A Multidisciplinary Approach to Oncological Resections with Vascular Surgeons Improves Patient Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Oncological resections have become more radical in pursuit of disease free margins. Consequently, vascular structures may be injured inadvertently or purposely resected, with or without subsequent reconstruction. Thus, vascular surgeons have an increasing role in oncological surgery. The present authors sought to review their experience and examine the effect of timing of referral to a Vascular Surgeon (VS) on patient and surgical outcomes following tumour resection. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of a prospectively maintained database at a public hospital network in Adelaide, Australia. All cases of collaboration between a VS and other surgeons for resection of cancer or non-malignant tumour were included. Medical records and operative, pathological, and transfusion data were reviewed, with particular attention to referring team, timing of VS referral (pre- or intra-operative), and the operative role of the VS. RESULTS: Seventy-two cases were identified from January 2004 to June 2018. The most common collaborators were General Surgery and Urology. Of the cases, 86% were elective and 71% were referred to the VS pre-operatively. Pre-operative referral was associated with a predominant VS role of dissection and exposure. Pre-operative referral was associated with lower odds of vessel repair and reconstruction compared with intra-operative referral (adjusted OR = 0.20; 95% CI 0.04-0.93; p = .040) and a lower incidence of positive surgical margins (35% vs. 80%, p = .028). The rate of blood product units required was lower among pre-operative referrals relative to intra-operative referrals, but the effect of timing was not significant after adjustment for potential confounders (IRR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.26-2.44; p = .70). CONCLUSION: Pre-operative planned involvement of vascular surgery in oncological operations can improve surgical outcomes, with additional expected benefits for surgical training and cross specialty collaboration.

Early follow-up colonoscopy after colorectal cancer resection detects significant pathology.

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy is a key component of surveillance after colorectal cancer (CRC) resection. Surveillance intervals for colonoscopy vary across the world, with a limited evidence-base to support guidelines. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the timing and outcome of colonoscopies after CRC resection. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study on prospectively collected data. Included adult patients under surveillance following CRC resection. Patients with organ transplant, inflammatory bowel disease or colon cancer syndromes were excluded. The outcomes of the first (up to) three follow-up colonoscopies were audited and classified for presence of advanced neoplasia (advanced adenoma or adenocarcinoma). RESULTS: 980 patients underwent at least one follow-up colonoscopy with a median time to first colonoscopy of 12.4 months. The findings included 2.7% CRC and 13.2% advanced adenoma. Older age, stage IV disease, and synchronous cancers at surgery were significantly associated with a finding of advanced neoplasia at first colonoscopy. 562 patients underwent a second colonoscopy (median of 35 months after the first surveillance colonoscopy) with findings of 1.8% CRC and 11.4% advanced adenoma. Advanced adenoma on prior colonoscopy was associated with finding advanced neoplasia at the second colonoscopy. 288 patients underwent a third colonoscopy (median of 37 months from the preceding colonoscopy), with similar outcomes of advanced neoplasia being associated with advanced adenoma at the previous colonoscopy. 43 (4.4%) patients developed CRC whilst on surveillance. CONCLUSIONS: Timely surveillance after CRC resection is important for detecting advanced neoplasia, and prolonged intervals between colonoscopies in the early years after surgery should be avoided.

Long-term outcomes of breast reconstruction and the need for revision surgery.

BACKGROUND: Breast reconstruction (BR) often forms part of a patient's breast cancer journey. Revision surgery may be required to maintain the integrity of a BR, although this is not commonly reported in the literature. Different reconstructive methods may have differing requirements for revision. It is important for patients and surgeons to understand the factors leading to the need for revision surgery. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study analyses BRs performed by oncoplastic breast surgeons in public and private settings between 2005 and 2014, with follow-up until December 2018. Surgical and patient factors were examined, including types of BR, complications and reasons for revision surgery. RESULTS: A total of 390 women with 540 reconstructions were included, with a median follow-up of 61 months. Twenty-eight percent (151/540) of reconstructions required at least one revision operation. Overall, implant-based reconstructions (direct-to-implant [DTI] and two-stage expander-implant) had a higher revision rate compared to pedicled flap reconstructions (odds ratio 1.91, 95% confidence interval 1.08, 3.38). DTI reconstructions had the highest odds, and pedicled flap without implants the lowest odds of requiring revision. Post-reconstruction radiotherapy increased the chance of revision surgery, while pre-reconstruction radiotherapy did not. Odds of revision were higher in implant-based reconstructions compared to pedicled flap reconstructions that had radiotherapy. Other factors increasing the rates of revision surgery were being a current smoker and post-operative infection. CONCLUSION: Almost one-third of reconstructive patients require revision surgery. Autologous pedicled flap reconstructions have lower rates of revision compared to implant-based reconstructions. Radiotherapy increases the need for revision surgery, particularly in implant-based reconstructions.

Lessons learned from relocating an acute surgical unit to a new quaternary referral centre in Adelaide, South Australia: a tale of two hospitals.

BACKGROUND: On 4 September 2017, patient care was relocated from one quaternary hospital that was closing, to another proximate greenfield site in Adelaide, Australia, this becoming the new Royal Adelaide Hospital. There are currently no data to inform how best to transition hospitals. We conducted a 12-week prospective study of admissions under our acute surgical unit to determine the impact on our key performance indicators. We detail our results and describe compensatory measures deployed around the move. METHODS: Using a standard proforma, data were collected on key performance indicators for acute surgical unit patients referred by the emergency department (ED). This was supplemented by data obtained from operative management software and coding data from medical records to build a database for analysis. RESULTS: Five hundred and eight patients were admitted during the study period. Significant delays were seen in times to surgical referral, surgical review and leaving the ED. Closely comparable was time spent in the surgical suite. Uptake of the Ambulatory Care Pathway fell by 67% and the Rapid Access Clinic by 46%. Overall mortality and patient length of stay were not affected. CONCLUSION: We found the interface with ED was most affected. Staff encountered difficulties familiarizing with a new environment and an anecdotally high number of ED presentations. Delays to referral and surgical review resulted in extended patient stay in ED. Once in theatre, care was comparable pre- and post-transition. This was likely from early identification of patients requiring an emergency operation, close consultant surgeon involvement and robust working relationships between surgeons, anaesthetists and nurses.

Care of patients with stomas in general practice.

BACKGROUND: Intestinal stomas are formed for emergency, elective, benign and malignant conditions. They may be temporary or permanent. The complication rates of intestinal stomas are reported as high as 56%. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this article is to provide an overview of intestinal stomas and common related issues, to inform general practitioners (GPs) and improve stoma-related care. DISCUSSION: There are a variety of early and late complications associated with intestinal stomas. It is important that patients have access to an informed GP, stomal therapy nurse and surgeon to provide optimal ongoing care. Good stoma care contributes to good quality of life for patients.

Radical Gastrectomy: Still the Cornerstone of Curative Treatment for Gastric Cancer in the Perioperative Chemotherapy Era-A Single Institute Experience over a Decade.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Most gastric cancer patients now undergo perioperative chemotherapy (POCT) based on the MAGIC trial results. POCT consists of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) as well as postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy. This study assessed the applicability of perioperative chemotherapy and the impact of radical gastrectomy encompassing a detailed lymph-node resection on outcomes of gastric cancer. METHODS: Medical and pathology records of all gastric carcinoma resections were reviewed from 2006 onwards. Pathological details, number of lymph-nodes resected, and proportion of involved nodes, reasons for nonadministration of NACT, complications, recurrence, and survival data were analysed. RESULTS: Only twenty-eight (37.8%) out of 74 patients underwent NACT and only nine completed POCT. NACT was declined due to comorbidities/patient refusal n = 24, early stage n = 14, and emergency presentation n = 8. Patients receiving NACT were much younger. Anastomotic leaks, hospital-mortality, lymph-node yield, and proportion of involved lymph-nodes were similar in both groups. Thirty-two patients died due to recurrence with lymph-node involvement heralding higher recurrence risk and much poorer survival (HR 2.66; p = 0.013). CONCLUSION: More than 60% patients with resectable gastric carcinoma did not undergo NACT. Radical gastrectomy with lymphadenectomy remained the cornerstone of treatment in this period.

Neutropenia and thrombocytopenia after cytoreductive surgery and heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Neutropenia and thrombocytopenia are well-recognised complications of systemic chemotherapy. In cytoreductive surgery and heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), the interplay between surgical factors and systemic toxicity of chemotherapeutics must be considered when considering post-operative haematological outcomes. We sought to quantify the incidence of these events in cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC at our institution. METHODS: We conducted a single centre, a retrospective cohort study of 50 consecutive patients who underwent cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC from 2002 to 2015. Routine haematological data were analysed and complications classified according to CTCAE 4.0. Subgroup analysis was undertaken to compare those who received or not perioperative systemic chemotherapy. RESULTS: The rate of all-grade post-procedure neutropenia was 4 % (n=2/50); one grade 1, and one grade 4 neutropenia. The patient with grade 4 neutropenia died day 57 post-operatively, despite subsequent growth factor support. Eight percent (n=4/50) of patients had thrombocytopenia preoperatively. The overall rate of post-procedure thrombocytopenia was 46 % with grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia of 4 %. If not present preoperatively, thrombocytopenia onset was on day 1 or 2 post-operatively, with a median duration of 3 days. CONCLUSIONS: Intraperitoneal delivery of chemotherapy as HIPEC can cause haematological toxicity with potentially fatal outcomes. However, the incidence of neutropenia and thrombocytopenia after CRS and HIPEC is low.