Repair of radiation-induced rectovaginal fistula with rectal stricture by a combined Tuttle, Turnbull-Cutait and Singapore flap approach.

Radiation-induced rectovaginal fistula (RI-RVF) with associated rectal stricture represents a challenging problem in management. The aim of the present technical note is to describe a surgical technique aimed at minimizing disease recurrence by avoiding radiated tissue in the reconstruction: 1. Tuttle longitudinal incision of posterior vaginal wall with sharp excision of proximally located fistula; 2. Resection of strictured rectum via a combined transvaginal/laparotomy access, reconstruction with Turnbull-Cutait colon pull-through, and delayed handsewn coloanal anastomosis with loop ileostomy; 3. Bridge closure of the posterior vaginal wall by the interposition of a Singapore flap. This approach resulted in a favorable outcome at the 1-year follow-up in one patient with a medical history of gynecological carcinoma status after hystero-salpingo-oophorectomy followed by adjuvant radiation.

Does the visceral fat area impact the histopathology specimen metrics after total mesorectal excision for distal rectal cancer?

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the visceral fat area (VFA) has an impact on the histopathology specimen metrics of male patients undergoing robotic total mesorectal resection (rTME) for distal rectal cancer. METHODS: Prospectively collected data of patients undergoing rTME for resectable rectal cancer by five surgeons during a period of three years were extracted from the REgistry of Robotic SURgery for RECTal cancer (RESURRECT). VFA was measured in all patients at preoperative computed tomography. Distal rectal cancer was defined as <6cm from the anal verge. The histopathology metrics included circumferential resection margin (CRM) (in mm) and its involvement rate (if <1mm), distal resection margin (DRM), and quality of TME (complete, nearly-complete, incomplete). RESULTS: Of 839 patients who underwent rTME, 500 with distal rectal cancer were included. One hundred and six (21.2%) males with VFA>100cm2 were compared to 394 (78.8%) males or females with VFA≤100cm2. The mean CRM of males with VFA>100cm2 was not significantly different from its counterpart (6.6 ± 4.8 mm versus 7.1 ± 9.5mm; p=0.752). CRM involvement rates were 7.6% in both groups (p=1.000). The DRM was not significantly different: 1.8±1.9cm versus 1.8±2.6cm; p=0.996. The quality of TME did not significantly differ: complete TME 87.3% vs. 83.7%; nearly complete TME 8.9% vs. 12.8%; incomplete TME 3.8% vs. 3.6%. Complications and clinical outcomes did not significantly differ. CONCLUSION: This study did not find evidence to support that increased VFA would result in suboptimal histopathology specimen metrics when performing rTME in males with distal rectal cancer.

Systematic review of failure of nonoperative management in complicated sigmoid diverticulitis with abscess.

PURPOSE: The aim of this systematic review was to determine the rates of failure following nonoperative management for acute sigmoid diverticulitis complicated by abscess. METHODS: Pubmed and Medline were systematically searched by two independent researchers. Studies reporting outcomes of nonoperative management of diverticulitis with abscess revealed on CT scan were included. The endpoint of the study was failure of nonoperative management which included relapse and recurrence. Relapse was defined as development of additional complications such as peritonitis or obstruction that required urgent surgery during index admission or readmission within 30 days. Recurrence was defined as development of symptoms after an asymptomatic period of 30-90 days following nonoperative management. Nonoperative management included nil per os, intravenous fluids and antibiotics, CT-guided percutaneous drainage, and/or total parenteral nutrition. RESULTS: Twenty-four of 844 studies yielded by literature search totaling 12,601 patients were eligible for inclusion. Pooled relapse rate was 18.9%. The pooled rate of recurrence of acute diverticulitis was found to be 25.5%. 60.9% of recurrences were complicated diverticulitis. Failure rate appeared to be significantly increased in patients undergoing percutaneous drainage for distant abscess as compared with pericolic abscess (51% vs. 18%; p = 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The rate of failure of nonoperative management was 44.4%. The rate of relapse at 30 days following nonoperative management was at 18.9%. Distant abscesses were associated with significantly increased rates of relapse compared with pericolic abscesses. The rate of recurrence following nonoperative management was 25.5% at the mean follow-up of 38 months.

Primary anastomosis and nonrestorative resection for perforated diverticulitis with peritonitis: meta-analysis of randomized trials.

AIM: The aim of this meta-analysis was to comparatively evaluate the outcomes of primary anastomosis (PRA) and nonrestorative resection (NRR) as emergency surgery and ostomy reversal in patients with perforated diverticulitis and peritonitis. METHODS: PubMed, MEDLINE via Ovid, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases were systematically searched. Postoperative morbidity following emergency resection was the primary end-point. Quality assessment of the included studies was performed using the Cochrane Quality Assessment Tool including recruitment bias and crossover with intention-to-treat analysis. The Haenszel-Mantel method with odds ratios (OR, 95% CI) and the inverse variance method with mean difference (MD, 95% CI) as effect measures were utilized for dichotomous and continuous outcomes, respectively. RESULTS: Four randomized controlled trials totaling 382 patients (180 PRA vs 204 NRR) were included. Morbidity rates following emergency resection did not differ (OR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.65, 1.51; P = 0.95; number needed to treat/harm (NNT) 96). Organ/space surgical site infection rates were 3.3% in PRA vs 11.3% in NRR (OR = 0.29, 95% CI 0.12, 0.74; P = 0.009; NNT = 13). Postoperative morbidity rates following ostomy reversal were significantly lower in PRA (OR = 0.31, 95% CI 0.15, 0.64; P = 0.001; NNT = 7). Pooled ostomy non-reversal rates were 16% in PRA vs 35.5% in NRR (OR = 0.37, 95% CI 0.22, 0.62; P = 0.0001; NNT = 6) with high heterogeneity (I2  = 63%; τ2  = 8.17). Meta-regression analysis revealed significant negative correlation between the PRA-to-NRR crossover rate and the ostomy non-reversal rate (P = 0.029). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis found that PRA was associated with better short- and long-term outcomes at the cost of significantly longer operating time at emergency surgery.

Recurrence of infection and hernia following partial versus complete removal of infected hernia mesh: a systematic review and cohort meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine whether complete removal of infected hernia mesh (CMR) provides better results as compared to partial removal (PMR). METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and MEDLINE via Ovid were systematically searched for records published from 1980 to 2018 by three independent researchers (GM, GS, and GG). Quality assessment, data extraction and analysis were performed according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Mantel-Haenszel method with odds ratio and 95% confidence interval (OR (95% CI)) as the measure of effect size of dichotomous primary and secondary endpoints was utilized. Random-effects model was used for meta-analysis. RESULTS: Five observational studies totaling 421 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Rates of infection recurrence were 58.5% (62/106) in PMR and 25.5% (62/315) in CMR. The difference was statistically significant [OR (95% CI) 4.15 (2.30, 7.47); p < 0.001]. Rates of hernia recurrence were 9.7% (8/82) in PMR vs. 40.2% (41/102) in CMR. This difference was not statistically significant [OR (95% CI) 0.25 (0.04, 1.62); p = 0.15]. Low risk of publication bias was found using funnel plots and Egger's test. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis found significantly increased rates of infection recurrence in patients undergoing partial removal of infected hernia mesh as compared to complete removal. Complete removal of infected hernia mesh may be associated with increased rates of hernia recurrence. Further longitudinal observational studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Purse-string vs. linear skin closure at loop ileostomy reversal: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: There is no level 1a evidence regarding the best technique for skin closure at loop ileostomy reversal. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether purse-string skin closure (PSC) is associated with lower surgical site infection (SSI) rates as compared to linear skin closure (LC). METHODS: EMBASE, MEDLINE, Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases were systematically searched. PSC was defined as a circumferential subcuticular suture leaving a small circular skin defect allowing for free drainage, granulation, and epithelialization. In LC, the wound edges were approximated side to side with or without drainage. The primary endpoint was SSI rate. Secondary endpoints included operating time, length of hospital stay, wound healing time, and incisional hernia rates. STUDY SELECTION: Inclusion criterion was any observational or experimental study comparing PSC to LC in patients undergoing ostomy reversal. RESULTS: Twenty studies (6 experimental and 14 observational) totaling 1812 patients (826 PSC and 986 LC) were included. SSI rates were significantly lower statistically and clinically in patients with PSC [OR (95% CI) = 0.14 (0.09, 0.21); p < 0.0001; NNT = 6] in the meta-analysis of all studies. The subgroup analysis of randomized trials [OR (95% CI) = 0.10 (0.04, 0.21); p < 0.0001; NNT = 6] as well as the analysis of randomized trials including patients with loop ileostomy only [OR (95% CI) = 0.12 (0.05, 0.28); p < 0.0001; NNT = 5] confirmed this finding. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis found that PSC was associated with significantly decreased rates of SSI in patients undergoing loop ileostomy reversal.

The influence of diverting loop ileostomy vs. colostomy on postoperative morbidity in restorative anterior resection for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the morbidity of loop ileostomy (LI) and loop colostomy (LC) creation in restorative anterior resection for rectal cancer as well as the morbidity of their reversal. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE via Ovid, and Cochrane Library were systematically searched for records published from 1980 to 2017 by three independent researchers. The primary endpoint was overall morbidity after stoma creation and reversal. Mantel-Haenszel odds ratio (OR) was used to compare categorical variables. Clinical significance was evaluated using numbers needed to treat (NNT). RESULTS: Six studies (two randomized controlled trials and four observational studies) totaling 1063 patients (666 LI and 397 LC) were included in the meta-analysis. Overall morbidity rate after both stoma creation and closure was 15.6% in LI vs. 20.4% in LC [OR(95%CI) = 0.67 (0.29, 1.58); p = 0.36] [NNT(95%CI) = 21 (> 10.4 to benefit, > 2430.2 to harm)]. Morbidity rate after stoma creation was both statistically and clinically significantly lower after LI [18.2% vs. 30.6%; OR(95%CI) = 0.42 (0.25, 0.70); p = 0.001; NNT(95%CI) = 9 (4.7, 29.3)]. Dehydration rate was 3.1% (8/259) in LI vs. 0% (0/168) in LC. The difference was not statistically or clinically significant [OR(95%CI) = 3.00 (0.74, 12.22); p = 0.13; NNT (95%CI) = 33 (19.2, 101.9)]. Ileus rates after stoma closure were significantly higher in LI as compared to LC [5.2% vs. 1.7%; OR(95%CI) = 2.65 (1.13, 6.18); p = 0.02]. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis found no difference between LI and LC in overall morbidity after stoma creation and closure. Morbidity rates following the creation of LI were significantly decreased at the cost of a risk for dehydration.