-690) min. Seven patients (4.9%) required conversion. The global morbidity was 31.0% and the mortality was 2.1%. After a median follow-up of 29 (1-108) months, 40 patients (28.2%) developed tumor recurrence. Curative treatment of recurrence was possible in 17 patients (12.0%), including a second liver resection in 13 patients (9.1%), which was performed by laparoscopy in 7 patients (4.9%). Overall 1-, 3-, and 5-year survivals were 98.8, 82.1, and 71.9%, respectively. By multivariate analysis, ASA score≥3 [OR 13.6 (1.8-99.6); P=0.01] and operative time [OR 1.008 (1.001-1.016); P=0.03] were independent predictors of postoperative morbidity. CONCLUSIONS: Our combined data show that in experienced centers, simultaneous laparoscopic approach is technically feasible, safe, and associated with good oncological outcomes.

Traditional versus robot-assisted full laparoscopic liver resection: a matched-pair comparative study.

BACKGROUND: Robotic surgery was introduced as a means of overcoming the limitations of traditional laparoscopy. This report describes the results of a matched comparative study between traditional (TLLR) and robot-assisted laparoscopic liver resection (RLLR) performed in two European centers. METHODS: From January 2008-April 2013, 46 patients underwent RLLR at San Matteo degli Infermi Hospital. Each patient was matched to a patient who had undergone TLLR at Antoine Béclère Hospital. The variables evaluated were operative time, blood loss, conversion rate, morbidity, mortality, and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients were included in each group. Despite matching, more tumors were solitary in the TLLR group (P = 0.02) and more were localized in the superior and posterior segments in the RLLR group (P = 0.003). The median duration of surgery was 210 and 176 min in the RLLR and TLLR groups, respectively (P = 0.12). Conversion rate, blood loss, morbidity, and length of stay were similar in both groups. In multivariate analysis in all cohorts of patients, the sole independent risk factor of postoperative complications was the operative duration [OR = 1.016; P = 0.007]. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic LLR is associated with outcomes similar to those obtained with TLLR. However, robotics may facilitate LLR in patients with superior and posterior liver tumors.

Intraoperative left-sided colorectal anastomotic testing in clinical practice: a multi-treatment machine-learning analysis of the iCral3 prospective cohort.

BACKGROUND: Current evidence about intraoperative anastomotic testing after left-sided colorectal resections is still controversial. The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of Indocyanine Green fluorescent angiography (ICG-FA) and air-leak test (ALT) over standard assessment on anastomotic leakage (AL) rates according to surgeon's perception of anastomosis perfusion and/or integrity in clinical practice. METHODS: A database of 2061 patients who underwent left-sided colorectal resections was selected from patients enrolled in a prospective multicenter study. It was retrospectively analyzed through a multi-treatment machine-learning model considering standard visual assessment (NW; No. = 899; 43.6%) as the reference treatment arm, compared to ICG-FA alone (WP; No. = 409; 19.8%), ALT alone (WI; No. = 420; 20.4%) or both (WPI; No. = 333; 16.2%). Twenty-four covariates potentially affecting the outcomes were included and balanced into the model within the subgroups. The primary endpoint was AL, the secondary endpoints were overall morbidity (OM), major morbidity (MM), reoperation for AL, and mortality. All the results were reported as odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95%CI). RESULTS: The WPI subgroup showed significantly higher AL risk (OR 1.91; 95% CI 1.02-3.59; p 0.043), MM risk (OR 2.35; 95% CI 1.39-3.97; p 0.001), and reoperation for AL risk (OR 2.44; 95% CI 1.12-5.31; p 0.025). No other significant differences were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that the surgeons' perception of both anastomotic perfusion and integrity (WPI subgroup) was associated to a significantly higher risk of AL and related morbidity, notwithstanding the extensive use of both ICG-FA and ALT testing.

Mechanical bowel preparation in elective colorectal surgery: a propensity score-matched analysis of the Italian colorectal anastomotic leakage (iCral) study group prospective cohorts.

Retrospective evaluation of the effects of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) on data derived from two prospective open-label observational multicenter studies in Italy regarding elective colorectal surgery. MBP for elective colorectal surgery remains a controversial issue with contrasting recommendations in current guidelines. The Italian ColoRectal Anastomotic Leakage (iCral) study group, therefore, decided to estimate the effects of no MBP (treatment variable) versus MBP for elective colorectal surgery. A total of 8359 patients who underwent colorectal resection with anastomosis were enrolled in two consecutive prospective studies in 78 surgical centers in Italy from January 2019 to September 2021. A retrospective PSMA was performed on 5455 (65.3%) cases after the application of explicit exclusion criteria to eliminate confounders. The primary endpoints were anastomotic leakage (AL) and surgical site infections (SSI) rates; the secondary endpoints included SSI subgroups, overall and major morbidity, reoperation, and mortality rates. Overall length of postoperative hospital stay (LOS) was also considered. Two well-balanced groups of 1125 patients each were generated: group A (No MBP, true population of interest), and group B (MBP, control population), performing a PSMA considering 21 covariates. Group A vs. group B resulted significantly associated with a lower risk of AL [42 (3.5%) vs. 73 (6.0%) events; OR 0.57; 95% CI 0.38-0.84; p = 0.005]. No difference was recorded between the two groups for SSI [73 (6.0%) vs. 85 (7.0%) events; OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.63-1.22; p = 0.441]. Regarding the secondary endpoints, no MBP resulted significantly associated with a lower risk of reoperation and LOS > 6 days. This study confirms that no MBP before elective colorectal surgery is significantly associated with a lower risk of AL, reoperation rate, and LOS < 6 days when compared with MBP.

Abdominal drainage after elective colorectal surgery: propensity score-matched retrospective analysis of an Italian cohort.

BACKGROUND: In Italy, surgeons continue to drain the abdominal cavity in more than 50 per cent of patients after colorectal resection. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of abdominal drain placement on early adverse events in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery. METHODS: A database was retrospectively analysed through a 1:1 propensity score-matching model including 21 covariates. The primary endpoint was the postoperative duration of stay, and the secondary endpoints were surgical site infections, infectious morbidity rate defined as surgical site infections plus pulmonary infections plus urinary infections, anastomotic leakage, overall morbidity rate, major morbidity rate, reoperation and mortality rates. The results of multiple logistic regression analyses were presented as odds ratios (OR) and 95 per cent c.i. RESULTS: A total of 6157 patients were analysed to produce two well-balanced groups of 1802 patients: group (A), no abdominal drain(s) and group (B), abdominal drain(s). Group A versus group B showed a significantly lower risk of postoperative duration of stay >6 days (OR 0.60; 95 per cent c.i. 0.51-0.70; P < 0.001). A mean postoperative duration of stay difference of 0.86 days was detected between groups. No difference was recorded between the two groups for all the other endpoints. CONCLUSION: This study confirms that placement of abdominal drain(s) after elective colorectal surgery is associated with a non-clinically significant longer (0.86 days) postoperative duration of stay but has no impact on any other secondary outcomes, confirming that abdominal drains should not be used routinely in colorectal surgery.