Long-term quality of life after hybrid robot-assisted and open Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for esophageal cancer in a single center: a comparative analysis.

PURPOSE: Due to improved survival of esophageal cancer patients, long-term quality of life (QoL) is increasingly gaining importance. The aim of this study is to compare QoL outcomes between open Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (Open-E) and a hybrid approach including laparotomy and a robot-assisted thoracic phase (hRob-E). Additionally, a standard group of healthy individuals serves as reference. METHODS: With a median follow-up of 36 months after hRob-E (n = 28) and 40 months after Open-E (n = 43), patients' QoL was assessed using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30) and the EORTC Esophagus specific QoL questionnaire 18 (QLQ-OES18). RESULTS: Patients showed similar clinical-pathological characteristics, but hRob-E patients had significantly higher ASA scores at surgery (p < 0.001). Patients and healthy controls reported similar global health status and emotional and cognitive functions. However, physical functioning of Open-E patients was significantly reduced compared to healthy controls (p = 0.019). Operated patients reported reduced role and social functioning, fatigue, nausea and vomiting, dyspnea, and diarrhea. A trend towards a better pain score after hRob-E compared to Open-E emerged (p = 0.063). Regarding QLQ-OES18, hRob-E- and Open-E-treated patients similarly reported eating problems, reflux, and troubles swallowing saliva. CONCLUSIONS: The global health status is not impaired after esophagectomy. Despite higher ASA scores, QoL of hRob-E patients is similar to that of patients operated with Open-E. Moreover, patients after hRob-E appear to have a better score regarding physical functioning and a better pain profile than patients after Open-E, indicating a benefit of minimally invasive surgery.

Omission of perioperative morphine reduces postoperative pain in proctological interventions: a single-center analysis.

There is an increase in outpatient procedures and this trend will continue in the future. For hemorrhoidectomy, it is the standard of treatment in many health care systems. Perioperative management including adequate pain control is of paramount importance to ensure successful ambulatory surgery. This study investigates the role and effect of morphine compared to short-acting opiates applied before, during, or after proctological interventions and with focus on hemorrhoidectomy. A retrospective analysis of a prospective database was conducted comparing two populations. The control cohort received morphine (Yes-Mô) intra- and postoperatively, while the intervention group did not receive morphine (No-Mô) between January 2018 and January 2020. Both cohorts were balanced by propensity score matching. The outcomes were postoperative pain measured by numeric ratings scale (NRS) one hour postoperatively, pain 24 h postoperatively, success rate of outpatient management, and complication rate including postoperative nausea and vomiting as well as urinary retention. The intervention population comprised 54 patients and the control group contained 79 patients. One hour after surgery, patients in No-Mô reported lower NRS (1.44 ± 1.41) compared to Yes-Mô (2.48 ± 2.30) (p = 0.029). However, there was no difference in NRS 24 h postoperatively (No-Mô: 1.61 ± 1.41 vs Yes-Mô: 1.63 ± 1.72; p = 0.738). 100% of No-Mô was managed as outpatients while only 50% of Yes-Mô was dismissed on the day of the operation (p = < 0.001). There was no difference in postoperative complications (including postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and urinary retention) between the two groups (PONV No-Mô 7.4% vs Yes-Mô 5.6%, p = 1.0 and urinary retention No-Mô 3.7% vs Yes-Mô 7.4%, p = 0.679). No-Mô received an oral morphine equivalent of 227.25 ± 140.35 mg intraoperatively and 11.02 ± 18.02 mg postoperatively. Yes-Mô received 263.17 ± 153.60 mg intraoperatively and 15.97 ± 14.17 mg postoperatively. The difference in received morphine equivalent between the groups was not significant after matching for the intraoperative (p = 0.212) and postoperative (p = 0.119) received equivalent. Omission of perioperative morphine is a viable but yet not understood method for reducing postoperative pain. Omission of morphine leads to a lower use of total morphine equivalent to attain satisfactory analgesia. The reduction of the overall opiate load and using opiates with a very short half-life potentially leads to a reduction of side effects like sedation. This in turn promotes discharge of the patient on the day of surgery. Omission of morphine is safe and does not increase postoperative complications.

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in colorectal surgery: implementation is still beneficial despite modern surgical and anesthetic care.

PURPOSE: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols have shown beneficial outcomes in the last 20 years. Nevertheless, simultaneously implemented technical improvements such as minimally invasive access or modified anesthesia care may play a crucial role in optimizing patient outcome. The aim of the study was to investigate the effect of ERAS implementation in a highly specialized colorectal center. METHODS: This is a propensity score matched single-center study comparing the short-term outcomes of patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery in a society-indepedent ERAS program from January 2021 to August 2022 to standard perioperative care from January 2019 to December 2020. RESULTS: Four hundred fifty-six patients were included in the propensity score matched analysis with 228 patients per group (ERAS vs. standard care). Minimally invasive access was used in 80.2% vs. 77.6% (p = 0.88), and there were 16.6% vs. 18.8% (p = 0.92) rectal procedures in the ERAS and standard care group, respectively. Major complications occurred in 10.1% vs. 11.4% (p = 0.65) and anastomotic leakage demanding operative revision in 2.2% vs. 2.6% (p = 0.68) in the ERAS and standard care group, respectively. ERAS lead to a lower number of non-surgical complications compared to standard care (57 vs. 79; p = 0.02). Mean length of stay (LOS) and mean costs per case were lower in ERAS compared to standard care (9.2 ± 5.6 days vs. 12.7 ± 7.4 days, p < 0.01; costs 33,727 ± 15,883 USD vs. 40,309 ± 29,738 USD, p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: The implementation of an ERAS protocol may lead to a reduction of LOS, costs, and a lower number of non-surgical complications even in a highly specialized colorectal unit using modern surgical and anesthetic care. ( ClinialTrials.gov number NCT05773248).

[New and Established Multimodal Therapeutic Strategies in Advanced Rectal Cancer].

INTRODUCTION: Locally advanced rectal cancer has a high risk of local recurrence which can be reduced by multimodal therapy. Neoadjuvant radiotherapy or radiochemotherapy has been established. Nevertheless, this has not proved to improve overall survival. The benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy after neoadjuvant radiotherapy or radiochemotherapy remains unclear. Current studies are investigating total neoadjuvant therapy with different sequences of radiotherapy and chemotherapy followed by rectal resection. This procedure shows high pathologic complete remissions up to 28 % as well as an improvement in disease-free and metastasis-free survival. Under study conditions, in case of clinical complete remission, watchful waiting with close follow-up and surgery can be considered only in case of local tumor recurrence.

Surgical outcomes in elective sigmoid resection for diverticulitis stratified according to indication: a propensity-score matched cohort study with 903 patients.

OBJECTIVE: Weighing the perioperative risk of elective sigmoidectomy is done regardless of the specific diverticulitis classification. The aim of this study is to evaluate surgical outcomes according to the classification grade and the indication. METHODS: All patients who underwent elective colonic resection for diverticulitis during the ten-year study period were included. They were divided into two groups: relative surgery indication (RSI) and absolute surgery indication (ASI). RSI included microabscess and recurrent uncomplicated disease. ASI included macroabscess and recurrent complicated disease. Propensity score-matching (PSM, 1:1) was performed. RESULTS: 585 patients fulfilled criteria for RSI and 318 patients fulfilled criteria for ASI. In the univariate analysis, RSI patients were younger (62 vs. 67.7 years, p < 0.001), had a higher physical status (ASA score 1 or 2 in 80.7% vs. 60.8%, p < 0.001), were less immunosuppressed (3.4% vs. 6.9%, p = 0.021) and suffered less often from coronary heart disease (3.8% vs. 7.2%, p = 0.025). After PSM, 318 RSI vs. 318 ASI patients were selected; baseline characteristics results were comparable. The proportion of planned laparoscopic resection was 93% in RSI versus 75% in ASI (p < 0.001), and the conversion rate to open surgery for laparoscopic resection was 5.0% and 13.8% in RSI versus ASI, respectively (p < 0.001). Major morbidity (Clavien/Dindo ≥ IIIb) occurred less frequently in RSI (3.77% vs. 10%, p = 0.003). A defunctioning stoma was formed in 0.9% and 11.0% in RSI vs ASI, respectively (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The lower risk for postoperative morbidity, the higher chance for a laparoscopic resection and the decreased rate of stoma formation are attributed to patients with recurrent uncomplicated diverticulitis or diverticulitis including a microabscess as compared to patients with complicated diverticulitis or diverticulitis and a macroabscess, and this applies even after PSM.

Robotic Versus Conventional Minimal-Invasive Inguinal Hernia Repair: Study Protocol for a Prospective, Randomized and Blinded Clinical Trial.

Introduction: Inguinal hernia repairs are commonly performed procedures. The surgical techniques vary from open procedures to minimally invasive and robotic-assisted surgeries and include totally extra-peritoneal hernia repairs (TEP) and robotic transabdominal pre-peritoneal hernia repairs (rTAPP). So far, there is no randomized and blinded clinical trial comparing these two surgical approaches. Our objective is to investigate whether rTAPP is associated with a decreased postoperative level of pain. Methods: This is a prospective, single center, randomized and blinded clinical trial. Patients will receive either rTAPP or TEP for uni- or bilateral inguinal hernias. All patients and assessors of the study are blinded to the randomization. The perioperative setting is standardized, and all surgeons will perform both rTAPP and TEP to eliminate surgeons` bias. Primary endpoint is the assessment of pain while coughing 24 hours after surgery using the numeric rating scale (NRS). Secondary endpoints include the assessment of multiple pain and quality of life questionnaires at several defined times according to the study schedule. Furthermore, intra- and postoperative complications, duration until discharge, procedure time, duration of postoperative sick leave and the recurrence rate will be evaluated. Registry: The trial has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under the registry number NCT05216276. Highlights: Trial comparing robotic and conventional minimal-invasive inguinal hernia repairRandomized and patient/assessor blinded trialEarly postoperative pain as primary outcome (24 hours)Secondary patient outcomes include pain and quality of life scores up to one yearFurther secondary outcomes: complications, costs, surgeon's stress level.

Idiopathic lymphatic mesenteric cyst of the proximal jejunum: A case report of an unusual clinical presentation.

INTRODUCTION: Mesenteric cysts are rare lesions of the abdominal cavity or retroperitoneum. The exact etiopathogenesis is still undefined. Clinical manifestation can vary from asymptomatic patients to symptoms of an acute abdomen, making diagnosis very challenging. CASE PRESENTATION: We present a case of a 47-year-old male with new ongoing polyuria and nocturia as well as episodes of slight abdominal pain. An abdominal ultrasound showed ascites and the computer tomography (CT) scan raised suspicion of an internal hernia. We performed a diagnostic laparoscopy and open resection of a cystic lesion of the small bowel mesentery. The histological examination revealed a lymphatic mesenteric cyst. DISCUSSION: Mesenteric cysts represent rare intra-abdominal tumors that physicians should consider as a differential diagnosis in patients with abdominal pain and an intra-abdominal mass. CONCLUSION: Surgery should be advised to prevent the development of complications and to confirm the histopathological diagnosis.

Continuously sutured versus linear-stapled anastomosis in robot-assisted hybrid Ivor Lewis esophageal surgery following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: a single-center cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Esophageal cancer surgery is technically highly demanding. During the past decade robot-assisted surgery has successfully been introduced in esophageal cancer treatment. Various techniques are being evaluated in different centers. In particular, advantages and disadvantages of continuously sutured (COSU) or linear-stapled (LIST) gastroesophageal anastomoses are debated. Here, we comparatively analyzed perioperative morbidities and short-term outcomes in patients undergoing hybrid robot-assisted esophageal surgery following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT), with COSU or LIST anastomoses in a single center. METHODS: Following standardized, effective, nCRT, 53 patients underwent a hybrid Ivor Lewis robot-assisted esophagectomy with COSU (n = 32) or LIST (n = 21) gastroesophageal anastomoses. Study endpoints were intra- and postoperative complications, in-hospital morbidity and mortality. Duration of operation, intensive care unit (ICU) and overall hospital stay were also evaluated. Furthermore, rates of rehospitalization, endoscopies, anastomotic stenosis and recurrence were assessed in a 90-day follow-up. RESULTS: Demographics, ASA scores and tumor characteristics were comparable in the two groups. Median duration of operation was similar in patients with COSU and LIST anastomosis (467 vs. 453 min, IQR 420-521 vs. 416-469, p = 0.0611). Major complications were observed in 4/32 (12.5%) and 4/21 (19%) patients with COSU or LIST anastomosis, respectively (p = 0.697). Anastomotic leakage was observed in 3/32 (9.3%) and 2/21 (9.5%) (p = 1.0) patients with COSU or LIST anastomosis, respectively. Pleural empyema occurred in 1/32 (3.1%) and 2/21 (9.5%) (p = 0.555) patients, respectively. Mortality was similar in the two groups (1/32, 3.1% and 1/21, 4.7%, p = 1.0). Median ICU stay did not differ in patients with COSU or LIST anastomosis (p = 0.255), whereas a slightly, but significantly (p = 0.0393) shorter overall hospital stay was observed for COSU, as compared to LIST cohort (median: 20 vs. 21 days, IQR 17-22 vs. 18-28). CONCLUSIONS: COSU is not inferior to LIST in the performance of gastroesophageal anastomosis in hybrid Ivor Lewis operations following nCRT.

From open Ivor Lewis esophagectomy to a hybrid robotic-assisted thoracoscopic approach: a single-center experience over two decades.

PURPOSE: Robotic-assisted procedures are increasingly used in esophageal cancer surgery. We compared postoperative complications and early oncological outcomes following hybrid robotic-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy (Rob-E) and open Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (Open-E), performed in a single mid-volume center, in the context of evolving preoperative patient and tumor characteristics over two decades. METHODS: We evaluated prospectively collected data from a single center from 1999 to 2020 including 321 patients that underwent Ivor Lewis esophagectomy, 76 underwent Rob-E, and 245 Open-E. To compare perioperative outcomes, a 1:1 case-matched analysis was performed. Endpoints included postoperative morbidity and 30-day mortality. RESULTS: Preoperative characteristics revealed increased rates of adenocarcinomas and wider use of neoadjuvant treatment over time. A larger number of patients with higher ASA grades were operated with Rob-E. In case-matched cohorts, there were no differences in the overall morbidity (69.7% in Rob-E, 60.5% in Open-E, p value 0.307), highest Clavien-Dindo grade per patient (43.4% vs. 38.2% grade I or II, p value 0.321), comprehensive complication index (median 20.9 in both groups, p value 0.401), and 30-day mortality (2.6% in Rob-E, 3.9% in Open-E, p value 1.000). Similar median numbers of lymph nodes were harvested (24.5 in Rob-E, 23 in Open-E, p value 0.204), and comparable rates of R0-status (96.1% vs. 93.4%, p value 0.463) and distribution of postoperative UICC stages (overall p value 0.616) were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates similar postoperative complications and early oncological outcomes after Rob-E and Open-E. However, the selection criteria for Rob-E appeared to be less restrictive than those of Open-E surgery.

Robotic versus laparoscopic low anterior resection following neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy for stage II-III locally advanced rectal cancer: a single-centre cohort study.

Neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy (nCRT) of locally advanced rectal cancer is associated with challenging surgical treatment and increased postoperative morbidity. Robotic technology overcomes laparoscopy limitations by enlarged 3D view, improved anatomical transection accuracy, and physiologic tremor reduction. Patients with UICC stage II-III rectal cancer, consecutively referred to our institution between March 2015 and June 2020 (n = 102) were treated with robotic (Rob-G, n = 38) or laparoscopic (Lap-G, n = 64) low anterior resection (LAR) for total meso-rectal excision (TME) following highly standardized and successful nCRT treatment. Feasibility, conversion rates, stoma creation, morbidity and clinical/pathological outcome were comparatively analysed. Sex, age, BMI, ASA scores, cTN stages and tumour distance from dentate line were comparable in the two groups. Robotic resection was always feasible without conversion to open surgery, which was necessary in 11/64 (17%) Lap-G operations (p = 0.006). Primary or secondary stomata were created in 17/38 (45%) Rob-G and 52/64 (81%) Lap-G patients (p < 0.001). Major morbidity occurred in 7/38 (18.4%) Rob-G and 6/64 (9.3%) Lap-G patients (p = 0.225). Although median operation time was longer in Rob-G compared with Lap-G (376; IQR: 330-417 min vs. 300; IQR: 270-358 min; p < 0.001), the difference was not significant in patients (Rob-G, n = 6; Lap-G, n = 10) with ≥30 BMI (p = 0.106). Number of resected lymph nodes, ypTN staging and circumferential resection margins (CRM) were comparable. Resection was complete in 87% of Rob-G and 89% of Lap-G patients (p = 0.750). Robotic LAR is not inferior to laparoscopic LAR following nCRT. Larger, randomized studies are needed to confirm lower conversion in robotic, compared to laparoscopic resection.

Randomized clinical trial on the use of a colon-occlusion device to assist rectal washout.

BACKGROUND: Transrectal Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery is currently limited by the inherent risk of surgical site infection due to peritoneal contamination after rectotomy. Coloshield has been developed as a temporary colon occlusion device to facilitate rectal washout. However, effectiveness and safety has not been evaluated in humans. METHODS: Twenty-two patients have been randomly assigned to undergo proctological intervention with a rectal washout with and without the use of Coloshield. Patients and assessors were blinded. Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) has been determined 30 min as well as immediately after rectal washout. Feasibility, pain, intra- and postoperative morbidity as well as bowel function and continence 6 weeks after surgery were assessed. RESULTS: BBPS 30 min after rectal washout with and without Coloshield was in mean 2.42 ± 1.02 and 2.12 ± 0.89 (p = 0.042). Mean BBPS immediately after rectal washout was 2.39 ± 1.02 and 2.24 ± 0.66 (p = 0.269). Mean BBPS immediately after rectal washout and 30 min thereafter did not differ (p = 0.711). Coloshield application was feasible without any complications. The median (interquartile range) numeric rating scale for pain 4 h after surgery was 1 (0-1) and 3 (0-4) (p = 0.212). Six weeks after surgery 0/11 and 1/11 patients suffered from evacuation difficulties (p = 1.0) and the median Vaizey-Wexner score was 1 (0-3) and 1 (0-2) (p = 0.360). CONCLUSIONS: Coloshield application in humans is feasible and safe. Slight benefits in rectal preparation by washout are found when Coloshield is used. Colon occlusion by Coloshield for transrectal NOTES should be evaluated within clinical studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02579330.

Optimising functional outcomes in rectal cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND: By improved surgical technique such as total mesorectal excision (TME), multimodal treatment and advances in imaging survival and an increased rate of sphincter preservation have been achieved in rectal cancer surgery. Minimal-invasive approaches such as laparoscopic, robotic and transanal-TME (ta-TME) enhance recovery after surgery. Nevertheless, disorders of bowel, anorectal and urogenital function are still common and need attention. PURPOSE: This review aims at exploring the causes of dysfunction after anterior resection (AR) and the accordingly preventive strategies. Furthermore, the indication for low AR in the light of functional outcome is discussed. The last therapeutic strategies to deal with bowel, anorectal, and urogenital disorders are depicted. CONCLUSION: Functional disorders after rectal cancer surgery are frequent and underestimated. More evidence is needed to define an indication for non-operative management or local excision as alternatives to AR. The decision for restorative resection should be made in consideration of the relevant risk factors for dysfunction. In the case of restoration, a side-to-end anastomosis should be the preferred anastomotic technique. Further high-evidence clinical studies are required to clarify the benefit of intraoperative neuromonitoring. While the function of ta-TME seems not to be superior to laparoscopy, case-control studies suggest the benefits of robotic TME mainly in terms of preservation of the urogenital function. Low AR syndrome is treated by stool regulation, pelvic floor therapy, and transanal irrigation. There is good evidence for sacral nerve modulation for incontinence after low AR.

Image-guided minimally invasive endopancreatic surgery using a computer-assisted navigation system.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive endopancreatic surgery (EPS), performing a pancreatic resection from inside the pancreatic duct, has been proposed as an experimental alternative to duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection in benign diseases such as chronic pancreatitis, but is complicated by difficult spatial orientation when trying to reach structures of interest. This study assessed the feasibility and potential benefits of image-guided EPS using a computer-assisted navigation system in artificial pancreas silicon model. METHODS: A surgical navigation system displayed a 3D reconstruction of the original computed tomography (CT) scan and the endoscope in relation to a selected target structure. In a first step, different surface landmark (LM)-based and intraparenchymal LM-based approaches for image-to-physical space registration were evaluated. The accuracy of registration was measured as fiducial registration error (FRE). Subsequently, intrapancreatic lesions (n = 8) that were visible on preoperative imaging, but not on the endoscopic view, were targeted with a computer-assisted, image-guided endopancreatic resection technique in pancreas silicon models. After each experiment, a CT scan was obtained for measurement of the shortest distance from the resection cavity to the centre of the lesion. RESULTS: Intraparenchymal LM registration [FRE 2.24 mm (1.40-2.85)] was more accurate than surface LM registration [FRE 3.46 mm (2.25-4.85); p = 0.035], but not more accurate than combined registration of intraparenchymal and surface LM [FRE 2.46 mm (1.60-3.35); p = 0.052]. Using image-guided EPS, six of seven lesions were successfully targeted. The median distance from the resection cavity to the centre of the lesion on CT was 1.52 mm (0-2.4). In one pancreas, a lesion could not be resected due to the fragility of the pancreas model. CONCLUSION: Image-guided minimally invasive EPS using a computer-assisted navigation system enabled successful targeting of pancreatic lesions that were invisible on the endoscopic image, but detectable on preoperative imaging. In the clinical setting, this tool could facilitate complex minimally invasive and robotic pancreatic procedures.

Unusual intraoperative finding of abnormal retroperitoneal ileum: a case report.

A 52-year-old female patient diagnosed with an adenocarcinoma of the sigmoid colon underwent anterior resection with direct anastomosis. Intraoperatively, we found the ileum completely retroperitonealized. Previously, the patient was asymptomatic and no congenital syndromes were diagnosed. The intraoperative finding of abnormal anatomy made the mobilization of the left hemicolon and the vessel ligation more challenging. This anatomical situation is a rare variation due to an embryonic malrotation, which occurs in about 1:500 newborns.

4/5 Gastrectomy in Patients Undergoing Pancreaticoduodenectomy Reduces Delayed Gastric Emptying.

BACKGROUND: Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) is a frequent complication after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), impairing oral food intake and reducing the quality of life. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of 4/5 gastrectomy on DGE after PD. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients undergoing pylorus-preserving PD (ppPD) were compared with PD with 4/5 subtotal gastrectomy, including resection of the gastric fundus (SGPD). The primary endpoint was DGE, according to the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery definition. Secondary outcomes included time to solid food intake, time to first flatus, postoperative morbidity, and body weight change 6- and 12-wk after surgery. RESULTS: Sixty patients underwent either ppPD (n = 32) or SGPD (n = 28). Patient characteristics were well balanced between the groups. DGE occurred in 47% after ppPD and 18% after SGPD (P = 0.027). Compared with ppPD, time to solid food intake and time to first flatus were significantly shorter after SGPD (8 d [interquartile range 5-12] versus 5 d [4-6]; P = 0.003 and 5 d [4-7] versus 3 d [2-5]; P = 0.001, respectively). Major postoperative morbidity and hospital stay was similar between the groups. Weight loss at 6 wk was less pronounced after ppPD (-4.8% [-6.3 to -2.7] versus -7.5% [-8.9 to -5.9]; P = 0.013), however, comparable after 3 and 6 mo (ppPD -7.6% [-8.5 to -4.8] versus SGPD -8.4% [-17.3 to -5.2]; P = 0.334 and ppPD -6.0% [-14.5 to 6.0] versus SGPD -9.5% [-11.8 to -7.0], P = 0.414, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with pylorus preservation, 4/5 gastrectomy significantly reduced the frequency of DGE and led to a faster gastrointestinal passage after PD. However, the benefits of a reduced DGE rate and a faster gastrointestinal passage should be carefully balanced against an increased weight loss after 4/5 gastrectomy in the early postoperative phase.

Rectal prolapse following short-course radiotherapy for rectal cancer: report of a case.

Palliative short-course radiotherapy may be considered as an alternative to abdominoperineal resection in elderly patients with advanced rectal cancer. A 92-year-old woman was diagnosed with a rectal prolapse after short-course radiotherapy; 2 months before she was diagnosed with advanced lower rectal cancer. A curative approach was declined. Therefore, a palliative short-course radiotherapy followed. Two weeks after termination of radiotherapy, a symptomatic rectal prolapse has been observed. Endoscopy confirmed a tumor completely included in the prolapsing rectum. A rectal prolapse resection by Altemeier's technique was performed. Histological examination downgraded the tumor staging to ypT1 M0. This case discusses whether the prolapse was preexisting and led to overstaging the tumor or whether the prolapse is a new-onset complication of the radiotherapy. It seems of paramount importance to detect preexisting rectal prolapse to avoid overstaging. If presumed rectal prolapse was not present before therapy, rectal prolapse may represent a new-onset adverse event of short-course radiotherapy.

Spondylodiscitis after minimally invasive recto- and colpo-sacropexy: Report of a case and systematic review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: Rectopexy and colpopexy are established surgical techniques to treat pelvic organ prolapse. Spondylodiscitis (SD) after rectopexy and colpopexy represents a rare infectious complication with severe consequences. We presented a case of SD after rectopexy and performed a systematic review. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed to identify case reports or case series reporting on SD after rectopexy or colpopexy. The main outcomes measures were time from initial surgery to SD, presenting symptoms, occurrence of mesh erosion or fistula formation and type of treatment. RESULTS:XS: Forty-one females with a median age of 59 (54-66) years were diagnosed with SD after a median of 76 (30-165) days after initial surgery. Most common presenting symptoms were back pain (n = 35), fever (n = 20), pain radiation in the legs (n = 9) and vaginal discharge (n = 6). A mesh erosion (n = 8) or fistula formation (n = 7) was detected in a minority of cases. The treatment of SD consisted of conservative treatment with antibiotics alone in 29%, whereas 66% of the patients had to undergo additional surgical treatment. If a revision surgery was necessary, more than one intervention was performed in 40%. Mesh and tack excision was performed in most cases (n = 21), whereas a neurosurgical intervention was necessary in 10 patients. CONCLUSION: Although a rare complication, surgeons performing rectopexy and colpopexy must be aware of the potential risk of SD Careful suture or tack placement into the anterior longitudinal ligament at the level of the promontory while avoiding the disc space is of paramount importance. Prompt diagnosis and multidisciplinary management are the cornerstones of a successful treatment.

Heller myotomy versus endoscopic balloon dilatation for achalasia: A single center experience.

This study aimed to compare clinical results, symptom relief, quality of life and patient satisfaction after the 2 most common procedures for achalasia treatment: laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM) and endoscopic balloon dilatation (EBD).Patients treated at University Hospital of Heidelberg with LHM or EBD were included. A retrospective chart review of perioperative data and a prospective follow-up of therapeutic efficiency, Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index (GIQLI) and patient satisfaction was conducted.Follow-up data (mean follow-up: 75.1 ±â€Š53.9 months for LHM group and 78.9 ±â€Š45.6 months for EBD) were obtained from 36 patients (19 LHM; 17 EBD). Eckardt score (median (q1,q3): 2 (1,4) in both groups, P = .91, GIQLI (LHM: 117 (91.5, 126) vs EBD: 120 (116, 128), P = .495) and patient satisfaction (3 (2,3) vs 3 (2,4), P = .883) did not differ between groups. Fifteen patients (78.9%) in LHM group and 11 (64.7%) in EBD group (P = .562) stated they would undergo the intervention again. All patients with EBD had at least 2 dilatations (100%), whilst only 2 patients (10.5%) had dilatation after LHM (P < .001). There were no complications after EBD, but 2 after LHM (10.5%, P = .517).Both LHM and EBD are able to control symptoms and provide similar quality of life and patient satisfaction. However, reintervention rate was higher following EBD, hence LHM provided a more sustained treatment than EBD.

Contamination After Disinfectant Rectal Washout in Left Colectomy as a Model for Transrectal NOTES: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: In natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) with transrectal (TR) access the intraoperative opening of the rectal wall poses a risk of intraperitoneal contamination and subsequent infectious complications. A rectal washout with a disinfectant may reduce this risk. The aim of the study was to assess the intraoperative contamination on the circular stapler pin when a rectal washout with povidone-iodine (RW-PI) or Ringer solution was performed in patients undergoing left-sided colectomy. Furthermore, the additional effect of an irrigation instrument on the contamination was evaluated. METHODS: In a patient and assessor blinded randomized controlled trial, patients undergoing left-sided colectomy were assigned to rectal washout with PI with an irrigation instrument (RW-PI; n = 23), rectal washout with Ringer solution with an irrigation instrument (RW-R; n = 21) or rectal washout with Ringer solution without an irrigation instrument (RW; n = 25). An end-to-end anastomosis with a circular stapler was performed. The contamination on the pin of the circular stapler was chosen as primary endpoint in order to simulate the intraabdominal contamination risk during TR NOTES. Secondary endpoints were contamination of the rectal mucosa, peritoneal contamination and postoperative morbidity. RESULTS: The contamination rate of the pin of the circular stapler did not differ (RW-PI 39.1%, RW-R 33.3%, RW 52.0%; P = 0.421), but contamination of the rectal mucosa was reduced (47.8% versus 95.2% versus 100%; P < 0.001) and peritoneal contamination tended to be reduced (39.1% versus 71.4% versus 60.0%; P = 0.09) when a rectal washout with PI was performed. The rates of infectious complications (17.4% versus 9.5% versus 12.0%; P = 0.821) and of overall complications (30.4% versus 28.6% versus 44.0%; P = 0.476) did not differ. CONCLUSIONS: Despite an intense rectal washout with PI, contamination of the stapler pin did not differ. Intraabdominal bacterial translocation was frequently encountered even after disinfectant rectal washout with PI. Further studies might focus on the clinical impact of intraabdominal contamination in TR NOTES.

Transpapillary endopancreatic surgery: decompression of duct system and comparison of greenlight laser with monopolar electrosurgical device in ex vivo and in vivo animal models.

BACKGROUND: Endopancreatic surgery (EPS) is an experimental minimally invasive technique for resection of pancreatic tissue from inside the pancreatic duct, accessed via the duodenum and papilla. It is proposed as an alternative to duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection in benign diseases such as chronic pancreatitis (CP). This study evaluated the use of EPS for resection of pancreatic duct stenoses. Moreover, greenlight laser (GLL) and monopolar electrosurgical device (MES) were compared as resection tools for EPS. METHODS: The suitability of EPS for resection of stenoses was evaluated in ex vivo bovine pancreas (n = 8). Artificially created stenoses in the pancreatic head were accessed via the duodenal papilla and resected from inside the organ with MES through a rigid endoscope. Furthermore, standardized pancreatic resections were performed in an in vivo porcine model using either GLL (n = 18) or MES (n = 18) to compare blood loss, operating time, and complications. Thermal damage to the surrounding tissue was assessed using a standardized histological classification. RESULTS: Stenosis resection by EPS was feasible in 8/8 bovine pancreases, with a procedure time of 17 (12-24) min. No perforation of the organ occurred. Resection by GLL was associated with reduced blood loss [median 1.7 (interquartile range 0.6-2.6) ml vs. 5.1 (3.8-13.2) ml; p < 0.01] and shorter operating time [109 (81-127) s vs. 390 (337-555) s; p < 0.01] compared with MES. The zone of thermal tissue damage was more extensive when using GLL than with MES [4.12 (3.48-4.89) mm vs. 1.33 (1.09-1.48) mm; p < 0.01]. CONCLUSION: Transduodenal-transpapillary EPS can be used to resect stenoses and decompress the pancreatic duct system. Both GLL and MES are feasible resection methods for EPS. However, GLL showed better hemostatic characteristics than MES in an in vivo porcine model. Safety measures such as temperature control and image-guided navigation should be employed to monitor the resection and tissue heating.