Intra-versus extracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic right colectomy: a meta-analysis of 3699 patients.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC) has become a gold standard. However, a major current concern is still whether anastomosis should be performed extracorporeally or entirely laparoscopically. This meta-analysis assesses and compares peri- and postoperative outcomes of intracorporeal anastomosis (IA) versus extracorporeal anastomosis (EA) in LRC. METHODS: The research used the PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases for studies comparing IA with EA during LRC. Our main endpoint was parietal abscess. Secondary endpoints were 30-day morbidity, mortality, time to onset of gas and stools, length of stay, number of lymph nodes removed and postoperative incisional hernia rates. The MINORS criteria were used to evaluate the quality of the studies examined. RESULTS: Twenty-four articles comprising 3699 patients, published between 2004 and 2020, were included in this meta-analysis. After sensitivity analysis, IA was associated with a decrease in parietal abscesses (OR 0.526, IC 0.333-0.832, p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis finds that IA allows a decrease in parietal abscesses and time to first gas and stools, surgical repair and length of stay, with similar overall complications.

Intolerance to early oral feeding in enhanced recovery after colorectal surgery: an early red flag?

AIM: Enhanced recovery programmes (ERPs) involve early postoperative oral feeding. The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that intolerance to early feeding was associated with a complicated postoperative course. METHOD: A retrospective cohort analysis of the prospective multicentre database developed by the Francophone Group for Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (GRACE) was undertaken. Seventy-one centres in Belgium, France and Switzerland participated in the study. All patients were encouraged to eat within 24 h after surgery. Patients were separated into two groups according to whether early feeding was well tolerated (WT) or poorly tolerated (PT). The primary outcome measure was overall postoperative complications. Secondary outcome measures were unplanned reoperation, early mobilization rate and duration of postoperative hospital stay. RESULTS: Among the cohort of 3034 patients, early feeding was WT in 2614 patients (WT group) and PT in 420 patients (PT group). There were significantly more postoperative complications in the PT group than in the WT group (52.1% vs 17.0%, respectively; P = 0.001), namely more unplanned reoperations, less early mobilization and longer postoperative hospital stay. Multivariate analyses confirmed that PT early feeding was the main and dominant independent factor for postoperative complications [OR 4.47 (95% CI3.49-5.72); P < 0.001], more unplanned reoperations and longer hospital stay. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates a close relationship between intolerance to early feeding and a complicated postoperative course. Whenever this simple very early red flag is observed, discharge should not be planned until postoperative complications have been ruled out.

Correction to: Incidence and Risk Factors for Severity of Postoperative Ileus After Colorectal Surgery: A Prospective Registry Data Analysis.

In the list of participating investigators that appears in Acknowledgements, one of the investigators names appears incorrectly.

Incidence and Risk Factors for Severity of Postoperative Ileus After Colorectal Surgery: A Prospective Registry Data Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Defining severe postoperative ileus in terms of consequences could help physicians standardize the management of this condition. The recently described classification based on consequences requires further investigation. The aim of this study was to obtain a snapshot of postoperative ileus in patients undergoing colorectal surgery within enhanced recovery programs and to identify factors associated with non-severe and severe postoperative ileus. METHODS: This prospective registry data analysis was conducted in 40 centers in five different countries. A total of 786 patients scheduled for colorectal surgery within enhanced recovery programs were included. The primary endpoint was the incidence rate of postoperative ileus as defined by Vather et al. RESULTS: A total of 121 patients experienced postoperative ileus (15.4%). Non-severe POI occurred in 48 patients (6.1%), and severe postoperative ileus occurred in 73 patients (9.3%). In multivariate analysis, the male gender and intra-abdominal complications were associated with severe postoperative ileus: odd ratio (OR) = 2.03 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.14-3.59], p = 0.01 and OR = 3.60 [95% CI 1.75-7.40], p < 0.0001, respectively. Conversely, open laparotomy and urinary retention were associated with non-severe POI: OR = 3.03 [95% CI 1.37-6.72], p = 0.006 and OR = 2.70 [95% CI 0.89-8.23], p = 0.08, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative ileus occurred in 15% of patients after colorectal surgery within enhanced recovery programs. For 60% of patients, this was considered severe. The physiopathology of these two entities could be different, severe POI being linked to intraabdominal complication, while non-severe POI being linked with risk factors for "primary" POI. The physician should pay attention to male patients having POI after colorectal surgery and look for features evocating intraabdominal complications.

Is an enhanced recovery program (ERP) after rectal surgery as feasible as after colonic surgery? A multicentre Francophone study of 870 rectal resections.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery program (ERP) is well-established in colorectal surgery. Rectal surgery (RS) is known to be associated with high morbidity and prolonged hospital stay, which might explain why ERPs are less applied in this specific group of patients. The aim of this large-scale study was to assess the feasibility of an ERP in RS compared with colonic surgery. METHODS: This study was a retrospective analysis of a prospective database including 3740 patients eligible for colorectal resection from February 2014 to January 2017 in 75 European Francophone centres. Patients were divided into two groups (colon group C vs. rectum group R). The main endpoint was compliance with ERP components. A subgroup analysis was performed in patients for whom a defunctioning stoma (DS) was required after RS. RESULTS: A total of 3740 patients were included. There were 2870 patients in group C and 870 patients in group R. The overall compliance rate for ERPs was 81.71% in group C and 79.09% in group R. Patients were significantly less mobilized within 24 h in group R. Specific recommendations for RS concerning bowel preparation and abdominal drainage were significantly less implemented. Overall morbidity was significantly higher in group R. Mean length of stay (LOS) was significantly shorter in group C. In the sub-group analysis, a DS was significantly associated with fewer compliance with early mobilization and early feeding, leading to significantly longer LOS (group R). CONCLUSION: ERP is safe and effective in RS, despite the well-known higher morbidity and LOS compared with colonic surgery. DS could be a limiting factor in ERP implementation after RS.

Consensus guidelines for enhanced recovery after gastrectomy: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Application of evidence-based perioperative care protocols reduces complication rates, accelerates recovery and shortens hospital stay. Presently, there are no comprehensive guidelines for perioperative care for gastrectomy. METHODS: An international working group within the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society assembled an evidence-based comprehensive framework for optimal perioperative care for patients undergoing gastrectomy. Data were retrieved from standard databases and personal archives. Evidence and recommendations were classified according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system and were discussed until consensus was reached within the group. The quality of evidence was rated 'high', 'moderate', 'low' or 'very low'. Recommendations were graded as 'strong' or 'weak'. RESULTS: The available evidence has been summarized and recommendations are given for 25 items, eight of which contain procedure-specific evidence. The quality of evidence varies substantially and further research is needed for many issues to improve the strength of evidence and grade of recommendations. CONCLUSION: The present evidence-based framework provides comprehensive advice on optimal perioperative care for the patient undergoing gastrectomy and facilitates multi-institutional prospective cohort registries and adequately powered randomized trials for further research.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of enhanced recovery after pancreatic surgery with particular emphasis on pancreaticoduodenectomies.

BACKGROUND: In the past decade, Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) protocols have been implemented in several fields of surgery. With these protocols, a faster recovery and shorter hospital stay can be accomplished without an increase in morbidity or mortality. The purpose of this study was to review systematically the evidence for implementation of an ERAS protocol in pancreatic resections, with particular emphasis on pancreaticoduodenectomies (PDs). METHODS: A systematic search was performed in Medline, Embase, Pubmed, CINAHL, and the Cochrane library for papers describing an ERAS program in adult patients undergoing elective pancreatic surgery published between January 1966 and December 2012. The primary outcome measure was postoperative length of stay. Secondary outcome measures were time to recovery of normal function, overall postoperative complication rates, readmissions, and mortality. Subsequently, a meta-analysis of outcome measures focusing on PD was conducted. This systematic review and meta-analysis was performed according to the PRISMA statement. RESULTS: The literature search produced 248 potentially relevant papers. Of these, eight papers met the predefined inclusion criteria: five case-control studies, two retrospective studies, and one prospective study, describing a total of 1,558 patients. Only three of the studies reported data on discharge criteria and assessed time to recovery and return to normal function. Implementation of an ERAS protocol led in four of five comparative studies to a significant decrease in length of stay (reduction of 2-6 days in different studies). Meta-analysis of four studies focusing on PDs showed that there was a significant difference in complication rates in favor of the ERAS group (absolute risk difference 8.2 %, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 2.0-14.4, p = 0.008). Introduction of an ERAS protocol did not result in an increase in mortality or readmissions. Delayed gastric emptying and incidence of pancreatic fistula did not differ significantly between groups. All studies reporting on hospital costs showed a decrease after implementation of ERAS. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review suggests that using an ERAS protocol in pancreatic resections may help to shorten hospital length of stay without compromising morbidity and mortality. This seemed to apply to distal pancreatectomy, total pancreatectomy, and PD. Meta-analysis was performed for those studies focusing on PD and showed that there were no differences in readmission or mortality. Morbidity rates were significantly lower for patients managed according ERAS principles.

Obesity, sleeve gastrectomy and gastro-esophageal reflux disease.

Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the most frequently performed operation for morbid obesity in the world. In spite of its demonstrated efficacy, the Achilles' Heel of this procedure seems to be either pre-existing or de novo gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) with its potential complications such as peptic esophagitis, Barrett's esophagus and, in the long-term, esophageal adenocarcinoma. According to factual literature, it appears clear that Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is the preferred choice in case of pre-existing GERD or hiatal hernia discovered during preoperative workup for bariatric surgery. Nonetheless, certain authors propose performance of SG with an associated antireflux procedure such as Nissen fundoplication. Strict endoscopic surveillance is recommended after bariatric surgery. Revisional surgery (conversion of SG into Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB)) is the treatment of choice for patients who develop GERD after SG when conservative treatment (modified lifestyle and proton pump inhibitors) has failed. Lastly, with regard to the risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma after SG, large scale studies with adequate follow-up are necessary to come to factual conclusions. In all cases, the management of this conundrum remains a major technical challenge that has to be taken in consideration in future years, especially because of the current expansion of bariatric surgery.

Umbrella reviews: A new tool to synthesize scientific evidence in surgery.

Researchers and practitioners are faced with an exponential increase in the number of systematic reviews (SRs) (with or without meta-analysis), a so-called `secondary' research method that synthesizes data from primary research. This growing number, sometimes with discordant results on the same subject or with non-conclusions, has led to the introduction of the concept of reviews to synthesize SR in order to combine scientific knowledge useful to practitioners. These so-called ``umbrella reviews'' (UR) constitute a new tertiary research tool. Surgical research is no exception to this development but umbrella surgical reviews remain relatively rare. Any UR must be transparent and meet rigorous methodological criteria. The UR could thus provide answers to practical questions in the field of surgery, but only on condition that the bias of the included SRs is limited. Let us not forget that the base requirement of clinical surgical research remains the good methodological quality of clinical studies (primary research). Only thus can SRs or URs (secondary or tertiary research) be more useful and decisive.

Umbrella review of the efficacy of perioperative immunonutrition in visceral surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Immunonutrition (IN) is used in major visceral surgery to reduce postoperative complications. This umbrella review (review of reviews) collects and analyses data on the efficacy of perioperative IN. METHODS: The review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Inclusion criteria were meta-analyses comparing IN with normal diet or isocaloric isonitrogenous feeding. The primary outcome was infectious complications. Secondary outcomes were overall morbidity, hospital length of stay and mortality. Methodological quality was evaluated using AMSTAR-2. Overlap and certainty of evidence (GRADE) were assessed. RESULTS: Twenty meta-analyses (MAs) were included in the umbrella review: eleven on various abdominal surgeries (one MA was considered twice) and eight on pancreatic, oesophageal, hepatic, or colorectal surgeries. Overall, IN was associated with significantly fewer postoperative infectious complications (OR 0.60 [0.54-0.65], random effect model) but with substantial heterogeneity (I2 = 64%), and less postoperative morbidity (OR 0.78 [0.74-0.81], I2 = 30.3%). Excluding three MAs with heterogeneity did not alter the results. The overlap between the MAs was slight, with a corrected covered area of 0.13. There was no significant difference in the timing of IN (preoperative, postoperative or perioperative). CONCLUSION: This umbrella review confirms the beneficial effect of IN in visceral surgery. Some practical questions remain unanswered: optimal timing of IN, in which surgical speciality it is best used, and its utility in enhanced recovery programmes. REGISTRATION IN PROSPERO: CRD42021255177.

Evidence-based evaluation of abdominal drainage in pancreatic surgery.

Pancreatic fistula is the most common and dreaded complication after pancreatic resection, responsible for high morbidity and mortality (2 to 30%). Prophylactic drainage of the operative site is usually put in place to decrease and/or detect postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) early. However, this policy is currently debated and the data from the literature are unclear. The goal of this update is to analyze the most recent evidence-based data with regard to prophylactic abdominal drainage after pancreatic resection (pancreatoduodenectomy [PD] or distal pancreatectomy [PD]). This systematic review of the literature between 1990 and 2020 sought to answer the following questions: should drainage of the operative site after pancreatectomy be routine or adapted to the risk of POPF? If a drainage is used, how long should it remain in the abdomen, what criteria should be used to decide to remove it, and what type of drainage should be preferred? Has the introduction of laparoscopy changed our practice? The literature seems to indicate that it is not possible to recommend the omission of routine drainage after pancreatic resection. By contrast, an approach based on the risk of POPF using the fistula risk score seems beneficial. When a drain is placed, early removal (within 5 days) seems feasible based on clinical, laboratory (C-reactive protein, leukocyte count, neutrophile/lymphocyte ratio, dosage and dynamic of amylase in the drains on D1, D3±D5) and radiological findings. This is in line with the development of enhanced recovery programs after pancreatic surgery. Finally, this literature review did not find any specific data relative to mini-invasive pancreatic surgery.

Conceptual innovation: 4P Medicine and 4P surgery.

The aim of this article is to present the concept of "4P medicine" i.e., medicine that is Personalized, Preventive, Predictive, and Participatory. We will discuss the evolution from cure-focused traditional medicine toward personalized medicine based on genome analysis. This new approach is illustrated by several clinical examples such as prevention of cardiovascular diseases (primary and secondary), prophylactic cancer surgery, targeted therapies, targeted peri-operative care and patient participation in their care. Finally, it will discuss the impact of this development on the health system of the future and the ethical questions raised by this new approach.

How to reduce failure to rescue after visceral surgery?

Mortality after visceral surgery has decreased owing to progress in surgical techniques, anesthesiology and intensive care. Mortality occurs in 5-10% of patients after major surgery and remains a topic of interest. However, the ratio of mortality after postoperative complications in relation to overall complications varies between hospitals because of failure to rescue at the time of the complication. There are multiple factors that lead to complication-related mortality: they are patient-related, disease-related, but are related, above all, to the timeliness of diagnosis of the complication, the organisational aspects of management in private or public hospitals, hospital volume that corresponds to the centralisation of initial management or to the concept of referral centre in case of complications, to the team spirit, to communication between the health care providers and to the management of the complication itself. Several organisational advances are to be considered, such as the development of shorter hospitalisations and notably ambulatory surgery, as well as enhanced recovery programs. Remote monitoring and the contribution of artificial intelligence must also be evaluated in this context. The reduction of mortality after visceral surgery rests on several tactics: prevention of potentially lethal complications, the all-important reduction of failure to rescue, and risk management before, during and after hospitalisations that are increasingly shorter.