Development of Desmoid Tumors After Ileorectal Anastomosis Versus Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis in Familial Adenomatous Polyposis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Desmoid tumors (DT) are an important cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). DT development might be related to the type and approach of colectomy. We aimed to compare DT development after colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis (IRA) and proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA). METHODS: We performed an international historical cohort study in patients with FAP who underwent IRA or IPAA between 1961 and 2020. The primary outcome was the incidence of abdominal DT (either mesenteric, retroperitoneal, or abdominal wall). Patients with a DT diagnosis before or at colectomy were excluded. Time to DT was considered censored at an eventual secondary proctectomy after IRA. We used multivariable Cox regression modelling to adjust for potential confounders. RESULTS: We analyzed data from 852 patients: 514 after IRA and 338 after IPAA (median follow-up, 21 and 16 years, respectively). DTs were diagnosed in 64 IRA patients (12%) and 66 IPAA patients (20%). The cumulative DT incidence at 5 and 10 years was 7.5% and 9.3% after open IRA and 4.7% and 10.9% after laparoscopic IRA. These estimates were 13.6% and 15.4% after open IPAA and 8.4% and 10.0% after laparoscopic IPAA. The postoperative risk was significantly higher after IPAA (P < .01) in multivariable analysis, whereas approach did not significantly influence the risk. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of developing an abdominal DT was found to be significantly higher after IPAA than after IRA. Postoperative DT risk should be taken into account when choosing between IRA and IPAA in FAP.

Comparison of Postoperative Complications After Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer with Antecolic Versus Retrocolic Reconstruction: A Population-Based Study.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to examine the rates of 90-day anastomotic complications and other postoperative complications after total or partial gastrectomy with antecolic versus retrocolic reconstruction in a population-based setting. METHODS: This population-based nationwide retrospective cohort study included all patients undergoing total or partial gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma in Finland in 2005-2016, with follow-up until 31 December 2019. Logistic regression provided odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of 90-day mortality. Results were adjusted for age, sex, year of the surgery, comorbidities, tumor locations, pathological stage, and neoadjuvant therapy. RESULTS: A total of 2063 patients having gastrectomy with antecolic (n = 814) or retrocolic (n = 1249) reconstruction were identified from the registries. The anastomotic complication rate was 3.8% with antecolic reconstruction and 5.0% with retrocolic reconstruction. Antecolic reconstruction was not associated with a higher risk of anastomotic complications compared with retrocolic reconstruction in the adjusted analysis (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.44-1.09) of the whole cohort or in the predefined subgroups. The reoperation rate was 8.2% with antecolic reconstruction and 7.7% with retrocolic reconstruction, without statistical significance. In subgroup analysis of total gastrectomy patients, the risk of major complications was lower with antecolic reconstruction compared with retrocolic reconstruction (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.45-0.86). CONCLUSIONS: The rate of anastomotic complications did not differ after antecolic versus retrocolic reconstruction after total or partial gastrectomy. In total gastrectomies, the risk of major complications was lower after antecolic compared with retrocolic reconstruction.

The Effect of Laparoscopic Gastric Ischemic Preconditioning Prior to Esophagectomy on Anastomotic Stricture Rate and Comparison with Esophagectomy-Alone Controls.

BACKGROUND: Benign anastomotic stricture is a recognized complication following esophagectomy. Laparoscopic gastric ischemic preconditioning (LGIP) prior to esophagectomy has been associated with decreased anastomotic leak rates; however, its effect on stricture and the need for subsequent endoscopic intervention is not well studied. METHODS: This was a case-control study at an academic medical center using consecutive patients undergoing oncologic esophagectomies (July 2012-July 2022). Our institution initiated an LGIP protocol on 1 January 2021. The primary outcome was the occurrence of stricture within 1 year of esophagectomy, while secondary outcomes were stricture severity and frequency of interventions within the 6 months following stricture. Bivariable comparisons were performed using Chi-square, Fisher's exact, or Mann-Whitney U tests. Multivariable regression controlling for confounders was performed to generate risk-adjust odds ratios and to identify the independent effect of LGIP. RESULTS: Of 253 esophagectomies, 42 (16.6%) underwent LGIP prior to esophagectomy. There were 45 (17.7%) anastomotic strictures requiring endoscopic intervention, including three patients who underwent LGIP and 42 who did not. Median time to stricture was 144 days. Those who underwent LGIP were significantly less likely to develop anastomotic stricture (7.1% vs. 19.9%; p = 0.048). After controlling for confounders, this difference was no longer significant (odds ratio 0.46, 95% confidence interval 0.14-1.82; p = 0.29). Of those who developed stricture, there was a trend toward less severe strictures and decreased need for endoscopic dilation in the LGIP group (all p < 0.20). CONCLUSION: LGIP may reduce the rate and severity of symptomatic anastomotic stricture following esophagectomy. A multi-institutional trial evaluating the effect of LGIP on stricture and other anastomotic complications is warranted.

Short-term outcomes and long-term quality of life of reconstruction methods after proximal gastrectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The optimal reconstruction method after proximal gastrectomy remains unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the short-term outcomes and long-term quality of life of various reconstruction methods. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library were searched to identify comparative studies concerning the reconstruction methods after proximal gastrectomy. The reconstruction methods were classified into six groups: double tract reconstruction (DTR), esophagogastrostomy (EG), gastric tube reconstruction (GT), jejunal interposition (JI), jejunal pouch interposition (JPI) and double flap technique (DFT). Esophagogastric anastomosis group (EG group) included EG, GT and DFT, while esophagojejunal anastomosis group (EJ group) included DTR, JI and JPI. RESULTS: A total of 27 studies with 2410 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled results indicated that the incidences of reflux esophagitis of DTR, EG, GT, JI, JPI and DFT were 7.6%, 27.3%, 4.5%, 7.1%, 14.0%, and 9.1%, respectively. The EG group had more reflux esophagitis (OR = 3.68, 95%CI 2.44-5.57, P < 0.00001) and anastomotic stricture (OR = 1.58, 95%CI 1.02-2.45, P = 0.04) than the EJ group. But the EG group showed shorter operation time (MD=-56.34, 95%CI -76.75- -35.94, P < 0.00001), lesser intraoperative blood loss (MD=-126.52, 95%CI -187.91- -65.12, P < 0.0001) and shorter postoperative hospital stay (MD=-2.07, 95%CI -3.66- -0.48, P = 0.01). Meanwhile, the EG group had fewer postoperative complications (OR = 0.68, 95%CI 0.51-0.90, P = 0.006) and lesser weight loss (MD=-1.25, 95%CI -2.11- -0.39, P = 0.004). For specific reconstruction methods, there were lesser reflux esophagitis (OR = 0.10, 95%CI 0.06-0.18, P < 0.00001) and anastomotic stricture (OR = 0.14, 95%CI 0.06-0.33, P < 0.00001) in DTR than the esophagogastrostomy. DTR and esophagogastrostomy showed no significant difference in anastomotic leakage (OR = 1.01, 95%CI 0.34-3.01, P = 0.98). CONCLUSION: Esophagojejunal anastomosis after proximal gastrectomy can reduce the incidences of reflux esophagitis and anastomotic stricture, while esophagogastric anastomosis has advantages in technical simplicity and long-term weight status. Double tract reconstruction is a safe technique with excellent anti-reflux effectiveness and favorable quality of life. REGISTRATION: This meta-analysis was registered on the PROSPERO (CRD42022381357).

Nomogram for predicting the probability of rectal anastomotic re-leakage after stoma closure: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: In this study, we aimed to identify the risk factors in patients with rectal anastomotic re-leakage and develop a prediction model to predict the probability of rectal anastomotic re-leakage after stoma closure. METHODS: This study was a single-center retrospective analysis of patients with rectal cancer who underwent surgery between January 2010 and December 2020. Among 3225 patients who underwent Total or Partial Mesorectal Excision (TME/PME) surgery for rectal cancer, 129 who experienced anastomotic leakage following stoma closure were enrolled. Risk factors for rectal anastomotic re-leakage were analyzed, and a prediction model was established for rectal anastomotic re-leakage. RESULTS: Anastomotic re-leakage after stoma closure developed in 13.2% (17/129) of patients. Multivariable analysis revealed that neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (odds ratio, 4.07; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-14.21; p = 0.03), blood loss > 50 ml (odds ratio, 4.52; 95% confidence interval, 1.31-15.63; p = 0.02), and intersphincteric resection (intersphincteric resection vs. low anterior resection: odds ratio, 6.85; 95% confidence interval, 2.01-23.36; p = 0.002) were independent risk factors for anastomotic re-leakage. A nomogram was constructed to predict the probability of anastomotic re-leakage, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.828 in the cohort. Predictive results correlated with the actual results according to the calibration curve. CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, blood loss > 50 ml, and intersphincteric resection are independent risk factors for anastomotic re-leakage following stoma closure. The nomogram can help surgeons identify patients at a higher risk of rectal anastomotic re-leakage.

Risk factors for esophageal anastomotic stricture after esophagectomy: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess the risk factors for anastomotic stricture in esophageal cancer patients undergoing esophagectomy. Esophageal anastomotic stricture is the most common long-term complication for esophagectomy. The risk factors for esophageal anastomotic stricture still remain controversial. METHODS: MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE were searched to identify observational studies reporting the risk factors for esophageal anastomotic stricture after esophagectomy. A meta-analysis was conducted to investigate the impact of various risk factors on esophageal anastomotic stricture. The GRADE [Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation] approach was used for quality assessment of evidence on outcome levels. RESULTS: This review included 14 studies evaluating 5987 patients.The meta-analysis found that anastomotic leakage (odds ratio [OR]: 2.75; 95% confidence interval[CI]:2.16-3.49), cardiovascular disease [OR:1.62; 95% CI: 1.22-2.16],diabete [OR: 1.62; 95% CI: 1.20-2.19] may be risk factors for esophageal anastomotic stricture.There were no association between neoadjuvant therapy [OR: 0.78; 95% CI:0.62-0.97], wide gastric conduit [OR:0.98; 95% CI: 0.37-2.56],mechanical anastomosis [OR: 0.84; 95% CI:0.47-1.48],colonic interposition[OR:0.20; 95% CI: 0.12-0.35],and transhiatal approach[OR:1.16; 95% CI:0.81-1.64],with the risk of esophageal anastomotic stricture. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis provides some evidence that anastomotic leakage,cardiovascular disease and diabete may be associated with higher rates of esophageal anastomotic stricture.Knowledge about those risk factors may influence treatment and procedure-related decisions,and possibly reduce the anastomotic stricture rate.

Comparison of lumen-apposing metal stents versus endoscopic balloon dilation for the management of benign colorectal anastomotic strictures.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Limited data exist evaluating lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) with endoscopic balloon dilation (EBD) for the treatment of benign colorectal anastomotic strictures (BCASs). This study compares outcomes of both interventions. METHODS: Patients with left-sided BCAS treated with LAMSs versus EBD were identified retrospectively. The primary outcome was a composite of crossover to another intervention to achieve clinical success or recurrence requiring reintervention. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients (11 LAMS and 18 EBD) were identified with longer follow-up in the EBD group (734 vs 142 days; P = .003). No significant differences were found in the composite outcome, technical success, clinical success, or components of composite outcome. With LAMS, there was a nonsignificant trend toward fewer procedures (2.4 vs 3.3; P = .06) and adverse events (0% vs 16.7%; P = .26). CONCLUSIONS: LAMS appears to be as effective as EBD for the treatment of BCAS but may require fewer procedures and may be safer than EBD.

Digestive neo-epithelialization after endoscopic stenting for upper digestive tract complete disunion.

BACKGROUND: Complete digestive disunion due to anastomotic necrosis is considered a contraindication to endoscopic repair. However, recent publications have suggested that endoscopic treatment by insertion of a self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) is possible. The report of this patient series aims to demonstrate the use of endoscopic management in selected cases with complete digestive disunion. METHODS: Seven consecutive patients with complete and circumferential upper gastrointestinal anastomotic disunion were treated at two European tertiary care centers between 2009 and 2021 by endoscopic insertion of an SEMS. Treatment was performed with a therapeutic gastroscope under general anesthesia, carbon dioxide insufflation, and fluoroscopic guidance, after surgical or percutaneous drainage. RESULTS: All patients were successfully treated by endoscopic insertion of fully or partially covered SEMS left in place for a median of 8 weeks, with a median of 3 endoscopic sessions. Digestive neo-epithelialization was associated with a restored circumferential gut lumen in all cases. The rate of stent migration was 23% and three patients (43%) experienced symptomatic strictures, which were successfully treated by endoscopic dilation. CONCLUSION: Complete digestive rupture could be successfully treated by endoscopy in selected cases, adding proof-of-concept data regarding guided tissue regeneration alongside SEMS placement.

Endoscopic resection of large anastomotic polyps is safe and effective.

BACKGROUND: Large (≥20mm) adenomatous anastomotic polyps (LAAPs) are uncommon. Data pertaining to their prevalence, characteristics, and the efficacy of endoscopic resection (ER) are absent. A safe and effective strategy for ER would reduce morbidity and healthcare costs. METHODS: Large nonpedunculated colorectal polyps of ≥20mm (LNPCPs) referred for ER were prospectively studied. Multiple data points were recorded including anastomotic location, polyp morphology, resection modality, complications, and technical success. RESULTS: Over 7 years until November 2022, 2629 lesions were referred. Of these, 10 (0.4%) were LAAPs (median size 35 mm [interquartile range (IQR) 30-40mm]). All LAAPs were removed by piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), most (n=9; 90%) in combination with cold-forceps avulsion with adjuvant snare-tip soft coagulation (CAST). On comparison of the LAAP group with the conventional LNPCP group, CAST was more commonly used (90% vs. 9%; P<0.001) and deep mural injury (DMI) type II was more frequent (40% vs. 11%, P=0.003); however, significant DMI (III-V) did not occur. At 6 month (IQR 5.25-6 months) surveillance, there was no recurrence in any of the 10 cases. There were no serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: LAAPs present unique challenges owing to their location overlying an anastomosis. Despite these challenges they can be safely and effectively managed endoscopically without recurrence at endoscopic follow-up.

Post-prostatectomy anastomotic stenosis: systematic review and meta-analysis of endoscopic treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of endoscopic procedures for treating vesico-urethral anastomotic stenosis (VUAS) after prostatectomy, as initial VUAS management remains unclear. METHODS: A search of the MEDLINE database, the Cochrane database, and clinicaltrials.gov was performed (last search February 2023) using the following query: (['bladder neck' OR 'vesicourethral anastomotic' OR 'anastomotic'] AND ['stricture' OR 'stenosis' OR 'contracture'] AND 'prostatectomy'). The primary outcome was the success rate of VUAS treatment, defined by the proportion (%) of patients without VUAS recurrence at the end of follow-up. RESULTS: The literature search identified 420 studies. After the screening, 78 reports were assessed for eligibility, and 40 studies were included in the review. The pooled characteristics of the 40 studies provided a total of 1452 patients, with a median (interquartile range [IQR]) follow-up of 23.7 (13-32) months and age of 66 (64-68) years. The overall success rate (95% confidence interval [CI]) of all endoscopic procedures for VUAS treatment was 72.8% (64.4%-79.9%). Meta-regression models showed a negative influence of radiotherapy on the overall success rate (P = 0.012). After trim-and-fill (addition of 10 studies), the corrected overall success rate (95% CI) was 62.9% (53.6%-71.4%). CONCLUSION: This first meta-analysis of endoscopic treatment success rate after VUAS reported an overall success rate of 72.8%, lowered to 62.9% after correcting for significant publication bias. This study also highlighted the need for a more thorough reporting of post-prostatectomy VUAS data to understand the treatment pathway and provide higher-quality evidence-based care.

Stapled Anastomosis Versus Hand-Sewn Anastomosis With Mucosectomy for Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Postoperative Outcomes, Functional Outcomes, and Oncological Safety.

PURPOSE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare outcomes between stapled ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) and hand-sewn IPAA with mucosectomy in cases of ulcerative colitis and familial adenomatous polyposis. METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis) guidelines 2020 and AMSTAR 2 (Assessing the methodological quality of systematic reviews) guidelines. We included randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs). Subgroup analysis was performed according to the indication for surgery. RESULTS: The bibliographic research yielded 31 trials: 3 RCTs, 5 prospective clinical trials, and 24 CCTs including 8872 patients: 4871 patients in the stapled group and 4038 in the hand-sewn group. Regarding postoperative outcomes, the stapled group had a lower rate of anastomotic stricture, small bowel obstruction, and ileal pouch failure. There were no differences between the 2 groups in terms of operative time, anastomotic leak, pelvic sepsis, pouchitis, or hospital stay. For functional outcomes, the stapled group was associated with greater outcomes in terms of seepage per day and by night, pad use, night incontinence, resting pressure, and squeeze pressure. There were no differences in stool Frequency per 24h, stool frequency at night, antidiarrheal medication, sexual impotence, or length of the high-pressure zone. There was no difference between the 2 groups in terms of dysplasia and neoplasia. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to hand-sewn anastomosis, stapled ileoanal anastomosis leads to a large reduction in anastomotic stricture, small bowel obstruction, ileal pouch failure, seepage by day and night, pad use, and night incontinence. This may ensure a higher resting pressure and squeeze pressure in manometry evaluation. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: The protocol was registered at PROSPERO under CRD 42022379880.

Quality of Reporting on Anastomotic Leaks in Colorectal Cancer Trials: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Although attempts have been made in the past to establish consensus regarding the definitions and grading of the severity of colorectal anastomotic leakage, widespread adoption has remained limited. OBJECTIVE: A systematic review of the literature was conducted to examine the various elements used to report and define anastomotic leakage in colorectal cancer resections. DATA SOURCES: A systematic review was conducted using the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library Database. STUDY SELECTION: All published randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses containing data related to adult patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery and reporting anastomotic leakage as a primary or secondary outcome, with a definition of anastomotic leakage were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Definitions of anastomotic leakage, clinical symptoms, radiological modalities and findings, findings at reoperation, and grading terminology or classifications for anastomotic leakage. RESULTS: Of the 471 articles reporting anastomotic leakage as a primary or secondary outcome, a definition was reported in 95 studies (45 randomized controlled trials, 13 systematic reviews, and 37 meta-analyses) involving a total of 346,140 patients. Of these 95 articles, 68% reported clinical signs and symptoms of anastomotic leakage, 26% biochemical criteria, 63% radiological modalities, 62% radiological findings, and 13% findings at reintervention. Only 45% (n = 43) of included studies reported grading of anastomotic leakage severity or leak classification, and 41% (n = 39) included a time frame for reporting. LIMITATIONS: There was a high level of heterogeneity between the included studies. CONCLUSIONS: This evidence synthesis confirmed incomplete and inconsistent reporting of anastomotic leakage across the published colorectal cancer literature. There is a great need to develop and implement a consensus framework for defining, grading, and reporting anastomotic leakage. REGISTRATION: Prospectively registered at PROSPERO (ID 454660).

Association Between Cross-Stapling Technique in Mechanical Colorectal Anastomosis and Short-term Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The double-stapled technique is the most common method of colorectal anastomosis in minimally invasive surgery. Several modifications to the conventional technique have been described to reduce the intersection between the stapled lines, as the resulting lateral dog-ears are considered possible risk factors for anastomotic leakage. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to analyze the outcomes of patients receiving conventional versus modified stapled colorectal anastomosis after minimally invasive surgery. DATA SOURCES: A systematic review of the published literature was undertaken. PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Embase databases were screened up to July 2023. STUDY SELECTION: Relevant articles were searched according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Articles reporting on the outcomes of patients with modified stapled colorectal reconstruction compared with the conventional method of double-stapled anastomosis were included. INTERVENTIONS: Conventional double-stapling colorectal anastomosis and modified techniques with reduced intersection between the stapled lines were compared. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The rate of anastomotic leak was the primary end point of interest. Perioperative details including postoperative morbidity were also appraised. RESULTS: There were 2537 patients from 12 studies included for data extraction, with no significant differences in age, BMI, or proportion of high ASA score between patients who had conventional versus modified techniques of reconstructions. The risk of anastomotic leak was 62% lower for the modified procedure than for the conventional procedure (OR = 0.38 [95% CI, 0.26-0.56]). The incidences of overall postoperative morbidity (OR = 0.57 [95% CI, 0.45-0.73]) and major morbidity (OR = 0.48 [95% CI, 0.32-0.72]) following modified stapled anastomosis were significantly lower than following conventional double-stapled anastomosis. LIMITATIONS: The retrospective nature of most included studies is a main limitation, essentially because of the lack of randomization and the risk of selection and detection bias. CONCLUSIONS: The available evidence supports the modification of the conventional double-stapled technique with the elimination of 1 of both dog-ears as it is associated with a lower incidence of anastomotic-related morbidity.

Controversies in IPAA for Ulcerative Colitis: A Systematic Review of Different Anastomotic Techniques.

BACKGROUND: Available techniques for IPAA in ulcerative colitis include handsewn, double-stapled, and single-stapled anastomoses. There are controversies, indications, and different outcomes regarding these techniques. OBJECTIVE: To describe technical details, indications, and outcomes of 3 specific types of anastomoses in restorative proctocolectomy. DATA SOURCE: Systematic literature review for articles in the PubMed database according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses criteria. STUDY SELECTION: Studies describing outcomes of the 3 different types of anastomoses, during pouch surgery, in patients undergoing restorative proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis. INTERVENTION: IPAA technique. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Postoperative outcomes (anastomotic leaks, overall complication rates, and pouch function). RESULTS: Twenty-one studies were initially included: 6 studies exclusively on single-stapled IPAA, 2 exclusively on double-stapled IPAA, 6 studies comparing single-stapled to double-stapled techniques, 6 comparing double-stapled to handsewn IPAA, and 1 comprising single-stapled to handsewn IPAA. Thirty-seven studies were added according to authors' discretion as complementary evidence. Between 1990 and 2015, most studies were related to double-stapled IPAA, either only analyzing the results of this technique or comparing it with the handsewn technique. Studies published after 2015 were mostly related to transanal approaches to proctectomy for IPAA, in which a single-stapled anastomosis was introduced instead of the double-stapled anastomosis, with some studies comparing both techniques. LIMITATIONS: A low number of studies with handsewn IPAA technique and a large number of studies added at authors' discretion were the limitations of this strudy. CONCLUSIONS: Handsewn IPAA should be considered if a mucosectomy is performed for dysplasia or cancer in the low rectum or, possibly, for re-do surgery. Double-stapled IPAA has been more widely adopted for its simplicity and for the advantage of preserving the anal transition zone, having lower complications, and having adequate pouch function. The single-stapled IPAA offers a more natural design, is feasible, and is associated with reasonable outcomes compared to double-stapled anastomosis. See video from symposium.

State of the Art: Pouch Surgery in the 21st Century.

BACKGROUND: An ileoanal pouch with IPAA is the preferred method to restore intestinal continuity in patients who require a total proctocolectomy. Pouch surgery has evolved during the past decades thanks to increased experience and research, changes in the medical management of patients who require an ileal pouch, and technological innovations. OBJECTIVE: To review the main changes in pouch surgery over the past 2 decades, with a focus on staging, minimally invasive and transanal approaches, pouch design, and anastomotic configuration. RESULTS: The decision on the staging approach depends on the patient's conditions, their indication for surgery, and the risk of anastomotic leak. A minimally invasive approach should be performed whenever feasible, but open surgery still has a role in this technically demanding operation. Transanal IPAA may be performed in experienced centers and may reduce conversion to open surgery in the hostile pelvis. The J-pouch is the easiest, fastest, and most commonly performed design, but other designs may be used when a J-pouch is not feasible. A stapled anastomosis without mucosectomy can be safely performed in the majority of cases, with a low incidence of rectal cuff neoplasia and better functional outcomes than handsewn. Finally, Crohn's disease is not an absolute contraindication to an ileoanal pouch, but pouch failure may be higher compared to other indications. CONCLUSIONS: Many technical nuances contribute to the success of an ileoanal pouch. The current standard of care is a laparoscopic J-pouch with double-stapled anastomosis, but this should not be seen as a dogma, and the optimal approach and design should be tailored to each patient. See video from symposium.

Risk Factors for Postoperative Complications of Laparoscopic Right Colectomy: A Post Hoc Analysis of the RELARC Trial.

BACKGROUND: There is concern regarding the possibility of postoperative complications for laparoscopic right colectomy. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the risk factors for postoperative complications for patients undergoing laparoscopic right colectomy. DESIGN: This was an observational study. SETTINGS: This was a post hoc analysis of a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial (RELARC trial, NCT02619942). PATIENTS: Patients included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis in the RELARC trial were all enrolled in this study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Risk factors for postoperative complications were identified using univariate and multivariable logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Of 995 patients, 206 (20.7%) had postoperative complications. Comorbidity ( p = 0.02; OR: 1.544; 95% CI, 1.077-2.212) and operative time >180 minutes ( p = 0.03; OR: 1.453; 95% CI, 1.032-2.044) were independent risk factors for postoperative complications, whereas female sex ( p = 0.04; OR: 0.704; 95% CI, 0.506-0.980) and extracorporeal anastomosis ( p < 0.001; OR: 0.251; 95% CI, 0.166-0.378) were protective factors. Eighty patients (8.0%) had overall surgical site infection, 53 (5.3%) had incisional surgical site infection, and 33 (3.3%) had organ/space surgical site infection. Side-to-side anastomosis was a risk factor for overall surgical site infection ( p < 0.001; OR: 1.912; 95% CI, 1.118-3.268) and organ/space surgical site infection ( p = 0.005; OR: 3.579; 95% CI, 1.455-8.805). The extracorporeal anastomosis was associated with a reduced risk of overall surgical site infection ( p < 0.001; OR: 0.239; 95% CI, 0.138-0.413), organ/space surgical site infection ( p = 0.002; OR: 0.296; 95% CI, 0.136-0.646), and incisional surgical site infection ( p < 0.001; OR: 0.179; 95% CI, 0.099-0.322). Diabetes ( p = 0.039; OR: 2.090; 95% CI, 1.039-4.205) and conversion to open surgery ( p = 0.013; OR: 5.403; 95% CI, 1.437-20.319) were risk factors for incisional surgical site infection. LIMITATIONS: Due to the retrospective nature, the key limitation is the lack of prospective documentation and standardization regarding the perioperative management of these patients, such as preoperative optimization, bowel preparation regimens, and antibiotic regimens, which may be confounder factors of complications. All surgeries were performed by experienced surgeons, and the patients enrolled were relatively young, generally healthy, and without obesity. It is unclear whether the results will be generalizable to obese and other populations worldwide. CONCLUSIONS: Male sex, comorbidity, prolonged operative time, and intracorporeal anastomosis were independent risk factors for postoperative complications of laparoscopic right colectomy. Side-to-side anastomosis was associated with an increased risk of organ/space surgical site infection. Extracorporeal anastomosis could reduce the incidence of overall surgical site infection. Diabetes and conversion to open surgery were associated with an increased risk of incisional surgical site infection. See Video Abstract . CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER: NCT02619942. FACTORES DE RIESGO DE COMPLICACIONES POSOPERATORIAS EN COLECTOMA DERECHA LAPAROSCPICA UN ANLISIS POST HOC DEL ENSAYO RELARC: ANTECEDENTES:Existe preocupación con respecto a la posibilidad de complicaciones postoperatorias en colectomía derecha laparoscópica.OBJETIVO:Evaluar los factores de riesgo de complicaciones postoperatorias en pacientes sometidos a colectomía derecha laparoscópica.DISEÑO:Este fue un estudio observacional.ENTORNO CLINICO:Este fue un análisis post hoc de un ensayo controlado aleatorio, multicéntrico y prospectivo: ensayo RELARC (NCT02619942).PACIENTES:Todos los pacientes incluidos en el análisis de intención de tratar modificado en el ensayo RELARC fueron inscritos en este estudio.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Los factores de riesgo de complicaciones posoperatorias se identificaron mediante análisis de regresión logística univariante y multivariable.RESULTADOS:De 995 pacientes, 206 (20,7%) tuvieron complicaciones postoperatorias. La comorbilidad ( p = 0,02, OR: 1,544, IC 95%: 1,077-2,212) y el tiempo operatorio >180 min ( p = 0,03, OR: 1,453, IC 95%: 1,032-2,044) fueron factores de riesgo independientes de complicaciones postoperatorias. Mientras que el sexo femenino ( p = 0,04, OR: 0,704, IC 95%: 0,506-0,980) y la anastomosis extracorpórea ( p < 0,001, OR: 0,251, IC 95%: 0,166-0,378) fueron factores protectores. 80 (8,0%) tenían infección general del sitio quirúrgico (ISQ), 53 (5,3%) tenían ISQ incisional y 33 (3,3%) tenían ISQ de órgano/espacio. Anastomosis latero-lateral fue un factor de riesgo para la ISQ general ( p < 0,001, OR: 1,912, IC 95%: 1,118-3,268) y ISQ órgano/espacio ( p = 0,005, OR: 3,579, IC 95%: 1,455-8.805). La anastomosis extracorpórea se asoció con un riesgo reducido de ISQ general ( p < 0,001, OR: 0,239, IC 95%: 0,138-0,413), ISQ órgano/espacio ( p = 0,002, OR: 0,296, IC 95%: 0,136-0,646), e ISQ incisional ( p < 0,001, OR: 0,179, IC 95%: 0,099-0,322). Diabetes ( p = 0,039, OR: 2,090, IC 95%: 1,039-4,205) y la conversión a cirugía abierta ( p = 0,013, OR: 5,403, IC 95%: 1,437-20,319) fueron factores de riesgo para ISQ incisional.LIMITACIONES:Debido a la naturaleza retrospectiva, la limitación clave es la falta de documentación prospectiva y estandarización sobre el manejo perioperatorio de estos pacientes, como la optimización preoperatoria, los regímenes de preparación intestinal y los regímenes de antibióticos, que pueden ser factores de confusión de las complicaciones. Todas las cirugías fueron realizadas por cirujanos experimentados y los pacientes inscritos eran relativamente jóvenes, generalmente sanos y no obesos. No está claro si los resultados serán generalizables a las poblaciones obesas y de otro tipo en todo el mundo.CONCLUSIONES:Sexo masculino, comorbilidad, el tiempo operatorio prolongado y anastomosis intracorpórea fueron factores de riesgo independientes de complicaciones postoperatorias de la colectomía derecha laparoscópica. Anastomosis latero-lateral se asoció con un mayor riesgo de SSI de órgano/espacio. La anastomosis extracorpórea podría reducir la incidencia de ISQ general. La diabetes y la conversión a cirugía abierta se asociaron con un mayor riesgo de ISQ incisional. (Traducción- Dr. Francisco M. Abarca-Rendon ).

Negative Pressure Wound Therapy After Intestinal Anastomosis: A Risk Factor Analysis for Dehiscence.

INTRODUCTION: Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) is part of the temporary abdominal closure in the treatment of patients with traumatic, inflammatory, or vascular disease. However, the use of NPWT when performing an intestinal anastomosis has been controversial. This study aimed to describe the patients managed with NPWT therapy and identify the risk factors for anastomotic dehiscence when intestinal anastomosis was performed. METHODS: A single-center cohort study with prospectively collected databases was performed. Patients who required NPWT therapy from January 2014 to December 2018 were included. Patients were stratified according to the performance of intestinal anastomosis and according to the presence of dehiscence. Bivariate and multivariate analyses were performed for anastomotic dehiscence and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 97 patients were included. Median age was 52 y old [interquartile range 24.5-70]. Male patients corresponded to 75.6% (n = 34) of the population. Delayed fascial closure was performed in 80% (n = 36). The risk of anastomotic dehiscence was higher in females (odds ratio (OR) 11.52 [confidence interval (CI) 1.29-97.85], P = 0.030), delayed fascial closure (OR 18.18 [CI 2.02-163.5], P = 0.010) and use of vasopressors (OR 12.04 [CI 1.22-118.47], P = 0.033). NPWT pressures >110 mmHg were evidenced in the dehiscence group with statistically significant value (OR 1.2 [0.99-2.26] p 0.04) CONCLUSIONS: There is still controversy in the use of NPWT when performing intestinal anastomosis. According to our data, the risk of dehiscence is higher in females, delayed fascial closure, use of vasopressors, and NPWT pressures >110 MMHG.

Primary Anastomosis Versus Stoma for Surgical Necrotizing Enterocolitis in US Children's Hospitals.

INTRODUCTION: Multiple studies have documented the safety of intestinal anastomosis after resection for necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC). We sought to evaluate a large population of infants with surgical NEC and assess outcomes after primary anastomosis versus enterostomy. METHODS: The Pediatric Health Information System database was used to identify infants with Bell Stage 3 NEC who underwent an intestinal resection for acute disease between 2016 and 2021. Demographics and preoperative physiology were assessed, and nutritional, infectious, and surgical outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-two infants at 38 children's hospitals were included. Thirty-five (15.8%) were managed with a primary anastomosis. Among infants who underwent a resection within 10 d of their first operative intervention and survived for at least 3 d, a primary anastomosis was used in 26 (13.7%). These patients were older but had similar weight and physiological status at the time of resection as those managed with an enterostomy. The incidence of wound and infectious complications, duration of parenteral nutrition and length of stay were similar after anastomosis or enterostomy. CONCLUSIONS: In a large, geographically heterogenous population of infants with NEC, only 15.8% were managed with a primary anastomosis after intestinal resection. Survivors who underwent resection within 10 d were demographically and physiologically comparable to those who underwent enterostomy and had similar surgical outcomes. While there are clearly indications for enterostomy in some infants with NEC, these data confirm the conclusions of smaller, single-center studies that a primary anastomosis should be considered more frequently.

A Systematic Review of Single-Layer Versus Double-Layer Intestinal Anastomosis: Is One Better?

INTRODUCTION: To perform a systematic review of randomized controlled trials comparing outcomes from handsewn single-layer and double-layer intestinal anastomosis in adults. METHODS: A literature search was conducted using PubMed, SCOPUS, and Web of Science databases for studies published up to September 14, 2023 using the following keyword search query: ((one) OR (single)) AND ((two) OR (double)) AND (layer) AND ((anastomoses) OR (anastomosis)). RESULTS: In seven of the eight studies, there was no significant difference in anastomotic leakage rate. In one of the eight studies, Moeen et al., double-layer anastomosis was associated with a significantly higher anastomotic leakage rate than single-layer anastomosis (5/100 versus 15/100, P = 0.018). Time to complete single-layer anastomosis was shorter than double-layer anastomosis. CONCLUSIONS: Single-layer and double-layer intestinal anastomosis have similar rates of anastomotic leak, mortality, and hospital stay in adults, with single-layer intestinal anastomosis having the benefit of shorter time to complete.

Redefining Esophagectomy: The Manual Layered Insertion Method That May Reduce Anastomotic Leakage.

INTRODUCTION: Anastomotic leakage post-esophagectomy remains a significant challenge. Despite the use of both mechanical and manual anastomosis, leakage rates remain high. This study evaluated the effectiveness of the manual layered insertion anastomosis technique in addressing this issue. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients who underwent this technique from September 2020 to December 2021. The process involved thoracoscopic release of the esophagus, mediastinal lymph node dissection, laparoscopic stomach release, and its transformation into a tube. The latter was then guided to the neck for anastomosis. The posterior anastomotic wall was reshaped in the neck first for optimal insertion, followed by layered suturing with the gastric conduit. The anterior wall was subsequently sutured and repositioned into the chest. RESULTS: The study included 56 patients (51 men, five women, mean age 65.4 y), with nine having undergone neoadjuvant therapy. All received minimally invasive esophagectomy. Average intraoperative blood loss was 79.8 mL, operation time averaged 331 min, and feeding resumed after an average of 6.3 d. No anastomotic leakages were reported, with reduced incidences of anastomotic stenosis and gastric acid reflux compared to previous studies. CONCLUSIONS: The manual layered insertion anastomosis technique may reduce anastomotic leakage and associated complications, improving the efficacy of esophagectomy, which may improve postoperative results and patient quality of life, suggesting the method's potential suitability for wider clinical application.