Operative blood loss adversely affects short and long-term outcomes after colorectal cancer surgery: results of a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the impact of operative blood loss on short and long-term outcomes following colorectal cancer surgery. METHODS: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis were performed, from inception to the 10th of August 2020. A comprehensive literature search was performed on the 10th of August 2020 of PubMed MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Only studies reporting on operative blood loss and postoperative short term or long-term outcomes in colorectal cancer surgery were considered for inclusion. RESULTS: Forty-three studies were included, reporting on 59,813 patients. Increased operative blood loss was associated with higher morbidity, for blood loss greater than 150-350 ml (odds ratio [OR] 2.09, p < 0.001) and > 500 ml (OR 2.29, p = 0.007). Anastomotic leak occurred more frequently for blood loss above a range of 50-100 ml (OR 1.14, p = 0.007), 250-300 ml (OR 2.06, p < 0.001), and 400-500 ml (OR 3.15, p < 0.001). Postoperative ileus rate was higher for blood loss > 100-200 ml (OR 1.90, p = 0.02). Surgical site infections were more frequent above 200-500 ml (OR 1.96, p = 0.04). Hospital stay was increased for blood loss > 150-200 ml (OR 1.63, p = 0.04). Operative blood loss was significantly higher in patients that suffered morbidity (mean difference [MD] 133.16 ml, p < 0.001) or anastomotic leak (MD 69.56 ml, p = 0.02). In the long term, increased operative blood loss was associated with worse overall survival above a range of 200-500 ml (hazard ratio [HR] 1.15, p < 0.001), and worse recurrence-free survival above 200-400 ml (HR 1.33, p = 0.01). Increased blood loss was associated with small bowel obstruction caused by colorectal cancer recurrence for blood loss higher than 400 ml (HR 1.97, p = 0.03) and 800 ml (HR 3.78, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Increased operative blood loss may adversely impact short term and long-term postoperative outcomes. Measures should be taken to minimize operative blood loss during colorectal cancer surgery. Due to the uncertainty of evidence identified, further research, with standardised methodology, is required on this important subject.

A systematic review and network meta-analysis comparing energy devices used in colorectal surgery.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare energy devices used for intraoperative hemostasis during colorectal surgery. METHODS: A systematic literature review and Bayesian network meta-analysis performed. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, and Cochrane were searched from inception to August 11th 2021. Intraoperative outcomes were operative blood loss, operative time, conversion to open, conversion to another energy source. Postoperative outcomes were mortality, overall complications, minor complications and major complications, wound complications, postoperative ileus, anastomotic leak, time to first defecation, day 1 and 3 drainage volume, duration of hospital stay. RESULTS: Seven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included, reporting on 680 participants, comparing conventional hemostasis, LigaSure™, Thunderbeat® and Harmonic®. Harmonic® had fewer overall complications compared to conventional hemostasis. Operative blood loss was less with LigaSure™ (mean difference [MD] = 24.1 ml; 95% confidence interval [CI] - 46.54 to - 1.58 ml) or Harmonic® (MD = 24.6 ml; 95% CI - 42.4 to - 6.7 ml) compared to conventional techniques. Conventional hemostasis ranked worst for operative blood loss with high probability (p = 0.98). LigaSure™, Harmonic® or Thunderbeat® resulted in a significantly shorter mean operative time by 42.8 min (95% CI - 53.9 to - 31.5 min), 28.3 min (95% CI - 33.6 to - 22.6 min) and 26.1 min (95% CI - 46 to - 6 min), respectively compared to conventional electrosurgery. LigaSure™ resulted in a significantly shorter mean operative time than Harmonic® by 14.5 min (95% CI 1.9-27 min) and ranked first for operative time with high probability (p = 0.97). LigaSure™ and Harmonic® resulted in a significantly shorter mean duration of hospital stay compared to conventional electrosurgery of 1.3 days (95% CI - 2.2 to - 0.4) and 0.5 days (95% CI - 1 to - 0.1), respectively. LigaSure™ ranked as best for hospital stay with high probability (p = 0.97). Conventional hemostasis was associated with more wound complications than Harmonic® (odds ratio [OR] = 0.27; CI 0.08-0.92). Harmonic® ranked best with highest probability (p = 0.99) for wound complications. No significant differences between energy devices were identified for the remaining outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: LigaSure™, Thunderbeat® and Harmonic® may be advantageous for reducing operative blood loss, operative time, overall complications, wound complications, and duration of hospital stay compared to conventional techniques. The energy devices result in comparable perioperative outcomes and no device is superior overall. However, included RCTs were limited in number and size, and data were not available to compare all energy devices for all outcomes of interest.

Postoperative chemotherapy improves survival in patients with resected high-risk Stage II colorectal cancer: results of a systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIM: The aim was to assess the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in high-risk Stage II colorectal cancer. METHOD: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis was performed comparing survival in patients with resected Stage II colorectal cancer and high-risk features having postoperative chemotherapy vs no chemotherapy. RESULTS: Of 1031 articles screened, 29 were included, reporting on 183 749 participants. Adjuvant chemotherapy significantly improved overall survival [hazard ratio (HR) 0.61, P < 0.0001], disease-specific survival (HR = 0.73, P = 0.05) and disease-free survival (HR = 0.59, P < 0.0001) compared to no chemotherapy. Adjuvant chemotherapy significantly increased 5-year overall survival (OR = 0.53, P = 0.0008) and 5-year disease-free survival (OR = 0.50, P = 0.001). Overall survival and disease-free survival remained significantly prolonged during subgroup analysis of studies published from 2015 onwards (HR = 0.60, P < 0.0001; HR = 0.65, P = 0.0001; respectively), in patients with two or more high-risk features (HR = 0.59, P = 0.0001; HR = 0.70, P = 0.03; respectively) and in colon cancer (HR = 0.61, P < 0.0001; HR = 0.51, P = 0.0001; respectively). Overall survival, disease-specific survival and disease-free survival during subgroup analysis of individual high-risk features were T4 tumour (HR = 0.58, P < 0.0001; HR = 0.50, P = 0.003; HR = 0.75, P = 0.05), < 12 lymph nodes harvested (HR = 0.67, P = 0.0002; HR = 0.80, P = 0.17; HR = 0.72, P = 0.02), poor differentiation (HR = 0.84, P = 0.35; HR = 0.85, P = 0.23; HR = 0.61, P = 0.41), lymphovascular or perineural invasion (HR = 0.55, P = 0.05; HR = 0.59, P = 0.11; HR = 0.76, P = 0.05) and emergency surgery (HR = 0.60, P = 0.02; HR = 0.68, P = 0.19). CONCLUSION: Adjuvant chemotherapy in high-risk Stage II colorectal cancer results in a modest survival improvement and should be considered on an individual patient basis. Due to potential heterogeneity and selection bias of the included studies, and lack of separate rectal cancer data, further large randomized trials with predefined inclusion criteria and standardized chemotherapy regimens are required.

A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing adverse events and functional outcomes of different pouch designs after restorative proctocolectomy.

AIM: There is no consensus as to which ileoanal pouch design provides better outcomes after restorative proctocolectomy. This study compares different pouch designs. METHOD: A systematic review of the literature was performed. A random effects meta-analytical model was used to compare adverse events and functional outcome. RESULTS: Thirty comparative studies comparing J, W, S and K pouch designs were included. No significant differences were identified between the different pouch designs with regard to anastomotic dehiscence, anastomotic stricture, pelvic sepsis, wound infection, pouch fistula, pouch ischaemia, perioperative haemorrhage, small bowel obstruction, pouchitis and sexual dysfunction. The W and K designs resulted in fewer cases of pouch failure compared with the J and S designs. J pouch construction resulted in a smaller maximum pouch volume compared with W and K pouches. Stool frequency per 24 h and during daytime was higher following a J pouch than W, S or K constructions. The J design resulted in increased faecal urgency and seepage during daytime compared with the K design. The use of protective pads during daytime and night-time was greater with a J pouch compared to S or K. The use of antidiarrhoeal medication was greater after a J reservoir than a W reservoir. Difficulty in pouch evacuation requiring intubation was higher with an S pouch than with W or J pouches. CONCLUSION: Despite its ease of construction and comparable complication rates, the J pouch is associated with higher pouch failure rates and worse function. Patient characteristics, technical factors and surgical expertise should be considered when choosing pouch design.

The effect of adjuvant chemotherapy on survival and recurrence after curative rectal cancer surgery in patients who are histologically node negative after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate whether adjuvant chemotherapy will affect recurrence rate or disease-free and overall survival in patients with rectal adenocarcinoma who were staged with MRI node-positive disease (mrN+) preoperatively. These patients underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with curative rectal cancer surgery and their pathological staging was negative for nodal disease (ypN0). There is no consensus on the role of adjuvant chemotherapy in such patients. METHOD: Patients who received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and underwent curative rectal cancer surgery for rectal adenocarcinoma staged as [mrTxN+M0] on MRI staging and who on pathological staging were found to be [ypTxN0M0] were retrospectively identified from January 2008 December 2012 from two tertiary referral centres (Royal Marsden Hospital, London and Saint-Andre Hospital, Bordeaux). RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-three patients were recruited and, after propensity matching at a ratio of 2:1, n = 80 patients were divided to receive adjuvant (n = 28) or no adjuvant treatment (n = 52). A comparison of adjuvant chemotherapy vs no adjuvant therapy showed that the mean overall survival was 2.67 vs 3.60 years (P = 0.42) and disease-free survival was 2.27 vs 3.32 years (P = 0.14). CONCLUSION: This study found no significant difference in survival or disease recurrence between patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy and patients who did not. There is no clear evidence to support or dismiss the use of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients who were node positive on preoperative MRI and node negative on histopathological staging. Further multicentre prospective randomized trials are needed to identify the appropriate treatment regime for this group of patients.

Magnetic resonance defecography versus clinical examination and fluoroscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance defecography (MRD) allows for dynamic visualisation of the pelvic floor compartments when assessing for pelvic floor dysfunction. Additional benefits over traditional techniques are largely unknown. The aim of this study was to compare detection and miss rates of pelvic floor abnormalities with MRD versus clinical examination and traditional fluoroscopic techniques. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with recommendations from the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were accessed. Studies were included if they reported detection rates of at least one outcome of interest with MRD versus EITHER clinical examination AND/OR fluoroscopic techniques within the same cohort of patients. RESULTS: Twenty-eight studies were included: 14 studies compared clinical examination to MRD, and 16 compared fluoroscopic techniques to MRD. Detection and miss rates with MRD were not significantly different from clinical examination findings for any outcome except enterocele, where MRD had a higher detection rate (37.16% with MRD vs 25.08%; OR 2.23, 95% CI 1.21-4.11, p = 0.010) and lower miss rates (1.20 vs 37.35%; OR 0.05, 95% CI 0.01-0.20, p = 0.0001) compared to clinical examination. However, compared to fluoroscopy, MRD had a lower detection rate for rectoceles (61.84 vs 73.68%; OR 0.48 95% CI 0.30-0.76, p = 0.002) rectoanal intussusception (37.91 vs 57.14%; OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.16-0.66, p = 0.002) and perineal descent (52.29 vs 74.51%; OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.17-0.74, p = 0.006). Miss rates of MRD were also higher compared to fluoroscopy for rectoceles (15.96 vs 0%; OR 15.74, 95% CI 5.34-46.40, p < 0.00001), intussusception (36.11 vs 3.70%; OR 10.52, 95% CI 3.25-34.03, p = 0.0001) and perineal descent (32.11 vs 0.92%; OR 12.30, 95% CI 3.38-44.76, p = 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: MRD has a role in the assessment of pelvic floor dysfunction. However, clinicians need to be mindful of the risk of underdiagnosis and consider the use of additional imaging.

A systematic review of transabdominal levator division during abdominoperineal excision of the rectum (APER).

BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the surgical technique, short-term oncological and perioperative outcomes for the transabdominal division of the levator ani muscles during abdominoperineal excision of the rectum (APER). METHODS: A systematic review was performed to identify studies reporting on transabdominal division of the levator ani during APER. A comprehensive literature search was performed using a combination of free-text terms and controlled vocabulary when applicable on the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials in the Cochrane Library. The search period was from January 1945 to December 2015. The following search headings were used: "transabdominal", "transpelvic", "abdominal" or "pelvic" combined with either "levator" or "extralevator" and with "abdominoperineal". RESULTS: Nine publications were identified reporting on 99 participants. The male/female distribution was 1.44:1, respectively, and the mean age was 56.6 (30-77) years. All tumours were less than 5 cm from the anal verge. The preoperative radiological staging was T2 in 18% of cases, T3 in 53.5% and T4 in 28.5%. Transabdominal division of the levators was performed laparoscopically in 55 cases, robotically in 34 and open in 10. The mean operating time was 255 (177-640) min. Mean intraoperative blood loss was 140 (92-500) ml. There were no conversions to open. Circumferential resection margins were positive in two cases, and there was one intraoperative perforation. Mean post-operative length of stay was 9.3 (3-67) days. Follow-up (from 0 to 31 months) revealed 19 perineal wound infections, 15 cases of sexual dysfunction and 7 cases of urinary retention. There was no mortality and 1 readmission. CONCLUSIONS: Transabdominal division of the levators during APER is feasible and reproducible, with acceptable perioperative and good early oncological outcomes. Further comparative studies are needed.

A systematic review of transanal total mesorectal excision: is this the future of rectal cancer surgery?

AIM: The surgical technique used for transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) was reviewed including the oncological quality of resection and the peri-operative outcome. METHOD: A literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded and Cochrane was performed in order to identify studies reporting on TaTME. RESULTS: Thirty-six studies (eight case reports, 24 case series and four comparative studies) were identified, reporting 510 patients who underwent TaTME. The mean age ranged from 43 to 80 years and the mean body mass index from 21.7 to 31.8 kg/m(2) . The mean distance of the tumour from the anal verge ranged from 4 to 9.7 cm. The mean operation time ranged from 143 to 450 min and mean operative blood loss from 22 to 225 ml. The ratio of hand-sewn coloanal to stapled anastomoses performed was 2:1. One death was reported and the peri-operative morbidity rate was 35%. The anastomotic leakage rate was 6.1% and the reoperation rate was 3.7%. The mean hospital stay ranged from 4.3 to 16.6 days. The mesorectal excision was described as complete in 88% cases, nearly complete in 6% and incomplete in 6%. The circumferential resection margin was negative in 95% of cases and the distal resection margin was negative in 99.7%. CONCLUSION: TaTME is a feasible and reproducible technique, with good quality of oncological resection. Standardization of the technique is required with formal training. Clear indications for this procedure need to be defined and its safety further assessed in future trials.

Systematic review and network meta-analysis comparing clinical outcomes and effectiveness of surgical treatments for haemorrhoids.

BACKGROUND: The aim was to compare the clinical outcomes and effectiveness of surgical treatments for haemorrhoids. METHODS: Randomized clinical trials were identified by means of a systematic review. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed using the Markov chain Monte Carlo method in WinBUGS. RESULTS: Ninety-eight trials were included with 7827 participants and 11 surgical treatments for grade III and IV haemorrhoids. Open, closed and radiofrequency haemorrhoidectomies resulted in significantly more postoperative complications than transanal haemorrhoidal dearterialization (THD), LigaSure™ and Harmonic® haemorrhoidectomies. THD had significantly less postoperative bleeding than open and stapled procedures, and resulted in significantly fewer emergency reoperations than open, closed, stapled and LigaSure™ haemorrhoidectomies. Open and closed haemorrhoidectomies resulted in more pain on postoperative day 1 than stapled, THD, LigaSure™ and Harmonic® procedures. After stapled, LigaSure™ and Harmonic® haemorrhoidectomies patients resumed normal daily activities earlier than after open and closed procedures. THD provided the earliest time to first bowel movement. The stapled and THD groups had significantly higher haemorrhoid recurrence rates than the open, closed and LigaSure™ groups. Recurrence of haemorrhoidal symptoms was more common after stapled haemorrhoidectomy than after open and LigaSure™ operations. No significant difference was identified between treatments for anal stenosis, incontinence and perianal skin tags. CONCLUSION: Open and closed haemorrhoidectomies resulted in more postoperative complications and slower recovery, but fewer haemorrhoid recurrences. THD and stapled haemorrhoidectomies were associated with decreased postoperative pain and faster recovery, but higher recurrence rates. The advantages and disadvantages of each surgical treatment should be discussed with the patient before surgery to allow an informed decision to be made.

Systematic review of classification systems for locally recurrent rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Classification of pelvic local recurrence (LR) after surgery for primary rectal cancer is not currently standardized and optimal imaging is required to categorize anatomical site and plan treatment in patients with LR. The aim of this review was to evaluate the systems used to classify locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) and the relevant published outcomes. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature prior to April 2020 was performed through electronic searches of the Science Citation Index Expanded, EMBASE, MEDLINE and CENTRAL databases. The primary outcome was to review the classifications currently in use; the secondary outcome was the extraction of relevant information provided by these classification systems including prognosis, anatomy and prediction of R0 after surgery. RESULTS: A total of 21 out of 58 eligible studies, classifying LR in 2086 patients, were reviewed. Studies used at least one of the following eight classification systems proposed by institutions or institutional groups (Mayo Clinic, Memorial Sloan-Kettering - original and modified, Royal Marsden and Leeds) or authors (Yamada, Hruby and Kusters). Negative survival outcomes were associated with increased pelvic fixity, associated symptoms of LR, lateral compared with central LR and involvement of three or more pelvic compartments. A total of seven studies used MRI with specifically defined anatomical compartments to classify LR. CONCLUSION: This review highlights the various imaging systems in use to classify LRRC and some of the prognostic indicators for survival and oncological clearance based on these systems. Implementation of an agreed classification system to document pelvic LR consistently should provide more detailed information on anatomical site of recurrence, burden of disease and standards for comparative outcome assessment.

Factors associated with metachronous metastases and survival in locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Better understanding of the impact of metachronous metastases in locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer may improve decision-making. The aim of this study was to investigate factors influencing metachronous metastasis and its impact on survival in patients who have a beyond total mesorectal excision (bTME) operation. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of consecutive patients who had bTME surgery for locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer at a tertiary referral centre between January 2006 and December 2016. The primary outcome was overall survival. Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were performed. The influence of metachronous metastases on survival was investigated. RESULTS: Of 220 included patients, 171 were treated for locally advanced primary tumours and 49 for recurrent rectal cancer. Some 90·0 per cent had a complete resection with negative margins. Median follow-up was 26·0 (range 1·5-119·6) months. The 5-year overall survival rate was 71·1 per cent. Local recurrence and metachronous metastasis rates were 11·8 and 22·2 per cent respectively. Patients with metachronous metastases had a worse overall survival than patients without metastases (median 52·9 months versus estimated mean 109·4 months respectively; hazard ratio (HR) 6·73, 95 per cent c.i. 3·23 to 14·00). Advancing pT category (HR 2·01, 1·35 to 2·98), pN category (HR 2·43, 1·65 to 3·59), vascular invasion (HR 2·20, 1·22 to 3·97) and increasing numbers of positive lymph nodes (HR 1·19, 1·07 to 1·16) increased the risk of metachronous metastasis. Nine of 17 patients (53 per cent) with curatively treated synchronous metastases at presentation developed metachronous metastases, compared with 40 of 203 (19·7 per cent) without synchronous metastases (P = 0·002). Corresponding median length of disease-free survival was 17·5 versus 90·8 months (P < 0·001). CONCLUSION: As metachronous metastases impact negatively on survival after bTME surgery, factors associated with metachronous metastases may serve as selection tools when determining suitability for treatment with curative intent.

ANTECEDENTES: Una mejor comprensión del impacto de las metástasis metacrónicas en el cáncer de recto localmente avanzado y recidivante puede mejorar la toma de decisiones. El objetivo de este estudio fue investigar los factores que influyen en las metástasis metacrónicas y su impacto en la supervivencia en pacientes sometidos a una operación más amplia que una escisión total del mesorrecto (beyond total mesorectal excision, bTME). MÉTODOS: Se trata de un estudio retrospectivo de pacientes consecutivos sometidos a operaciones bTME por cáncer de recto localmente avanzado y recidivante en un centro de referencia terciario entre enero 2006 y diciembre 2016. El resultado primario fue la supervivencia global. Se realizaron análisis de regresión de riesgos proporcionales de Cox. Se evaluó la influencia de las metástasis metacrónicas en la supervivencia. RESULTADOS: De un total de 220 pacientes incluidos, 171 fueron tratados por tumores primarios localmente avanzados y 49 por una recidiva de cáncer de recto. Un 90% fue sometido a una resección completa con márgenes negativos. La mediana de seguimiento fue 260 meses (rango 1,5 a 119,6 meses). La supervivencia global a los 5 años fue del 71%. Las tasas de recidiva local y metástasis metacrónicas fueron del 11,8% y del 22,2%, respectivamente. Los pacientes con metástasis metacrónicas presentaron una supervivencia peor en comparación con los pacientes sin metástasis (mediana 46,7 versus 109,4 meses, cociente de riesgos instantáneos, hazard ratio, HR 6,73, i.c. del 95% 3,23-14,00). Los factores que aumentaron el riesgo de metástasis metacrónicas fueron un estadio T patológico avanzado HR 2,01 (i.c. del 95% 1,35-2,98), estadio N HR 2,43 (i.c. del 95% 1,65-3,59), invasión vascular HR 2,20 (i.c. del 95% 1,22-3,97) y un número creciente de ganglios linfáticos positivos HR 1,19 (i.c. del 95% 1,07-1,16). En pacientes con metástasis sincrónicas tratadas con intención curativa de inicio, el 52,9% desarrollaron metástasis metacrónicas versus el 19,7% en pacientes sin metástasis sincrónicas (P = 0,002). La mediana de la supervivencia libre de enfermedad (disease-free survival, DFS) correspondiente fue de 17,5 versus 90,8 meses (P < 0,0001). CONCLUSIÓN: Dado que las metástasis metacrónicas tienen un impacto negativo en la supervivencia tras cirugía bTME, los factores asociados con las metástasis metacrónicas pueden servir como variables de selección para decidir la idoneidad de un tratamiento con intención curativa.

Suture choice to reduce occurrence of surgical site infection, hernia, wound dehiscence and sinus/fistula: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: There are many options and little guiding evidence when choosing suture types with which to close the abdominal wall fascia. This network meta-analysis investigated the effect of suture materials on surgical site infection, hernia, wound dehiscence and sinus/fistula occurrence after abdominal surgery. The aim was to provide clarity on whether previous recommendations on suture choice could be followed with confidence. METHODS AND METHODS: In February 2017, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline, EMBASE and Science Citation Index Expanded were searched for randomised controlled trials investigating the effect of suture choice on these four complications in closing the abdomen. A reference search of identified trials was performed. Prisma guidelines and the Cochrane risk of bias tool were followed in the data extraction and synthesis. Two review authors screened titles and abstracts of trials identified. A random effect model was used for the surgical site infection network based on the deviance information criterion statistics. RESULTS: Thirty-one trials were included (11,533 participants). No suture material reached the predetermined 90% probability threshold for determination of 'best treatment' for any outcome. Pairwise comparisons largely showed no differences between suture types for all outcomes measured. However, nylon demonstrated a reduction in the occurrence of incisional hernias with respect to two commonly used absorbable sutures: polyglycolic acid (odds ratio, OR 1.91; 95% confidence interval, CI, 1.01-3.63) and polyglyconate (OR 2.18; 95% CI 1.17-4.07). CONCLUSIONS: No suture type can be considered the 'best treatment' for the prevention of surgical site infection, hernia, wound dehiscence and sinus/fistula occurrence.

Does a missed obstetric anal sphincter injury at time of delivery affect short-term functional outcome?

Introduction This study aimed to ascertain whether missed obstetric anal sphincter injury at delivery had worse functional and quality of life outcomes than primary repair immediately following delivery. Materials and methods Two to one propensity matching was undertaken of patients presenting to a tertiary pelvic floor unit with ultrasound evidence of missed obstetric anal sphincter injury within 24 months of delivery with patients who underwent primary repair at the time of delivery by parity, grade of injury and time to assessment. Outcomes compared included Birmingham Bowel, Bladder and Urinary Symptom Questionnaire (BBUSQ), Wexner Incontinence Score, Short Form-36, Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire and anorectal physiology results. Results Thirty-two missed anal sphincter injuries were matched two to one with sixty-two patients who underwent primary repair of an anal sphincter defect. Mean time to follow-up was 9.31 ± 6.79 months. Patients with a missed anal sphincter injury had suffered more incontinence, as seen in higher the Birmingham Bowel, Bladder and Urinary Symptom Questionnaire (BBUSQ; 30.56% ± 14.41% vs. 19.75% ± 15.65%, P = 0.002) and Wexner scores (6.00 ± 3.76 vs. 3.67 ± 4.06, P = 0.009). They also had a worse BBUSQ urinary domain score (28.25% ± 14.9% vs. 17.01 ± 13.87%, P = 0.001) and worse physical functioning as measured by the Short Form-36 questionnaire (P = 0.045). There were no differences in other outcomes compared, including anorectal physiology and sexual function. Discussion In the short-term, patients with a missed obstetric anal sphincter injury had significantly worse faecal incontinence and urinary function scores, however quality of life and sexual function were largely comparable between groups. Conclusions Longer-term follow-up is needed to assess the effects of missed obstetric anal sphincter injury over time.

A meta-analysis assessing the survival implications of subclassifying T3 rectal tumours.

AIM: Although T3 tumour subclassifications have been linked to prognosis, its mandatory adoption in histopathological reports has not been incorporated. This article focusses on the survival outcomes in patients with T3 rectal cancer according to extramural spread beyond the muscularis propria. METHODS: A systematic review of all studies up to January 2016, without language restriction, was identified from MEDLINE, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (1960-2016) and Embase (1991-2016). All studies reporting on survival and T3 tumours with a defined cut-off of 5 mm ± 1 mm tumour invasion beyond the muscularis propria for rectal cancers were included. Hazard ratios were extracted directly from the studies or from survival curves using the technique described by Parmar. Quality assessment was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. RESULTS: Tumours with invasion more than 5 ± 1 mm from the muscularis propria had statistically significantly worse overall survival (natural log of the hazard ratio [lnHR]: 1.40 [1.06, 2.04], p < 0.001) and there was no statistically significant heterogeneity (χ2 = 1.541, df = 3, p = 0.673, I2 = 0). There was statistically significantly worse disease-free survival in more invasive tumours (lnHR: 1.49 [1.19, 2.00], p < 0.001) and cancer specific survival (lnHR: 1.22 [0.917, 1.838], p < 0.001). Overall survival in patients who had preoperative therapy was higher in patients with less invasion beyond the muscularis propria [p < 0.01]. CONCLUSIONS: Subclassifying all T3 rectal tumours according to the depth of spread with a cut-off of 5±1 mm beyond the muscularis propria is prognostically relevant for overall survival, disease-free survival and cancer-specific survival irrespective of the nodal status; therefore, subclassifying T3 tumours should be a reporting requirement in histopathology reports.

A meta-analysis comparing simultaneous versus delayed resections in patients with synchronous colorectal liver metastases.

INTRODUCTION: The traditional surgical management for patients presenting with synchronous colorectal liver metastases (SCLM) has been a delayed resection. However, in some centres, there has been a shift in favour of 'simultaneous' resections. The aim of this study was to use a meta-analytical model to compare the short-term and long-term outcomes in patients with synchronous colorectal liver metastases (SCLM) undergoing simultaneous resections versus delayed resections. METHOD: Comparative studies published between 1991 and 2010 were included. Evaluated endpoints were intra-operative parameters, post-operative parameters, post-operative adverse events and survival. A random-effects meta-analytical model was used and sensitivity analysis performed to account for bias in patient selection. RESULTS: Twenty-four non-randomized studies were included, reporting on 3159 patients of which 1381 (43.7%) had simultaneous resections and 1778 (56.3%) had delayed resections. The bilobar distribution (P = 0.01), size of liver metastases (P < 0.001) and the proportion of major liver resections (P < 0.001) was found to be higher in the delayed resection group compared to the simultaneous resection group. There was no significant difference in operative blood loss (95% CI, -279.28, 22.53; P = 0.1) or duration of surgery (WMD -23.83, 95% CI, -85.04, 37.38; P = 0.45). Duration of hospital stay was significantly reduced in simultaneous resections by 5.6 days (95% CI: 2.4-8.9 days, P = 0.007) No significant differences in post-operative complications (36% vs 37%, P = 0.27), overall survival (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.86-1.15, P = 0.96) or disease free survival (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.71-1.02, P = 0.08) were found. Sensitivity analysis revealed that these findings were consistent for the duration of hospital stay, post-operative complications, overall survival and disease free survival. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that the selection criteria for patients undergoing simultaneous or delayed resections differs resulting in a discrepancy in the metastatic disease severity being compared between the two groups. The comparable intra-operative parameters, post-operative complications and survival found between the two groups suggest that delayed resections may result in better outcomes. Similarly, the reduced length of hospital stay in simultaneous resections may only be as a result of the reduced disease severity in this group. Simultaneous resections can only be recommended in patients with limited hepatic disease until prospective studies comparing similar disease burdens between the two resection groups are available.

A systematic review of early versus delayed treatment for type III supracondylar humeral fractures in children.

We performed a systematic review of early versus delayed treatment for type III Gartland supracondylar humeral fractures in children. We identified five non-randomised retrospective studies that fulfilled our criteria. We performed the analysis on 396 patients who sustained a type III supracondylar humeral fracture of which 243 (61.4%) belonged to the early treatment group and 153 (38.6%) belonged to the delayed treatment group. The planned treatment was closed reduction and percutaneous pin fixation. We found that failure of closed reduction and conversion to open reduction was significantly higher in the delayed treatment group (22.9%) as compared with the early treatment group (11.1%). Our study provides evidence that type III supracondylar humeral fractures in children should be treated early within 12h of injury.