Short-term Outcomes of Different Techniques for Gastric Ischemic Preconditioning Before Esophagectomy: A Network Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Ischemia at the anastomotic site plays a critical role determinant in the development of anastomosis-related complications after esophagectomy. Gastric ischemic conditioning (GIC) before esophagectomy has been described to improve the vascular perfusion at the tip of the gastric conduit with a potential effect on anastomotic leak (AL) and stenosis (AS) risk minimization. Laparoscopic (LapGIC) and angioembolization (AngioGIC) techniques have been reported. PURPOSE: Compare short-term outcomes among different GIC techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Systematic review and network meta-analysis. One-step esophagectomy (noGIC), LapGIC, and AngioGIC were compared. Primary outcomes were AL, AS, and gastric conduit necrosis (GCN). Risk ratio (RR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) were used as pooled effect size measures, whereas 95% credible intervals (CrIs) were used to assess relative inference. RESULTS: Overall, 1760 patients (14 studies) were included. Of those, 1028 patients (58.4%) underwent noGIC, 593 (33.6%) LapGIC, and 139 (8%) AngioGIC. AL was reduced for LapGIC versus noGIC (RR=0.68; 95% CrI 0.47-0.98) and AngioGIC versus noGIC (RR=0.52; 95% CrI 0.31-0.93). Similarly, AS was reduced for LapGIC versus noGIC (RR=0.32; 95% CrI 0.12-0.68) and AngioGIC versus noGIC (RR=1.30; 95% CrI 0.65-2.46). The indirect comparison, assessed with the network methodology, did not show any differences for LapGIC versus AngioGIC in terms of postoperative AL and AS risk. No differences were found for GCN, pulmonary complications, overall complications, hospital length of stay, and 30-day mortality among different treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to noGIC, both LapGIC and AngioGIC before esophagectomy seem equivalent and associated with a reduced risk for postoperative AL and AS.

Regional differences in outcomes with ablation versus drug therapy for atrial fibrillation: Results from the CABANA trial.

BACKGROUND: The finding of unexpected variations in treatment benefits by geographic region in international clinical trials raises complex questions about the interpretation and generalizability of trial findings. We observed such geographical variations in outcome and in the effectiveness of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation versus drug therapy in the Catheter Ablation vs Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation (CABANA) trial. This paper describes these differences and investigates potential causes. METHODS: The examination of treatment effects by geographic region was a prespecified analysis. CABANA enrolled patients from 10 countries, with 1,285 patients at 85 North American (NA) sites and 919 at 41 non-NA sites. The primary endpoint was a composite of death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest. Death and first atrial fibrillation recurrence were secondary endpoints. RESULTS: At least 1 primary endpoint event occurred in 157 patients (12.2%) from NA and 33 (3.6%) from non-NA sites over a median 54.9 and 40.5 months of follow-up, respectively (NA/non-NA adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 2.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.48-3.21, P < .001). In NA patients, 78 events occurred in the ablation and 79 in the drug arm, (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.66, 1.24) while 11 and 22 events occurred in non-NA patients (HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.25,1.05, interaction P = .154). Death occurred in 53 ablation and 51 drug therapy patients in the NA group (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.65,1.42) and in 5 ablation and 16 drug therapy patients in the non-NA group (HR 0.32, 95% CI 0.12,0.86, interaction P = .044). Adjusting for baseline regional differences or prognostic risk variables did not account for the regional differences in treatment effects. Atrial fibrillation recurrence was reduced by ablation in both regions (NA: HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.46, 0.63; non-NA: HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.30, 0.64, interaction P = .322). CONCLUSIONS: In CABANA, primary outcome events occurred significantly more often in the NA group but assignment to ablation significantly reduced all-cause mortality in the non-NA group only. These differences were not explained by regional variations in procedure effectiveness, safety, or patient characteristics. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0091150; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT00911508.

Impact of Thoracic Duct Resection on Long-Term Survival After Esophagectomy: Individual Patient Data Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Radical esophagectomy, including thoracic duct resection (TDR), has been proposed to improve regional lymphadenectomy and possibly reduce the risk of locoregional recurrence. However, because of its impact on immunoregulation, some authors have expressed concerns about its possible detrimental effect on long-term survival. The purpose of this review was to assess the influence of TDR on long-term survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched through 15 March 2024. Overall survival (OS), cancer specific survival (CSS), and disease-free survival (DFS) were primary outcomes. Restricted mean survival time difference (RMSTD), risk ratio (RR), standardized mean difference (SMD), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used as pooled effect size measures. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) methodology was employed to evaluate the certainty of evidence. RESULTS: The analysis included six studies with 5756 patients undergoing transthoracic esophagectomy. TDR was reported in 49.1%. Patients' ages ranged from 27 to 79 years and 86% were males. At 4-year follow-up, the multivariate meta-analysis showed similar results for the comparison noTDR versus TDR in term of OS [- 0.8 months, 95% confidence interval (CI) - 3.1, 1.3], CSS (0.1 months, 95% CI - 0.9, 1.2), and DFS (1.5 months, 95% CI - 2.6, 5.5). TDR was associated with a significantly higher number of harvested mediastinal lymph nodes (SMD 0.57, 95% CI 0.01-1.13) and higher risk of postoperative chylothorax (RR = 1.32; 95% CI 1.04-2.23). Anastomotic leak and pulmonary complications were comparable. CONCLUSIONS: TDR seems not to improve long-term OS, CSS, and DFS regardless of tumor stage. Routine TDR should not be routinely recommended during esophagectomy.

Effect of powered circular stapler in colorectal anastomosis after left-sided colic resection: systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Anastomotic leak (AL) remains the most important complication after left-sided colic anastomoses and technical complications during anastomotic construction are responsible of higher leakage incidence. Powered circular stapler (PCS) in colorectal surgery has been introduced in order to reduce technical errors and post-operative complications due to the manual circular stapler (MCS). METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed. An electronic systematic search was performed using Web of Science, PubMed, and Embase of studies comparing PCS and MCS. The incidence of AL, anastomotic bleeding (AB), conversion, and reoperation were assessed. PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42024512644. RESULTS: Five observational studies were eligible for inclusion reporting on 2379 patients. The estimated pooled Risk Ratios for AL and AB rates following PCS were significantly lower than those observed with MCS (0.44 and 0.23, respectively; both with p < 0.01). Conversion and reoperation rate did not show any significant difference: 0.41 (95% CI 0.09-1.88; p = 0.25) and 0.78 (95% CI 0.33-1.84; p = 0.57); respectively. CONCLUSION: The use of PCS demonstrates a lower incidence of AL and AB compared to MCS but does not exhibit a discernible influence on reintervention or conversion rates. The call for future randomized clinical trials aims to definitively clarify these issues and contribute to further advancements in refining surgical strategies for left-sided colonic resection.

Effect of complete mesocolic excision (cme) on long-term survival after right colectomy for cancer: multivariate meta-analysis and restricted mean survival time estimation.

INTRODUCTION: Debate exists concerning the impact of complete mesocolic excision (CME) on long-term oncological outcomes. The aim of this review was to condense the updated literature and assess the effect of CME on long-term survival after right colectomy for cancer. METHODS: PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched through July 2023. The included studies evaluated the effect of CME on survival. The primary outcome was long-term overall survival. Restricted mean survival time difference (RMSTD), hazard ratio (HR), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used as pooled effect size measures. GRADE methodology was used to summarize the certainty of evidence. RESULTS: Ten studies (3665 patients) were included. Overall, 1443 (39.4%) underwent CME. The RMSTD analysis shows that at 60-month follow-up, stage I-III CME patients lived 2.5 months (95% CI 1.1-4.1) more on average compared with noCME patients. Similarly, stage III patients that underwent CME lived longer compared to noCME patients at 55-month follow-up (6.1 months; 95% CI 3.4-8.5). The time-dependent HRs analysis for CME vs. noCME (stage I-III disease) shows a higher mortality hazard in patients with noCME at 6 months (HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.29-0.71), 12 months (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.43-0.73), and 24 months (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.57-0.92) up to 27 months. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that CME is associated with unclear OS benefit in stage I-III disease. Caution is recommended to avoid overestimation of the effect of CME in stage III disease since the marginal benefit of a more extended resection may have been influenced by tumor biology/molecular profile and multimodal adjuvant treatments.

Vaginal Hysterectomy: A Network Meta-Analysis Comparing Short-Term Outcomes of Surgical Techniques and Devices.

OBJECTIVE: To provide available evidence comparing surgical outcomes of different vaginal hysterectomy (VH) techniques and devices. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched from inception to December 1, 2023, using relevant keywords. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: Studies comparing at least 2 surgical techniques and devices for VH were included. An arm-based random effect frequentist network meta-analysis was performed. All available surgical outcomes were evaluated. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: Ten randomized controlled trials and 7 observational studies were eligible reporting on 1577 women undergoing VH with different techniques and devices (50% conventional, 22.5% Ligasure, 17.3% BiClamp, and 9.2% transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery [vNOTES]). All surgical techniques/devices had a comparable risk ratio (RR) in terms of intraoperative complications, but Clavien-Dindo grade III postoperative complications were significantly reduced in the vNOTES group (RR, 0.15; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.03-0.82; I2 = 0%) compared with conventional VH. The pooled network analysis showed a lower standard mean deviation for blood loss when comparing energy-based vessel sealing technologies (Ligasure: standard mean deviation, -0.92; 95% CI, -1.47 to -0.37; BiClamp: standard mean deviation, -1.66; 95% CI, -2.77 to -0.55) with conventional VH. Total operative time, postoperative hemoglobin variation, and pain were significantly reduced only in the Ligasure group compared with conventional VH. Bilateral salpingectomy or bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy was most commonly performed in the vNOTES group (RR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.17-3.10) compared with the conventional VH group. CONCLUSION: Modern surgical techniques/devices have the potential to improve anatomic exposure and to reduce morbidity of VH. This may drive resurgence of vaginal approach to hysterectomy.

Effect of Anastomotic Leak on Long-Term Survival After Esophagectomy: Multivariate Meta-analysis and Restricted Mean Survival Times Examination.

BACKGROUND: Anastomotic leak (AL) is a serious complication after esophagectomy. It is associated with prolonged hospital stay, increased costs, and increased risk for 90-day mortality. Controversy exists concerning the impact of AL on survival. This study was designed to investigate the effect of AL on long-term survival after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. METHODS: PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched through October 30, 2022. The included studies evaluated the effect of AL on long-term survival. Primary outcome was long-term overall survival. Restricted mean survival time difference (RMSTD), hazard ratio (HR), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used as pooled effect size measures. RESULTS: Thirteen studies (7118 patients) were included. Overall, 727 (10.2%) patients experienced AL. The RMSTD analysis shows that at 12, 24, 36, 48, and 60 months, patients not experiencing AL live an average of 0.7 (95% CI 0.2-1.2; p < 0.001), 1.9 (95% CI 1.1-2.6; p < 0.001), 2.6 (95% CI 1.6-3.7; p < 0.001), 3.4 (95% CI 1.9-4.9; p < 0.001), and 4.2 (95% CI 2.1-6.4; p < 0.001) months longer compared with those with AL, respectively. The time-dependent HRs analysis for AL versus no AL shows a higher mortality hazard in patients with AL at 3 (HR 1.94, 95% CI 1.54-2.34), 6 (HR 1.56, 95% CI 1.39-1.75), 12 (HR 1.47, 95% CI 1.24-1.54), and 24 months (HR 1.19, 95% CI 1.02-1.31). CONCLUSIONS: This study seems to suggest a modest clinical impact of AL on long-term OS after esophagectomy. Patients who experience AL seem to have a higher mortality hazard during the first 2 years of follow-up.

Lung Transplantation From Controlled and Uncontrolled Donation After Circulatory Death (DCD) Donors With Long Ischemic Times Managed by Simple Normothermic Ventilation and Ex-Vivo Lung Perfusion Assessment.

Donation after cardiac death (DCD) donors are still subject of studies. In this prospective cohort trial, we compared outcomes after lung transplantation (LT) of subjects receiving lungs from DCD donors with those of subjects receiving lungs from donation after brain death (DBD) donors (ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT02061462). Lungs from DCD donors were preserved in-vivo through normothermic ventilation, as per our protocol. We enrolled candidates for bilateral LT ≥14 years. Candidates for multi-organ or re-LT, donors aged ≥65 years, DCD category I or IV donors were excluded. We recorded clinical data on donors and recipients. Primary endpoint was 30-day mortality. Secondary endpoints were: duration of mechanical ventilation (MV), intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay, severe primary graft dysfunction (PGD3) and chronic lung allograft dysfunction (CLAD). 121 patients (110 DBD Group, 11 DCD Group) were enrolled. 30-day mortality and CLAD prevalence were nil in the DCD Group. DCD Group patients required longer MV (DCD Group: 2 days, DBD Group: 1 day, p = 0.011). ICU length of stay and PGD3 rate were higher in DCD Group but did not significantly differ. LT with DCD grafts procured with our protocols appears safe, despite prolonged ischemia times.

Short-term outcomes of different esophagojejunal anastomotic techniques during laparoscopic total gastrectomy: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Different techniques have been described for esophagojejunostomy (EJ) during laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) for gastric cancer. Linear stapled techniques include overlap (OL) and functional end-to-end anastomosis (FEEA) while single staple technique (SST), hemi-double staple technique (HDST), and OrVil® are circular stapled approaches. Nowadays, the choice among techniques for EJ depends on operating surgeon personal preference. PURPOSE: To compare short-term outcomes of different EJ techniques during LTG. METHODS: Systematic review and network meta-analysis. OL, FEEA, SST, HDST, and OrVil® were compared. Primary outcomes were anastomotic leak (AL) and stenosis (AS). Risk ratio (RR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) were used as pooled effect size measures, whereas 95% credible intervals (CrI) were used to measure relative inference. RESULTS: Overall, 3177 patients (20 studies) were included. The technique for EJ was SST (n = 1026; 32.9%), OL (n = 826; 26.5%), FEEA (n = 752; 24.1%), OrVil® (n = 317; 10.1%), and HDST (n = 196; 6.4%). AL was comparable for OL vs. FEEA (RR = 0.82; 95% CrI 0.47-1.49), OL vs. SST (RR = 0.55; 95% CrI 0.27-1.21), OL vs. OrVil® (RR = 0.54; 95% CrI 0.32-1.22), and OL vs. HDST (RR = 0.65; 95% CrI 0.28-1.63). Similarly, AS was similar for OL vs. FEEA (RR = 0.46; 95% CrI 0.18-1.28), OL vs. SST (RR = 0.89; 95% CrI 0.39-2.15), OL vs. OrVil® (RR = 0.36; 95% CrI 0.14-1.02), and OL vs. HDST (RR = 0.61; 95% CrI 0.31-1.21). Anastomotic bleeding, time to soft diet resumption, pulmonary complications, hospital length of stay, and mortality were comparable while operative time was reduced for FEEA. CONCLUSIONS: This network meta-analysis shows similar postoperative AL and AS risk when comparing OL, FEEA, SST, HDST, and OrVil® techniques. Similarly, no differences were found for anastomotic bleeding, operative time, soft diet resumption, pulmonary complications, hospital length of stay and 30-day mortality.

Does ProCore Fine-Needle Biopsy Really Improve the Clinical Outcome of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Sampling of Pancreatic Masses?

INTRODUCTION: Fine-needle biopsy (FNB) has been suggested to provide better histological samples as compared to endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA). However, studies comparing EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB for pancreatic lesions reported contrasting results. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical performance of EUS-FNA versus EUS-FNB with the ProCore needle for the investigation of pancreatic lesions. METHODS: We reviewed all patients undergoing EUS for the investigation of pancreatic lesions from August 2012 to September 2018. From August 2012 to January 2015, all procedures were performed with standard needles, whereas from February 2015 to September 2018, the use of ProCore needles had been introduced. Data on diagnostic accuracy, number of needle passes, and/or adverse events were collected. RESULTS: Three hundred twenty-four patients were retrospectively evaluated: 190 (58.6%) underwent EUS-FNA and 134 (41.4%) EUS-FNB. Both EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB showed high diagnostic accuracy for malignancy (94% [95% CI: 89-97%] vs. 94% [95% CI: 89-98%]). Notably, there were no differences between EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB in terms of sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratio, histological core tissue retrieval, adverse events, or number of needle passes. However, subgroup analysis noted a higher diagnostic accuracy for 25G EUS-FNB as compared to 25G EUS-FNA (85.7 vs. 55.5%; *p = 0.023). CONCLUSION: EUS-FNB with the ProCore needle is safe and feasible in pancreatic lesions. The ProCore needle did not provide any advantage in terms of diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive and/or negative likelihood ratio, or acquisition of the core specimen; therefore, its routine application is not supported.

Techniques for reconstruction after distal gastrectomy for cancer: updated network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: The choice of the best reconstruction technique after distal gastrectomy (DG) remains controversial and still not defined. The purpose was to perform a comprehensive evaluation within the major type of intestinal reconstruction after DG for gastric cancer. METHODS: Systematic review and network meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare Billroth I (BI), Billroth II (BII), Billroth II Braun (BII Braun), Roux-en-Y (RY), and Uncut Roux-en-Y (URY). Risk ratio (RR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) were used as pooled effect size measures while 95% credible intervals (CrI) were used to assess relative inference. RESULTS: Ten RCTs (1456 patients) were included. Of these, 448 (33.7%) underwent BI, 220 (15.1%) BII, 114 BII Braun (7.8%), 533 (36.6%) RY, and 141 URY (9.6%). No significant differences were found among treatments for 30-day mortality, anastomotic leak, anastomotic stricture, and overall complications. At 12-month follow-up, RY was associated with a significantly reduced risk of remnant gastritis compared to BI (RR=0.56; 95% Crl 0.35-0.76) and BII reconstruction (RR=0.47; 95% Crl 0.22-0.97). Similarly, despite the lack of statistical significance, RY seems associated with a trend toward reduced endoscopically proven esophagitis compared to BI (RR=0.58; 95% Crl 0.24-1.51) and bile reflux compared to BI (RR=0.48; 95% Crl 0.17-1.41), BII (RR=0.74; 95% Crl 0.20-2.81), and BII Braun (RR=0.65; 95% Crl 0.30-1.43). CONCLUSIONS: This network meta-analysis shows that there are five main options for intestinal anastomosis after DG. All techniques seem equally safe with comparable anastomotic leak, anastomotic stricture, overall morbidity, and short-term outcomes. In the short-term follow-up (12 months), RY seems associated with a reduced risk of remnant gastritis and a trend toward a reduced risk of bile reflux and esophagitis.

Linear- versus circular-stapled esophagogastric anastomosis during esophagectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Different techniques have been described for esophagogastric anastomosis. Over the past decades, surgeons have been improving anastomotic techniques with a gradual shift from hand-sewn to stapled anastomosis. Nowadays, circular-stapled (CS) and linear-stapled (LS) anastomosis are commonly used during esophagectomy. METHODS: PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched up to June 2022. The included studies evaluated short-term outcomes for LS vs. CS anastomosis in patients undergoing esophagectomy for cancer. Primary outcomes were anastomotic leak (AL) and stricture (AS). Risk ratio (RR) and standardized mean difference (SMD) were used as pooled effect size measures whereas 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) were used to assess relative inference. RESULTS: Eighteen studies (2861 patients) were included. Overall, 1371 (47.9%) underwent CS while 1490 (52.1%) LS. Compared to CS, LS was associated with a significantly reduced RR for AL (RR = 0.70; 95% CI 0.54-0.91; p < 0.01) and AS (RR = 0.32; 95% CI 0.20-0.51; p < 0.0001). Stratified subgroup analysis according to the level of anastomosis (cervical and thoracic) still shows a tendency toward reduced risk for LS. No differences were found for pneumonia (RR 0.78; p = 0.12), reflux esophagitis (RR 0.74; p = 0.36), operative time (SMD -0.25; p = 0.16), hospital length of stay (SMD 0.13; p = 0.51), and 30-day mortality (RR 1.26; p = 0.42). CONCLUSIONS: LS anastomosis seems associated with a tendency toward a reduced risk for AL and AS. Although surgeon's own training and experience might direct the choice of esophagogastric anastomosis, our meta-analysis encourages the use of LS anastomosis.

Patient-tailored algorithm for laparoscopic cruroplasty standardization: comparison with hiatal surface area and medium-term outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Different methods have been described for laparoscopic hiatoplasty and hiatus hernia (HH) repair. All techniques are not standardized and the choice to reinforce or not the hiatus with a mesh is left to the operating surgeon's preference. Hiatal surface area (HSA) has been described as an attempt at standardization; in case the area is > 4 cm2, a mesh is used to reinforce the repair. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to describe a new patient-tailored algorithm (PTA), compare its performance in predicting crura mesh buttressing to HSA, and analyze outcomes. METHODS: Retrospective, single-center, descriptive study (September 2018-September 2021). Adult patients (≥ 18 years old) who underwent laparoscopic HH repair. Outcomes and quality of life measured with the disease-specific gastroesophageal reflux disease health-related quality of life (GERD-HRQL) and reflux symptom index (RSI) were analyzed. RESULTS: Fifty patients that underwent laparoscopic hiatoplasty and Toupet fundoplication were included. The median age was 61 years (range 32-83) and the median BMI was 26.7 (range 17-36). According to the PTA, 27 patients (54%) underwent simple suture repair while crural mesh buttressing with Phasix-ST® was used in 23 (46%). According to the HSA, the median hiatus area was 4.7 cm2 while 26 patients had an HSA greater than 4 cm2. The overall concordance rate between PTA and HSA was 94% (47/50). The median hospital stay was 1.9 days (range 1-8) and the 90-day complication rate was 4%. The median follow-up was 18.6 months (range 1-35). Hernia recurrence was diagnosed in 6%. Postoperative dysphagia occurred in one patient (2%). The GERD-HRQL (p < 0.001) and RSI (p = 0.001) were significantly improved. CONCLUSIONS: The application of PTA for cruroplasty standardization in the setting of HH repair seems effective. While concordance with HSA is high, the PTA seems easier and promptly available in the operative theater with a potential increase in procedure standardization, reproducibility, and teaching.

Treatment of Inguinal Hernia: Systematic Review and Updated Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: Despite the advent of innovative surgical platforms and operative techniques, a definitive indication of the best surgical option for the treatment of unilateral primary inguinal hernia remains unsettled. Purpose was to perform an updated and comprehensive evaluation within the major approaches to inguinal hernia. METHODS: Systematic review and network meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) compare Lichtenstein tension-free repair, laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) repair, and totally extraperitoneal repair (TEP). Risk ratio (RR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) were used as pooled effect size measures, whereas 95% credible intervals (CrI) were used to assess relative inference. RESULTS: Thirty-five RCTs (7777 patients) were included. Overall, 3496 (44.9%) underwent Lichtenstein, 1269 (16.3%) TAPP, and 3012 (38.8%) TEP repair. The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) was significantly lower for minimally invasive repair at <12 hours, 24 hours, and 48 hours. Postoperative chronic pain [TAPP vs Lichtenstein (RR = 0.36; 95% CrI 0.15-0.81) and TEP vs Lichtenstein (RR = 0.36; 95% CrI 0.21-0.54)] and return to work/activities [TAPP vs Lichtenstein (WMD = -3.3; 95% CrI -4.9 to -1.8) and TEP vs Lichtenstein (WMD = -3.6; 95% CrI -4.9 to -2.4)] were significantly reduced for minimally invasive approaches. Wound hematoma and infection were significantly reduced for minimally invasive approaches, whereas no differences were found for seroma, hernia recurrence, and hospital length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive TAPP and TEP repair seem associated with significantly reduced early postoperative pain, return to work/activities, chronic pain, hematoma, and wound infection compared to the Lichtenstein tension-free repair. Hernia recurrence, seroma, and hospital length of stay seem similar across treatments.

Diaphragmatic herniation after esophagogastric surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The anatomy of the esophageal hiatus is altered during esophagogastric surgery with an increased risk of postoperative hiatus hernia (HH). The purpose of this article was to examine the current evidence on the surgical management and outcomes associated with HH after esophagogastric surgery for cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Web of Science, PubMed, and EMBASE data sets were consulted. RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies were included for a total of 404 patients requiring surgical treatment for HH after esophagogastric surgery. The age of the patients ranged from 35 to 85 years, and the majority were males (82.3%). Abdominal pain, nausea/vomiting, and dyspnea were the commonly reported symptoms. An emergency repair was required in 51.5%, while a minimally invasive repair was performed in 48.5%. Simple suture cruroplasty and mesh reinforced repair were performed in 65% and 35% of patients, respectively. The duration between the index procedure and HH repair ranged from 3 to 144 months, with the majority (67%) occurring within 24 months. The estimated pooled prevalence rates of pulmonary complications, anastomotic leak, overall morbidity, and mortality were 14.1% (95% CI = 8.0-22.0%), 1.4% (95% CI = 0.8-2.2%), 35% (95% CI = 20.0-54.0%), and 5.0% (95% CI = 3.0-8.0%), respectively. The postoperative follow-up ranged from 1 to 110 months (mean = 24) and the pooled prevalence of HH recurrence was 16% (95% CI = 13.0-21.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence reporting data for HH after esophagogastric surgery is narrow. The overall postoperative pulmonary complications, overall morbidity, and mortality are 14%, 35%, and 5%, respectively. Additional studies are required to define indications and treatment algorithm and evaluate the best technique for crural repair at the index operation in an attempt to minimize the risk of HH.

Magnetic sphincter augmentation device removal: surgical technique and results at medium-term follow-up.

BACKGROUND: The magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) device has become a common option for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Knowledge of MSA-related complications, indications for removal, and techniques are puzzled. With this study, we aimed to evaluate indications, techniques for removal, surgical approach, and outcomes with MSA removal. METHODS: This is an observational singe-center study. Patients were followed up regularly with endoscopy, pH monitoring, and assessed for specific gastroesophageal reflux disease health-related quality of life (GERD-HRQL) and generic short-form 36 (SF-36) quality of life. RESULTS: Five patients underwent MSA explant. Four patients were males and the median age was 47 years (range 44-55). Heartburn, epigastric/chest pain, and dysphagia were commonly reported. The median implant duration was 46 months (range 31-72). A laparoscopic approach was adopted in all patients. Intraoperative findings included normal anatomy (40%), herniation in the mediastinum (40%), and erosion (20%). The most common anti-reflux procedures were Dor (n = 2), Toupet (n = 2), and anterior partial fundoplication (n = 1). The median operative time was 145 min (range 60-185), and the median hospital length of stay was 4 days (range 3-6). The median postoperative follow-up was 41 months (range 12-51). At the last follow-up, 80% of patients were off PPI; the GERD-HRQL and SF-36 questionnaire were improved with DeMeester score and esophageal acid exposure normalization. CONCLUSION: The MSA device can be safely explanted through a single-stage laparoscopic procedure. Tailoring a fundoplication, according to preoperative patient symptoms and intraoperative findings, seems feasible and safe with a promising trend toward improved symptoms and quality of life.

Surgical treatment of recalcitrant gastroesophageal reflux disease in patients with systemic sclerosis: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is frequently seen in patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc). Long-standing GERD may cause esophagitis, long-segment strictures, and Barrett's esophagus and may worsen pre-existing pulmonary fibrosis with an increased risk of end-stage lung disease. Surgical treatment of recalcitrant GERD remains controversial. The purpose of this systematic review was to summarize the current data on surgical treatment of recalcitrant GERD in SSc patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic literature review according to PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines. PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases were consulted. RESULTS: A total of 101 patients were included from 7 studies. The age ranged from 34 to 61 years and the majority were females (73.5%). Commonly reported symptoms were heartburn (92%), regurgitation (77%), and dysphagia (74%). Concurrent pulmonary disease was diagnosed in 58% of patients. Overall, 63 patients (62.4%) underwent open fundoplication, 17 (16.8%) laparoscopic fundoplication, 15 (14.9%) Roux en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), and 6 (5.9%) esophagectomy. The postoperative follow-up ranged from 12 to 65 months. Recurrent symptoms were described in up to 70% and 30% of patients undergoing fundoplication and RYGB, respectively. Various symptoms were reported postoperatively depending on the type of surgical procedures, anatomy of the valve, need for esophageal lengthening, and follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The treatment of recalcitrant GERD in SSc patients is challenging. Esophagectomy should be reserved to selected patients. Minimally invasive RYGB appears feasible and safe with promising preliminary short-term results. Current evidence is scarce while a definitive indication about the most appropriate surgical treatment is lacking.

Red blood cell transfusions and the survival in patients with cancer undergoing curative surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Allogenic red blood cell transfusions exert a potential detrimental effect on the survival when delivered to cancer patients undergoing surgery with curative intent. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the association between perioperative allogenic red blood cell transfusions and risk of death as well as relapse after surgery for localized solid tumors. PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and EMBASE were searched from inception to March 2019 for studies reporting the outcome of patients receiving transfusions during radical surgery for non-metastatic cancer. Risk of death and relapse were pooled to provide an adjusted hazard ratio with a 95% confidence interval [hazard ratio (HR) (95% confidence interval {CI})]. Mortality and relapse associated with perioperative transfusion due to cancer surgery were evaluated among participants (n = 123 studies). Overall, RBC transfusions were associated with an increased risk of death [HR = 1.50 (95% CI 1.42-1.57), p < 0.01] and relapse [HR = 1.36 (95% CI 1.26-1.46), p < 0.01]. The survival was reduced even in cancer at early stages [HR = 1.45 (1.36-1.55), p < 0.01]. In cancer patients undergoing surgery, red blood cell transfusions reduced the survival and increased the risk of relapse. Transfusions based on patients' blood management policy should be performed by applying a more restrictive policy, and the planned preoperative administration of iron, if necessary, should be pursued.

Hospital staff practical skills and theoretical knowledge in inhaled aerosol therapy: a single centre cross-sectional observational study.

Inhaled therapy is widely used for treatment of many respiratory disorders. Drug delivery in lungs is dependent on the correct use of aerosol devices and patients' training is vital for a correct therapy administration. Therefore, is very important to assess the skills of professionals involved in training patients to the correct use of inhaler devices. The aim of this study was to check the practical skills and the theoretical knowledge of health care personnel in our University Hospital in using aerosol therapy and to determine differences among professional figures in the management of inhaler devices. Three hundred and fifteen (315) volunteers including physicians, residents, nurses and respiratory physiotherapists were enrolled; an independent professional, not working in our University Hospital, assessed their theoretical knowledge related to aerosol throughout a questionnaire. Practical skills were assessed through placebo simulation with the devices that participants declared to use frequently with patients. None of the respondents correctly answered all questions evaluating theoretical knowledge on the proper use of aerosol therapy. Respiratory physiotherapists obtained significantly better results with 17.2 (1.3) average points compared to 10.3 (3.7) obtained by doctors, 9.0 (3.0) by nurses and 9.1 (4.5) by residents. Analysing in detail physicians' results, pneumologists showed better theoretical knowledge than other specialists. Concerning the practical skills, about 80% of those stating they knew how to use metered dose inhalers, made mistakes in the basic steps for proper inhalation technique and over 50% of respondents were unable to properly simulate placebo administration of dry powder inhalers. Also here, respiratory physiotherapists and pneumologists had significant better performances, when compared to other health professionals. Our data are in line with those published in the literature in other international clinical settings, noting inadequate practical and theoretical knowledge of the available devices for aerosol therapy.

Assessment of enthesis in patients with psoriatic arthritis and fibromyalgia using clinical examination and ultrasound.

OBJECTIVES: The primary aim of this study was to compare the prevalence of clinical and particularly ultrasonographic signs of enthesitis in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA), fibromyalgia (FM), or both. The secondary aim was to assess the impact of FM on disease activity and clinimetric scores. METHODS: This single-centre, observational cross-sectional study involved 101 consenting patients: 39 with PsA (CASPAR criteria), 23 with FM (2016 criteria), and 39 with both. Standard PsA and FM clinical, laboratory and clinimetric data were recorded, and entheses were assessed using the Leeds Enthesitis Index (LEI) and the Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score (MASES). All of the patients underwent B mode (grey scale) and Power Doppler (PD) ultrasonography bilaterally at the insertions of the quadriceps tendons, the proximal and distal patellar tendons, the Achilles tendons, and the plantar fascia insertions of the calcaneus, to evaluate the thickness of entheses, the hypoechogenicity, the presence of bony erosions, the enthesophytes, and the bursitis. The US findings were scored using the Glasgow Ultrasound Enthesitis Scoring System (GUESS). The data were statistically analysed using univariate and multivariate analyses, and receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves, concentrating on the shared clinical features of the two condition. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients as a whole was 53.6±9.47 years. Females accounted for 64.1% of the PsA patients (disease duration 9.13 years), 95.6% of the FM patients (disease duration 5.09 years), and 92.3% of the patients with PsA-FM (disease duration 7.9 years). There were no between-group differences in the patients' body mass index (BMI). In accordance with the study inclusion criteria, none of the FM subjects had PsA or reported any personal or family history of psoriasis. The mean Psoriasis Area and Severity Index was 2.3±3.1 in the PsA group, and 1.2±2.45 in the PsA-FM group. Clinical evidence of enthesopathy was found in 43% of the patients with PsA, 51.3% of those with PsA-FM, and 50.8% of those with FM, while US entheseal abnormalities were detected in respectively 77%, 74% and 35%. The median Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index was significantly higher in the patients with PsA-FM than in those with PsA (7.7 [IQR 2.1] vs. 5.0 [IQR 3.8]; p<0.001), as was the median ESR-assessed Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (3.69 [IQR 1.00] vs. 2.82 [IQR 1.55; p=0.004), or CRP- assessed (median 3.27 [IQR 1.07] vs. 2.66 [IQR 1.26]; p=0.006). There was a correlation between GUESS scores and disease duration in the patients with PsA (rho=0.37; p=0.019, 95% CI 0.10-0.61) or PsA-FM (rho=0.38; p=0.016, 95% CI 0.10-0.61), but not in the FM group, and GUESS scores correlated with BMI (rho=0.2; p=0.05, 95% CI 0.00-0.37) and dyslipidemia (rho=0.34; p=0.006, 95% CI 0.11-0.58) in all three groups. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a clinical examination and clinimetric scores alone may overestimate active enthesitis in FM patients. As US was more frequently positive in patients with PsA and PsA-FM than in those with FM, it may be useful in differentiating pain due to enthesitis from entheseal pain due to FM.