ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Many patients with Crohn's Disease will require surgical resection. While many studies have described outcomes following ileocecectomy, few have evaluated surgical resection of other portions of small bowel. We sought to compare open and minimally invasive surgery (MIS) approaches for small bowel resection excluding ileocecectomy of patients with Crohn's Disease using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. METHODS: The NSQIP database was queried for patients with Crohn's disease or complications related to Crohn's disease who underwent segmental small bowel resection utilizing open or minimally invasive approaches between 2012 and 2018. Patients requiring ileocecectomy or diagnosed with ascites, disseminated cancer, pre-operative sepsis, ASA class 5, and patients requiring mechanical ventilation were excluded. The association of pre-operative variables including patient demographic information and comorbidities with surgical approach were examined using Fishers exact test. Intraoperative, and 30-day post-operative outcomes were compared between the groups using both univariate and multivariate logistical regression models. SAS was used for data analysis with p < 0.05 considered significant. RESULTS: After exclusions, we found 1697 patients with Crohn's disease who underwent segmental small bowel resection, 1252 of whom underwent open surgery and 445 of whom underwent MIS. After adjusting for possible confounders with multivariable analysis, patients who underwent MIS had a lower incidence of wound events (surgical site, organ space, or deep wound infection, or dehiscence), post-operative bleeding, need for return to the operating room, and shorter total hospital length of stay despite longer operative times compared with open surgery. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective review of NSQIP shows that minimally invasive small bowel resection is associated with equivalent or improved morbidity over open surgery in select patients with small bowel Crohn's Disease. We show that in select patients minimally invasive small bowel resection can be safe and performed for patients with isolated small bowel Crohn's disease.
Subject(s)
Crohn Disease , Digestive System Surgical Procedures , Crohn Disease/complications , Crohn Disease/surgery , Humans , Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Quality Improvement , Retrospective Studies , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Minimally invasive resection of colon cancer at the splenic flexure can be technically challenging with concerns for a suboptimal oncologic outcome. We aimed to compare open and minimally invasive approaches following curative resection. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for patients with non-metastatic colon adenocarcinoma at the splenic flexure who underwent resection from 2010 to 2016. Cohorts were separated into open and minimally invasive approaches, and demographic and clinicopathologic variables were compared. Propensity-score matching (PSM) was utilized to balance potential confounding covariates between cohorts to elucidate the independent association between surgical approach and outcomes. Kaplan-Meier estimation and Cox-proportional hazards regression were used to analyze survival. Secondary outcomes were analyzed by way of logistic regression or Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS: After matching, 842 patients were compared between approaches. Patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery had no significant difference in regional nodes ≥ 12 examined, positive margins, negative circumferential margins, unplanned 30-day readmission, or time from surgery to initiation of chemotherapy when compared to patients who underwent open surgery. Minimally invasive surgery was significantly associated with decreased odds of 30-day mortality, 90-day mortality, and decreased mortality hazard for 5-year overall survival compared to open surgery. CONCLUSION: The optimal approach for surgical management of splenic flexure colon cancer has not been standardized given its rarity and exclusion from randomized controlled trials. Our retrospective review suggests that minimally invasive resection of splenic flexure colon cancers in carefully selected patients is associated with equivalent oncologic outcomes as well as improved short and long-term survival compared to an open approach.
Subject(s)
Colon, Transverse , Colonic Neoplasms , Laparoscopy , Robotic Surgical Procedures , Colon, Transverse/surgery , Colonic Neoplasms/surgery , Humans , Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures , Retrospective Studies , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
Cutaneous amebiasis is a rare clinical entity caused by the invasive protozoan parasite Entamoeba histolytica that can be readily diagnosed with skin biopsy if suspected. It presents as a rapidly progressive and destructive ulceration with necrosis. A man in his 40s with metastatic rectal cancer who underwent palliative abdominal perineal resection with end colostomy in his left lower quadrant and on systemic chemotherapy developed progressive breakdown of his peristomal skin unresponsive to antibiotics that was then diagnosed to be cutaneous amebiasis. It is important to be aware of cutaneous amebiasis and include it in the differential diagnosis when peristomal wounds do not respond to treatment.
Subject(s)
Amebiasis , Entamoeba histolytica , Skin Diseases, Parasitic , Male , Humans , Colostomy , Amebiasis/diagnosis , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Ulcer , Skin Diseases, Parasitic/diagnosisABSTRACT
This case series presents two patients with symptoms consistent with acute rectal prolapse. The prolapses were subsequently found to be sigmoid intussusception that had prolapsed through the anus without rectal prolapse and without any intraluminal pathology or lead point. Both were recognised on examination and underwent colonic resection rather than proctectomy.
Subject(s)
Intussusception , Rectal Prolapse , Humans , Colon , Colon, Sigmoid , Intussusception/diagnosis , Intussusception/etiology , Intussusception/surgery , Rectal Prolapse/complications , Rectal Prolapse/diagnosisABSTRACT
Despite the benefits of minimally invasive surgery for colorectal procedures, significant disparities in access to these techniques remain. While these gaps have been well-documented for laparoscopy, few studies have evaluated inequalities in access to robotic surgery. We analyze whether disparities exist in the use of robotic surgery in the management of colon cancer. The U.S. National Cancer Database was queried for patients with non-metastatic colon adenocarcinoma who underwent resection with the robotic platform (2010-2016). Demographic, clinicopathologic, and treatment facility-related variables were analyzed with respect to preferential utilization of robotic surgery with multivariable logistic regression. Patients with metastatic disease, missing or incomplete surgical information, and those who underwent local tumor excision were excluded. 74,984 patients were identified, 3001 (4%) of whom underwent robotic surgery. In multivariable analysis, patients who were older, Black, or were living in an urban area had decreased odds of receiving robotic surgery compared with open or laparoscopic surgery. Patients who were privately insured or living in areas with higher education had increased odds of receiving robotic surgery. Robotic surgery was also preferentially associated with lower clinical stage, more recent year of diagnosis, and hospitals with higher procedural volume. As advantages of the robotic platform are becoming better understood, use of this approach is increasing in popularity for treatment of non-metastatic colon cancer. Despite this, significant disparities exist with respect to patient demographics and socioeconomic factors, and access may only be limited to certain types of hospitals. Further studies are needed to define why these inequalities exist.
Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma , Colonic Neoplasms , Laparoscopy , Robotic Surgical Procedures , Humans , Robotic Surgical Procedures/methods , Colonic Neoplasms/surgery , Adenocarcinoma/surgery , Laparoscopy/methods , Databases, Factual , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Robotic-assisted techniques in colorectal surgery have dramatically increased. Comparative data on the management of uncomplicated and complicated diverticulitis using robotics is lacking. The purpose of this study is to examine outcomes of patients who underwent robotic-assisted resection in diverticulitis. METHODS: A prospectively maintained database performed by a single surgeon was retrospectively reviewed to identify patients who underwent robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) for diverticulitis from October 2009 to November 2018. Demographic data, preoperative and intraoperative parameters and postoperative outcomes were assessed using χ2 or Fisher exact test with p values <0.05 considered significant. IRB approval was obtained for this study, #NCR190935. RESULTS: Comparison revealed significant differences in operative times (222 vs. 291 min, p < 0.00001), mean estimated blood loss (130 vs. 304 cc, p = 0.0003) and mean length of stay (3.9 vs. 5.0 days, p = 0.006). Low rates of postoperative complications were observed, with no significant differences noted for conversion to laparoscopy, surgical site infection, leak, intra-abdominal abscess, 30-day unplanned readmission or recurrence. CONCLUSION: Patients with complicated diverticulitis required longer operative time, had increased estimated blood loss and more often converted to an open procedure; however, overall rates of post-operative complications were low in both groups. RAS shows promise for use in complicated diverticulitis.