Multicentre propensity score-matched analysis of laparoscopic versus open surgery for T4 rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: The use of laparoscopy for advanced-stage rectal cancer remains controversial. This study aimed to compare the operative and oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic (LAR) versus open anterior rectal resection (OAR) for patients with pT4 rectal cancer. METHODS: This is a multicenter propensity score matching (PSM) study of patients undergoing elective curative-intent LAR or OAR for pT4 rectal cancer (TNM stage II/III/IV) between 2005 and 2015. RESULTS: In total, 137 patients were included in the analysis. After PSM, demographic, clinical and tumor characteristics were similar between the 52 LAR and the 52 OAR patients. Overall, 52 tumors were located in the high rectum, 25 in the mid-rectum and 27 in the low rectum. Multivisceral resection was performed in 26.9% of LAR and 30.8% of OAR patients (p = 0.829). Conversion was required in 11 LAR patients (21.2%). The LAR group showed significantly shorter time to flatus (3.13 vs. 4.97 days, p = 0.001), time to regular diet (3.59 vs. 6.36 days, p < 0.0001) and hospital stay (15.49 vs. 17.96 days, p = 0.002) compared to the OAR group. The 90-day morbidity and mortality were not different between groups. In the majority of patients (85.6%), R0 resection was achieved. A complete mesorectal excision was obtained in 82.7% of LAR and 78.8% of OAR patients (p = 0.855). The 1-, 2- and 3-year overall survival rates were, respectively, 95.6, 73.8 and 66.7% for the LAR group and 86.7, 66.9 and 64.1% for the OAR group (p = 0.219). The presence of synchronous metastases (hazard ratio 2.26), R1 resection (HR 2.71) and lymph node involvement (HR 2.24) were significant predictors of overall survival. CONCLUSION: The present study suggests that LAR for pT4 rectal cancer can achieve good pathologic and oncologic outcomes similar to open surgery despite the risk of conversion. Moreover, laparoscopy offers the benefits of a faster recovery and a shorter hospital stay.

The Utility of Video Recording in Assessing Bariatric Surgery Complications.

INTRODUCTION: Recording every procedure could diminish the postoperative complication rates in bariatric surgery. The aim of our study was to evaluate the correlation between recording every bariatric surgery and their postoperative analysis in relation to the early or late postoperative complications. METHODS: Seven hundred fifteen patients who underwent a bariatric procedure between January 2018 and December 2019 were included in a retrospective analysis. There were: 589 laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomies (LSGs); 110 Roux-en-Y bypasses (RYGBs) and 16 gastric bands (LAGBs). The video recording was systematically used, and all patients were enrolled in the IFSO registry. RESULTS: There were 15 patients (2.1%) with surgical postoperative complications: 5 leaks, 8 hemorrhages and 2 stenosis. Most complications were consequent to LSG, except for two, which occurred after RYGB. In four cases a site of active bleeding was identified. After reviewing the video, in three cases the site was correlated with an event which occurred during the initial procedure. Three out of five cases of leak following sleeve were treated purely endoscopically, and no potential correlated mechanism was identified. Two other possible benefits were observed: a better evaluation of the gastric pouch for the treatment of the ulcer post bypass and the review of one per operative incident. Two negative diagnostic laparoscopies were performed. The benefit of the systematic video recording was singled out in eight cases. All the other cases were completed by laparoscopy with no conversion. CONCLUSION: To record every bariatric procedure could help in understanding the mechanism of certain complications, especially when the analysis is performed within the team. Still, recording the procedure did not prevent the negative diagnostic laparoscopy, but it could play a significant role for the medico-legal aspect in the future.