Scoring systems as outcomes assessment of the treatments for haemorrhoidal disease: a systematic review of the literature.

PURPOSE: The comparison between haemorrhoidal treatments is still unclear. Attempts have been made to adopt a unifying postoperative scoring system and thus ensure adequate comparison between clinical trials. We aimed to systematically review the available outcome scores of haemorrhoidal treatment. METHODS: MEDLINE/Pubmed, Web of science, Embase and Cochrane were searched from database implementation until the December 6th 2019. All studies describing or referencing a score to assess haemorrhoidal disease treatment were included. Likert scale alone, incontinence score alone, general assessment of quality of life or scores developed for other proctologic disorders were excluded. The main outcome measures were validation of the scores and correlation of the score items to the core outcome set for haemorrhoidal disease developed by the European Society of Coloproctology. RESULTS: From the 633 records initially screened, 22 studies were included: 8 original articles describing a scoring system and 14 referencing a previously described scoring system. Only 1 score was validated by an external prospective cohort. All the scores evaluated the symptoms of haemorrhoidal disease. No score integrated the disease recurrences or patient's satisfaction. Scores values tended to decrease postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: The scores described by Gerjy et al. and by Shanmugan et al. are available questionnaires, which have been validated and used in various studies. These scores might help researchers for comparative studies between treatment modalities and optimize haemorrhoids treatment.

Performance of surgical site infection risk prediction models in colorectal surgery: external validity assessment from three European national surveillance networks.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the validity of multivariable models for predicting risk of surgical site infection (SSI) after colorectal surgery based on routinely collected data in national surveillance networks. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis performed on 3 validation cohorts. PATIENTS: Colorectal surgery patients in Switzerland, France, and England, 2007-2017. METHODS: We determined calibration and discrimination (ie, area under the curve, AUC) of the COLA (contamination class, obesity, laparoscopy, American Society of Anesthesiologists [ASA]) multivariable risk model and the National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) multivariable risk model in each cohort. A new score was constructed based on multivariable analysis of the Swiss cohort following colorectal surgery, then based on colon and rectal surgery separately. RESULTS: We included 40,813 patients who had undergone elective or emergency colorectal surgery to validate the COLA score, 45,216 patients to validate the NHSN colon and rectal surgery risk models, and 46,320 patients in the construction of a new predictive model. The COLA score's predictive ability was poor, with AUC values of 0.64 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.63-0.65), 0.62 (95% CI, 0.58-0.67), 0.60 (95% CI, 0.58-0.61) in the Swiss, French, and English cohorts, respectively. The NHSN colon-specific model (AUC, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.61-0.62) and the rectal surgery-specific model (AUC, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.53-0.61) showed limited predictive ability. The new predictive score showed poor predictive accuracy for colorectal surgery overall (AUC, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.64-0.66), for colon surgery (AUC, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.65-0.66), and for rectal surgery (AUC, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.60-0.66). CONCLUSION: Models based on routinely collected data in SSI surveillance networks poorly predict individual risk of SSI following colorectal surgery. Further models that include other more predictive variables could be developed and validated.

Robotic single-site versus multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a case-matched analysis of short- and long-term costs.

BACKGROUND: Multiport laparoscopy is the gold-standard approach for cholecystectomy, and single-port laparoscopy has been developed to further reduce its invasiveness. A specific robotic single-port platform (da Vinci single-site, Intuitive Surgical Inc., Sunnyvale, CA, USA) has been released in 2011, which could technically facilitate single-site cholecystectomy. Current data show its feasibility; however, detailed short- and long-term analyses of costs and comparisons relative to multiport laparoscopy are not available to date. METHODS: Patients who underwent robotic single-site cholecystectomy for benign, clinically noninflammatory disease between 2011 and 2015 were matched for disease, age, gender, BMI, ASA classification, diagnosis, and elapsed year of surgery to a cohort of multiport cholecystectomies. Demographic, perioperative, and long-term data were collected retrospectively and analyzed. Perioperative and long-term costs including re-operations due to the primary procedure until February 2017 were compared across both cohorts. RESULTS: 99 patients who underwent robotic single-site cholecystectomy were matched to 99 patients with multiport cholecystectomy. A higher rate of outpatient procedures in the robotic cohort (31.3 vs. 17.2%, p = 0.0305) was found, and demographic parameters and perioperative clinical outcomes were similar. Perioperative costs were significantly higher for the robotic single-site patients (6158.0 vs. 4288.0 USD, p < 0.0001). With similar follow-up times of 59.0 and 58.9 months, respectively (p = 0.9552), significantly more patients of the robotic Single-Site cohort underwent follow-up surgery (7.1 vs. 0.0%, p = 0.0140), and follow-up costs were significantly higher for the robotic cohort (694.7 vs. 0.0 USD, p = 0.0145). CONCLUSION: With similar early postoperative clinical results and a higher rate of re-operations, perioperative and long-term costs are significantly higher with robotic Single-Site cholecystectomy compared with multiport cholecystectomy. Considering the unclear clinical value of robotic single-site cholecystectomy and the significant short- and long-term costs, a call for further research and a debate as to who should bear the costs beyond the ones of the gold-standard treatment appear reasonable.

Robotic versus laparoscopic stapling during robotic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery: a case-matched analysis of costs and clinical outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this analysis is to compare the robotic EndoWrist Stapling System (EWSS) 45 mm (Intuitive Surgical Inc. Sunnyvale, CA, USA) and the ECHELON FLEX™ ENDOPATH® Staplers (EFES) 60 mm (Ethicon, Cincinnati, OH, USA) for gastric pouch formation during robotic gastric bypass surgery. METHODS: Patients who underwent robotic gastric bypass surgery with stapling using EWSS were matched with patients who underwent the same procedure with the EFES. Demographic, intra- and postoperative, and cost data were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 49 patients were identified who had undergone robotic gastric bypass surgery using EWSS. They were matched with 49 patients who underwent the equivalent procedure using EFES. With similar demographic parameters, corrected operating room time without cholecystectomy took longer for the patients that underwent surgery with EWSS (+22 min, p = 0.1042). Stapler clamping was unsuccessful in 19.0% of all recorded attempts with EWSS. Two intra-operative complications unrelated to stapling and one complication due to stapling were observed in the EWSS cohort, while none was observed for the EFES group. Significantly, more recharges were needed with EWSS to complete the gastric pouch (4.9 vs. 4.1, p = 0.0048) and overall stapling costs for the procedure were significantly higher (2212.2 vs. 1787.4 USD, p = 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Gastric pouch formation using EWSS during robotic gastric bypass surgery is feasible. Due to the shorter length of EWSS compared to EFES, more stapling recharges are required to complete gastric pouch formation and the stapling costs for gastric bypass surgery are higher. Further systematic research should be conducted to precisely determine the value of the robotic EWSS for gastric bypass surgery.

Robotic Gastric Bypass Surgery in the Swiss Health Care System: Analysis of Hospital Costs and Reimbursement.

BACKGROUND: Robotic technology shows some promising early outcomes indicating potentially improved outcomes particularly for challenging bariatric procedures. Still, health care providers face significant clinical and economic challenges when introducing innovations. METHODS: Prospectively derived administrative cost data of patients who were coded with a primary diagnosis of obesity (ICD-10 code E.66.X), a procedure of gastric bypass surgery (CHOP code 44.3), and a robotic identifier (CHOP codes 00.90.50 or 00.39) during the years 2012 to 2015 was analyzed and compared to the triggered reimbursement for this patient cohort. RESULTS: A total of 348 patients were identified. The mean number of diagnoses was 2.7 and the mean length of stay was 5.9 days. The overall mean cost per patients was Swiss Francs (CHF) from 2012 to 2014 that was 21,527, with a mean reimbursement of CHF 24,917. Cost of the surgery in 2015 was comparable to the previous years with CHF 22,550.0 (p = 0.6618), but reimbursement decreased significantly to CHF 20,499.0 (0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The average cost for robotic gastric bypass surgery fell well below the average reimbursement within the Swiss DRG system between 2012 and 2014, and this robotic procedure was a DRG winner for that period. However, the Swiss DRG system has matured over the years with a significant decrease resulting in a deficit for robotic gastric bypass surgery in 2015. This stipulates a discussion as to how health care providers should continue offering robotic gastric bypass surgery, particularly in the light of developing clinical evidence.

Robotic single-site combined cholecystectomy and hysterectomy: Advantages and limits.

INTRODUCTION: Robotic single-site surgery (RSS) represents the latest innovation for clinical use of single incision surgery. Several applications have been reported in urology, general surgery and gynecology with potential application in benign cases as well as in oncology. PRESENTATION OF CASE: To further explore potential applications of RSS, we present the first case reported in the literature of combined cholecystectomy and total hysterectomy using the da Vinci Si single-port platform (Intuitive Surgical Inc., Sunnyvale, CA). DISCUSSION: A critical description of the procedure with potential advantages and limitations of the current platform for combined surgical procedure is provided. CONCLUSION: Robotics may facilitate the widespread diffusion of single incision surgery, overcoming current laparoscopic and LESS limitations. However, the available robotic platform still has technical features that will limit its uptake amongst surgeons and further technological development is needed for a wider diffusion of single incision surgery.

Perioperative risk assessment in robotic general surgery: lessons learned from 884 cases at a single institution.

OBJECTIVE: To assess factors associated with morbidity and mortality following the use of robotics in general surgery. DESIGN: Case series. SETTING: University of Illinois at Chicago. PATIENTS AND INTERVENTION: Eight hundred eighty-four consecutive patients who underwent a robotic procedure in our institution between April 2007 and July 2010. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Perioperative morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: During the study period, 884 patients underwent a robotic procedure. The conversion rate was 2%, the mortality rate was 0.5%, and the overall postoperative morbidity rate was 16.7%. The reoperation rate was 2.4%. Mean length of stay was 4.5 days (range, 0.2-113 days). In univariate analysis, several factors were associated with increased morbidity and included either patient-related (cardiovascular and renal comorbidities, American Society of Anesthesiologists score ≥ 3, body mass index [calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared] <30, age ≥ 70 years, and malignant disease) or procedure-related (blood loss ≥ 500 mL, transfusion, multiquadrant operation, and advanced procedure) factors. In multivariate analysis, advanced procedure, multiquadrant surgery, malignant disease, body mass index of less than 30, hypertension, and transfusion were factors significantly associated with a higher risk for complications. American Society of Anesthesiologists score of 3 or greater, age 70 years or older, cardiovascular comorbidity, and blood loss of 500 mL or more were also associated with increased risk for mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Use of the robotic approach for general surgery can be achieved safely with low morbidity and mortality. Several risk factors have been identified as independent causes for higher morbidity and mortality. These can be used to identify patients at risk before and during the surgery and, in the future, to develop a scoring system for the use of robotic general surgery

Cost and validity of early postoperative contrast swallow after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding.

BACKGROUND: To assess the validity and cost of early routine upper gastrointestinal (UGI) studies after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) at a university hospital in the United States. Today, although there is widespread use of LAGB, and it is considered a safe procedure, it also can result in some specific early complications. In most centers, an UGI series after bariatric surgery is performed to rule out these potentially dangerous complications. METHODS: From March 2006 to July 2010, 183 LAGB procedures were performed by a single surgeon. All data were collected prospectively in a computerized database and reviewed retrospectively. The patients underwent water-soluble UGI studies during the early postoperative phase (2-24 h) to exclude gastrointestinal perforation, obstruction, and gastric band malposition. RESULTS: No intraoperative complications occurred. One conversion to an open procedure was required because of massive adhesions. A total of 21 postoperative complications (11.5%) occurred. None of the 183 patients who underwent an early UGI series experienced leakage, gastric band malposition, or slippage. The only radiologic abnormality was a stomal obstruction (.5%) requiring reoperation. The total cost for the 183 UGI studies was $54,900. The mean hospital stay was .5 day (range .1-5.6). Approximately 90% of patients were discharged within the first 24 hours. CONCLUSION: The fear of acute perforation or obstruction has been the rationale for obtaining UGI studies after LAGB. We found this to be expensive and of limited value in an experienced center and have created a decisional algorithm to determine when its use is appropriate for symptomatic patients.

Traditional versus single-site placement of adjustable gastric banding: a comparative study and cost analysis.

In bariatric surgery, laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) has proven effective in reducing weight and improving obesity-associated comorbidities. Recently, however, laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) surgery has been proposed to minimize the invasiveness of laparoscopic surgery. The aim of this study is to compare the operative cost and peri-operative outcomes of these two approaches. We undertook a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database of patients undergoing either LAGB or LESS between March 2006 and October 2009. The outcomes and cost of 25 LESS gastric bandings were compared to 121 standard LAGB. Costs included operative time, consumables, and laparoscopic tower depreciation. Both groups had similar patient demographics, body mass index, and comorbidities; with the exception of age (37 year for single site vs. 44 years for standard; P=0.002). There were no statistical differences for operative time (78 vs. 76 min, P=0.69), blood loss (8.4 vs. 9 ml, P=0.76), pain score (0.81 vs. 0.84 at 1 week, P=0.95) or complication rates (12% vs. 14%, P=1). Length of stay was shorter for the LESS group (0.5 day vs. 1.5 days, P=0.02). The mean operative cost for the LESS banding was $20,502/case vs. $20,346/case for the standard LAGB, with no statistically significant difference between the approaches (P=0.73). Operative costs and peri-operative outcomes of LESS gastric banding are comparable with those of the standard LAGB procedure. As a result, single-site surgery can be proposed as a valid alternative to the standard procedure with cosmetic advantage and comparable complication rate.

Value of contrast-enhanced 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography in detection and presurgical assessment of pancreatic cancer: a prospective study.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Positron Emission Tomography (PET) using (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) associated with computed tomography (CT) is increasingly used for the detection and the staging of pancreatic cancer, but data regarding its clinical added value in pre-surgical planning is still lacking. The aim of this study is to investigate the performance of FDG PET associated with contrast-enhanced CT in detection of pancreatic cancer. METHODS: We prospectively evaluated FDG PET/CT studies obtained in patients with suspicion of operable pancreatic cancer between May 2006 and January 2008. Staging was conducted according to a standardized protocol, and findings were confirmed in all patients by surgical resection or biopsy examination. RESULTS: Forty-five patients with a median age of 69 (range 22-82) were included in this study. Thirty-six had malignant tumors and nine had benign lesions (20%). The sensitivity of enhanced versus unenhanced PET/CT in the detection of pancreatic cancer was 96% versus 72% (P=0.076), the specificity 66.6% versus 33.3% (P=0.52), the positive predictive value 92.3% versus 80% (P=0.3), the negative predictive value 80% versus 25% (P=0.2), and the accuracy 90.3% versus 64% (P=0.085). CONCLUSIONS: Our preliminary data obtained in a limited number of patients shows that contrast-enhanced FDG PET/CT offers good sensitivity in the detection and assessment of pancreatic cancer, but at the price of a relatively low specificity. Enhanced PET/CT seems to be superior to unenhanced PET/CT. Further larger prospective studies are needed to establish its value for pre-surgical diagnosis and staging in pancreatic cancer.