Quality check: concordance between two monitoring systems for postoperative organ/space-surgical site infections in rectal cancer surgery. Linkage of data from the Catalan Cancer Plan and the VINCat infection surveillance programme.

BACKGROUND: The Catalan Cancer Plan (CCP) undertakes periodic audits of cancer treatment outcomes, including organ/space surgical site infections (O/S-SSI) rates, while the Catalan Healthcare-associated Infections Surveillance Programme (VINCat) carries out standardized prospective surveillance of surgical site infections (SSI) in colorectal surgery. This cohort study aimed to assess the concordance between these two monitoring systems for O/S-SSI following primary rectal cancer surgery. METHODS: The study compared O/S-SSI incidence data from CCP clinical audits versus the VINCat Programme in patients undergoing surgery for primary rectal cancer, in 2011-12 and 2015-16, in publicly funded centres in Spain. The main outcome variable was the incidence of O/S-SSI in the first 30 days after surgery. Concordance between the two registers was analysed using Cohen's kappa. Discordant cases were reviewed by an expert, and the main reasons for discrepancies evaluated. RESULTS: Pooling data from both databases generated a sample of 2867 patients. Of these, O/S-SSI was detected in 414 patients-235 were common to both registry systems, with satisfactory concordance (κ = 0.69, 95% confidence interval 0.65-0.73). The rate of discordance from the CCP (positive cases in VINCat and negative in CCP) was 2.7%, and from VINCat (positive in CCP and negative in VINCat) was 3.6%. External review confirmed O/S-SSI in 66.2% of the cases in the CCP registry and 52.9% in VINCat. CONCLUSIONS: This type of synergy shows the potential of pooling data from two different information sources with a satisfactory level of agreement as a means to improving O/S-SSI detection. CLINICALTRIALS: gov Identifier: NCT06104579. Registered 30 November 2023.

Transanal Hemorrhoidal Dearterialization With Mucopexy Versus Vessel-Sealing Device Hemorrhoidectomy for Grade III to IV Hemorrhoids: Long-term Outcomes From the THDLIGA Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Both transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization and vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy are safe for grade III to IV hemorrhoid treatment. Whether one of them is superior regarding long-term results remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: To compare long-term results after transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization and vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy. DESIGN: Multicenter randomized controlled trial. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at 6 centers. PATIENTS: Patients ≥18 years of age with grade III to IV hemorrhoids were included in the study. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization (n = 39) or vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy (n = 41). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was hemorrhoid symptom recurrence assessed by a specific questionnaire 2 years postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included long-term complications, reoperations, fecal continence, and patient satisfaction and quality of life. RESULTS: Five of the 80 patients included in the study were lost to follow-up. Thirty-six patients randomly assigned to transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization and 39 patients randomly assigned to vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy were included in the long-term analysis. The differences between mean baseline and mean 2-year score in the 2 groups were similar (-11.0, SD 3.8 vs -12.5, SD 3.6; p = 0.080). Three patients in the transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization group underwent supplementary procedures for hemorrhoid symptoms, compared with none in the vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy group ( p = 0.106). Four patients in the vessel-sealing hemorrhoidectomy group and none in the transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization group experienced chronic opened wound ( p = 0.116). LIMITATIONS: Lack of stratification for hemorrhoid grade and power calculation based on the main outcome trial but not on the end point of this long-term study. CONCLUSIONS: Transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization with mucopexy is associated with hemorrhoid symptom recurrence similar to vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy at 2 years. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B933 . REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov ; ID: NCT02654249. DESARTERIALIZACIN HEMORROIDAL TRANSANAL CON MUCOPEXIA VERSUS HEMORROIDECTOMA CON DISPOSITIVO DE SELLADO DE VASOS PARA HEMORROIDES DE GRADO IIIIV RESULTADOS A LARGO PLAZO DEL ENSAYO CLNICO ALEATORIZADO THDLIGARCT: ANTECEDENTES:Tanto la desarterialización hemorroidal transanal como la hemorroidectomía con dispositivo de sellado de vasos son seguras y bien toleradas para el tratamiento de las hemorroides de grado III-IV. La primera se asocia con una necesidad más breve de analgesia posoperatoria que la hemorroidectomía con dispositivo de sellado de vasos. No está claro si uno de ellos es superior con respecto a los resultados a largo plazo.OBJETIVO:El objetivo fue comparar los resultados a largo plazo después de la desarterialización hemorroidal transanal y la hemorroidectomía con dispositivo de sellado de vasos.DISEÑO:Se realizó un ensayo clínico aleatorizado multicéntrico.AJUSTE:Este estudio se realizó en 6 centros.PACIENTES:Se incluyeron en el estudio pacientes de ≥18 años con hemorroides de grado III-IV.INTERVENCIONES:Los pacientes fueron asignados al azar a desarterialización hemorroidal transanal (n = 39) o hemorroidectomía con dispositivo de sellado de vasos (n = 41).PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:El resultado primario fue la recurrencia de los síntomas de hemorroides evaluada mediante un cuestionario específico 2 años después de la operación. Los resultados secundarios incluyeron complicaciones a largo plazo, reoperaciones, continencia fecal, satisfacción del paciente y calidad de vida.RESULTADOS:Cinco de los 80 pacientes incluidos en el estudio se perdieron durante el seguimiento. En el análisis a largo plazo se incluyeron 36 pacientes aleatorizados a desarterialización hemorroidal transanal y 39 aleatorizados a hemorroidectomía con dispositivo de sellado de vasos. Las diferencias entre la puntuación inicial media y la puntuación media a los 2 años en los dos grupos fueron similares (-11,0, DE 3,8 frente a -12,5, DE 3,6; p = 0,080). Tres pacientes en el grupo de desarterialización hemorroidal transanal se sometieron a procedimientos complementarios por síntomas de hemorroides, en comparación con ninguno en el grupo de hemorroidectomía con dispositivo de sellado de vasos (p = 0,106). Cuatro pacientes en el grupo de hemorroidectomía con sellado de vasos y ninguno en el grupo de desarterialización hemorroidal transanal experimentaron herida abierta crónica (p = 0,116). No se encontraron diferencias en cuanto a continencia fecal (p = 0,657), satisfacción del paciente (p = 0,483) y calidad de vida.LIMITACIONES:No hay estratificación para el grado de hemorroides ni el cálculo del poder basado en el resultado principal del ensayo, pero no en el criterio de valoración de este estudio a largo plazo.CONCLUSIONES:La desarterialización hemorroidal transanal con mucopexia se asocia con una recurrencia de síntomas de hemorroides similar a la hemorroidectomía con dispositivo de sellado de vasos a los dos años. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B933 . (Traducción- Dr. Francisco M. Abarca-Rendon )REGISTRO DE PRUEBA:Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02654249).

Prognostic Value of the Circumferential Resection Margin After Curative Surgery for Rectal Cancer: A Multicenter Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Recently, positive circumferential resection margin has been found to be an indicator of advanced disease with a high risk of distant recurrence rather than local recurrence. OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to analyze the prognostic impact of the circumferential resection margin on long-term oncological outcomes in patients with rectal cancer. DESIGN: This was a multicenter, propensity score-matched (2:1) analysis comparing the positive and negative circumferential resection margins. SETTINGS: The study was conducted at 5 high-volume centers in Spain. PATIENTS: Patients who underwent total mesorectal excision with curative intent for middle-low rectal cancer between 2006 and 2014 were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcomes were local recurrence, distant recurrence, overall survival, and disease-free survival. RESULTS: The unmatched initial cohort consisted of 1599 patients, of whom 4.9% had a positive circumferential resection margin. After matching, 234 patients were included (156 with a negative circumferential margin and 78 with a positive circumferential margin). The median follow-up period was 52.5 (22.0-69.5) months. Local recurrence was significantly higher in patients with a positive circumferential margin (33.3% vs 11.5%; p < 0.001). Distant recurrence was similar in both groups (46.2% vs 42.3%; p = 0.651). There were no statistically significant differences in 5-year overall survival (48.6% vs 43.6%; p = 0.14). Disease-free survival was lower in patients with a positive circumferential margin (36.1% vs 52.3%; p = 0.026). LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its retrospective design. The different neoadjuvant treatment options were not included in the propensity score. CONCLUSIONS: The positive circumferential resection margin was associated with a higher local recurrence rate and worse disease-free survival in comparison with the negative circumferential resection margin. However, the positive circumferential resection margin was not a prognostic indicator of distant recurrence and overall survival. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B950 . VALOR PRONSTICO DEL MARGEN DE RESECCIN CIRCUNFERENCIAL DESPUS DE LA CIRUGA CURATIVA PARA EL CNCER DE RECTO UN ANLISIS MULTICNTRICO EMPAREJADO POR PUNTAJE DE PROPENSIN: ANTECEDENTES:En los últimos años, se ha encontrado que el margen de resección circunferencial positivo es un indicador de enfermedad avanzada con alto riesgo de recurrencia a distancia más que de recurrencia local.OBJETIVO:El objetivo fue analizar el impacto pronóstico del margen de resección circunferencial sobre la recidiva local, a distancia y las tasas de supervivencia en pacientes con cáncer de recto.DISEÑO:Este fue un análisis multicéntrico emparejado por puntaje de propensión 2: 1 que comparó el margen de resección circunferencial positivo y negativo.AJUSTES:El estudio se realizó en 5 centros Españoles de alto volumen.PACIENTES:Se incluyeron pacientes sometidos a escisión total de mesorrecto con intención curativa por cáncer de recto medio-bajo entre 2006-2014. Las características clínicas e histológicas se utilizaron para el emparejamiento.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Los resultadoes principales fueron la recurrencia local, la recurrencia a distancia, la supervivencia global y libre de enfermedad.RESULTADOS:La cohorte inicial no emparejada consistió en 1599 pacientes; El 4,9% tuvo un margen de resección circunferencial positivo. Tras el emparejamiento se incluyeron 234 pacientes (156 con margen circunferencial negativo y 78 con margen circunferencial positivo). La mediana del período de seguimiento fue de 52,5 meses (22,0-69,5). La recurrencia local fue significativamente mayor en pacientes con margen circunferencial positivo, 33,3% vs 11,5% [HR 3,2; IC 95%: 1,83-5,43; p < 0,001]. La recidiva a distancia fue similar en ambos grupos (46,2 % frente a 42,3 %) [HR 1,09, IC 95 %: 0,78-1,90; p = 0,651]. No hubo diferencias significativas en la supervivencia global a 5 años (48,6 % frente a 43,6 %) [HR 1,09, IC 95 %: 0,92-1,78; p = 0,14]; La supervivencia libre de enfermedad fue menor en pacientes con margen circunferencial positivo, 36,1% vs 52,3% [HR 1,5; IC 95%: 1,05-2,06; p = 0,026].LIMITACIONES:Este estudio estuvo limitado por el diseño retrospectivo. Las diferentes opciones de tratamientos neoadyuvantes no se han incluido en la puntuación de propensión.CONCLUSIONES:El margen de resección circunferencial positivo se asocia con una mayor tasa de recurrencia local y peor supervivencia libre de enfermedad en comparación con el margen de resección circunferencial negativo. Sin embargo, el margen de resección circunferencial positivo no fue un indicador pronóstico de recidiva a distancia ni de supervivencia global. Consulte el Video del Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B950 . (Traducción- Dr. Yesenia Rojas-Khalil ).

Protective ileostomy creation after anterior resection of the rectum: Shared decision-making or still subjective?

AIM: The choice of whether to perform protective ileostomy (PI) after anterior resection (AR) is mainly guided by risk factors (RFs) responsible for the development of anastomotic leakage (AL). However, clear guidelines about PI creation are still lacking in the literature and this is often decided according to the surgeon's preferences, experiences or feelings. This qualitative study aims to investigate, by an open-ended question survey, the individual surgeon's decision-making process regarding PI creation after elective AR. METHOD: Fifty four colorectal surgeons took part in an electronic survey to answer the questions and describe what usually led their decision to perform PI. A content analysis was used to code the answers. To classify answers, five dichotomous categories (In favour/Against PI, Listed/Unlisted RFs, Typical/Atypical, Emotions/Non-emotions, Personal experience/No personal experience) have been developed. RESULTS: Overall, 76% of surgeons were in favour of PI creation and 88% considered listed RFs in the question of whether to perform PI. Atypical answers were reported in 10% of cases. Emotions and personal experience influenced surgeons' decision-making process in 22% and 49% of cases, respectively. The most frequently considered RFs were the distance of the anastomosis from the anal verge (96%), neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (88%), a positive intraoperative leak test (65%), blood loss (37%) and immunosuppression therapy (35%). CONCLUSION: The indications to perform PI following rectal cancer surgery lack standardization and evidence-based guidelines are required to inform practice. Until then, expert opinion can be helpful to assist the decision-making process in patients who have undergone AR for adenocarcinoma.

Self-expandable metallic stent as bridge to surgery vs. emergency resection in obstructive right-sided colon cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Emergency resection is common for malignant right-sided obstructive colon cancer. As there is evidence showing a potential benefit of self-expandable metal stents as a bridge to surgery, a new debate has been initiated. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare self-expandable metal stents with emergency resection in right-sided obstructive colon cancer. DATA SOURCE: A systematic search was conducted accessing Medline/PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. STUDY SELECTION: Studies reporting either emergency surgery or stent placement in right-sided obstructive colon cancer were included. INTERVENTION: Stent or emergency resection in right-sided obstructive colon cancer. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Morbidity rate, mortality rate, stoma rate, laparoscopic resection rate, anastomotic insufficiency rate, success rate of stent. RESULTS: A total of 6343 patients from 16 publications were analyzed. The stent success rate was 0.92 (95% CI, 0.87 to 0.95) with perforation of 0.03 (95% CI, 0.01 to 0.06). Emergency resection was performed laparoscopically at a rate of 0.15 (95% CI, 0.09 to 0.24). Primary anastomosis rate in emergency resection was 0.95 (95% CI, 0.91 to 0.97) with an anastomotic insufficiency rate of 0.07 (95% CI, 0.04 to 0.11). The mortality rate after emergency resection was 0.05 (95% CI, 0.02 to 0.09). Primary anastomosis and anastomotic insufficiency rate were similar between the two groups (RR: 1.02; 95% CI, 0.95 to 1.1; p = 0.56 and RR: 0.53; 95% CI, 0.14 to 1.93; p = 0.33). The mortality rate in emergency resection was higher compared to stent (RR: 0.51, 95% CI 0.30 to 10.89, p = 0.016). LIMITATION: No randomized controlled trials are available. CONCLUSION: Stent is a safe and successful alternative to emergency resection and may increase the rate of minimally invasive surgery. Emergency resection, however, remains safe and did not result in higher rate of anastomotic insufficiency. Further high-quality comparative studies are warranted to assess long-term outcomes.

Benchmarks in colorectal surgery: multinational study to define quality thresholds in high and low anterior resection.

BACKGROUND: Benchmark comparisons in surgery allow identification of gaps in the quality of care provided. The aim of this study was to determine quality thresholds for high (HAR) and low (LAR) anterior resections in colorectal cancer surgery by applying the concept of benchmarking. METHODS: This 5-year multinational retrospective study included patients who underwent anterior resection for cancer in 19 high-volume centres on five continents. Benchmarks were defined for 11 relevant postoperative variables at discharge, 3 months, and 6 months (for LAR). Benchmarks were calculated for two separate cohorts: patients without (ideal) and those with (non-ideal) outcome-relevant co-morbidities. Benchmark cut-offs were defined as the 75th percentile of each centre's median value. RESULTS: A total of 3903 patients who underwent HAR and 3726 who had LAR for cancer were analysed. After 3 months' follow-up, the mortality benchmark in HAR for ideal and non-ideal patients was 0.0 versus 3.0 per cent, and in LAR it was 0.0 versus 2.2 per cent. Benchmark results for anastomotic leakage were 5.0 versus 6.9 per cent for HAR, and 13.6 versus 11.8 per cent for LAR. The overall morbidity benchmark in HAR was a Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI®) score of 8.6 versus 14.7, and that for LAR was CCI® score 11.9 versus 18.3. CONCLUSION: Regular comparison of individual-surgeon or -unit outcome data against benchmark thresholds may identify gaps in care quality that can improve patient outcome.

Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision Versus Anterior Total Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer: A Propensity Score Matched, Population-Based Study in Catalonia, Spain.

BACKGROUND: The clinical value of transanal total mesorectal excision is debated. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare short- and medium-term effects of transanal versus anterior total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. DESIGN: This was a multicenter retrospective cohort study. SETTING: The study included all Catalonian public hospitals. PATIENTS: All patients receiving transanal or anterior total mesorectal excision (open or laparoscopic) for nonmetastatic primary rectal cancer in 2015 to 2016 were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Data on vital status were collected to March 2019. Between-group differences were minimized by applying propensity score matching to baseline patient characteristics. Competing risk models were used to assess systemic and local recurrence along with death at 2 years, and multivariable Cox regression was used to assess 2-year disease-free survival. Results are expressed with their 95% CIs. RESULTS: The final subsample was 537 patients receiving total mesorectal excision (transanal approach: n = 145; anterior approach: n = 392). Median follow-up was 39.2 months (interquartile range, 33.0-45.8). Accounting for death as a competing event, there was no association between transanal total mesorectal excision and local recurrence (matched subhazard ratio 1.28, 95% CI 0.55-2.96). There were no statistical differences in the comparative rate of local recurrence (transanal: 1.77 per 100 person-years, 95% CI 0.76-3.34; anterior: 1.37 per 100 person-years, 95% CI 0.8-2.15) or mortality (transanal: 3.98 per 100 person-years, 95% CI 2.36-6.16; anterior: 2.99 per 100 person-years, 95% CI 2.1-4.07). Groups presented similar 2-year cumulative incidence of local recurrence (4.83% versus 3.57%) and disease-free survival (HR, 1.33; 95% CI 0.92-1.92). LIMITATIONS: We used data only from the public system, the study is retrospective, and data on individual surgeons are not reported. CONCLUSION: These population-based results support the use of either the transanal, open, or laparoscopic approach for rectal cancer in Catalonia. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B744.ESCISIÓN MESORRECTAL TOTAL TRANSANAL VERSUS ESCISIÓN MESORRECTAL TOTAL ANTERIOR PARA EL CÁNCER DE RECTO: UN ESTUDIO POBLACIONAL CON EMPAREJAMIENTO DE PUNTAJE DE PROPENSIÓN EN CATALUÑA, ESPAÑA. ANTECEDENTES: Se debate el valor clínico de la escisión mesorrectal total transanal. OBJETIVO: Comparar los efectos a corto y mediano plazo de la escisión mesorrectal total transanal versus anterior para el cáncer de recto. DISEO: Este fue un estudio de cohorte retrospectivo multicéntrico. AJUSTE: El estudio incluyó a todos los hospitales públicos de Cataluña. PACIENTES: Todos los pacientes no metastásicos que recibieron escisión mesorrectal total anterior o transanal (abierta o laparoscópica) por cáncer de recto primario en 2015-16. PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VALORACION: Los datos sobre el estado vital se recopilaron hasta marzo de 2019. Las diferencias entre los grupos se minimizaron aplicando el emparejamiento de puntajes de propensión a las características iniciales del paciente. Se utilizaron modelos de riesgo competitivo para evaluar la recurrencia sistémica y local junto con la muerte a los dos años, y la regresión de Cox multivariable para evaluar la supervivencia libre de enfermedad a dos años. Los resultados se expresan con sus intervalos de confianza del 95%. RESULTADOS: La submuestra final fue de 537 pacientes que recibieron escisión mesorrectal total (abordaje transanal: n = 145; abordaje anterior: n = 392). La mediana de seguimiento fue de 39,2 meses (rango intercuartílico 33,0-45,8). Teniendo en cuenta la muerte como un evento competitivo, no hubo asociación entre la escisión mesorrectal total transanal y la recurrencia local (cociente de subriesgo apareado 1,28, 0,55-2,96). No hubo diferencias estadísticas en la tasa comparativa de recurrencia local (transanal: 1,77 por 100 personas-año, 0,76-3,34; anterior: 1,37 por 100 personas-año, 0,8-2,15) o mortalidad (transanal: 3,98 por 100 personas-año, 2,36-6,16; anterior: 2,99 por 100 personas-año, 2,1-4,07). Los grupos presentaron una incidencia acumulada de dos años similar de recidiva local (4,83% frente a 3,57%, respectivamente) y supervivencia libre de enfermedad (índice de riesgo 1,33, 0,92-1,92). LIMITACIONES: Utilizamos datos solo del sistema público, el estudio es retrospectivo y no se informan datos sobre cirujanos individuales. CONCLUSIONES: Estos resultados poblacionales apoyan el uso del abordaje transanal, abierto o laparoscópico para el cáncer de recto en Cataluña. Consulte. Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B744. (Traducción- Dr. Francisco M. Abarca-Rendon).

Life with a stoma across five European countries-a cross-sectional study on long-term rectal cancer survivors.

PURPOSE: Stoma-related problems are known to be important to patients and potentially affect everyday life. The prevalence of stoma-related problems in rectal cancer survivors remains undetermined. This study aimed to examine aspects of life with a long-term stoma, stoma management, and stoma-related problems and explore the impact of stoma-related problems on daily life. METHODS: In total, 2262 patients from 5 European countries completed a multidimensional survey. Stoma-related problems were assessed using the Colostomy Impact score. Multivariable regression analysis, after adjusting for potential confounding factors, provided odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for stoma-related problems' association with restrictions in daily life. RESULTS: The 2262 rectal cancer survivors completed the questionnaire at a median of 5.4 years (interquartile range 3.8-7.6) after stoma formation. In the total sample, leakage (58%) and troublesome odour (55%) were most prevalent followed by skin problems (27%) and pain (21%). Stoma-related problems were more prevalent in patients with parastomal bulging. A total of 431 (19%) reported feeling restricted in daily activities in life with a stoma. Leakage, odour, skin problems, stool consistency, and frequent appliance changes were significantly associated with restrictions in daily life. The highest risk of experiencing restrictions was seen for patients having odour (OR 2.74 [95% CI: 1.99-3.78]) more than once a week and skin problems (OR 1.77 [95% CI: 1.38-2.27]). CONCLUSION: In this large cohort with rectal cancer, stoma-related problems were highly prevalent and impacted daily life. Supportive care strategies should entail outreach to patients with a long-term stoma.

Combined endoscopic-laparoscopic surgery (CELS) can avoid segmental colectomy in endoscopically unremovable colonic polyps: a cohort study over 10 years.

BACKGROUND: Combined-Endoscopic-Laparoscopic-Surgery (CELS) was developed for benign colonic polyps, endoscopically unresectable, to avoid segmental colectomy. This observational study aims to compare surgical outcomes of endoscopically unresectable colonic polyps treated laparoscopically before and since the institutional introduction of CELS. Primary endpoint was postoperative morbidity and mortality; secondary endpoints were time of hospitalization and histopathological findings. METHODS: Charts of all patients with preoperative diagnosis of benign colonic tumors, treated laparoscopically at our institution from 1/2010 to 2/2020 were reviewed. Patients with polyps (1) affecting ileocecal valve, (2) occupying > 50% of the circumference, (3) ≥ 3 endoscopically unresectable polyps, (4) inflammatory bowel disease, (5) polyps within diverticular area post diverticulitis, (6) rectal polyps (7) foreseen impossibility of laparoscopy (8) preoperatively biopsy proven invasive adenocarcinoma were excluded. Group I consists of all patients potentially treatable by CELS but operated by laparoscopic colonic resection as CELS was not yet institutionally established. Group II includes all patients treated with CELS (since 11/2017). RESULTS: One hundred-fifteen consecutive patients were reviewed. Applying exclusion criteria, twenty-three patients form group I and twenty-three group II (female 30.4%, median age 68 years). Groups distributed homogenously for age, BMI (body mass index) and polyps´ localization with most polyps (60.4%) localized in right colon; group II patients had significantly higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score. Median operating time, hospital stay and morbidity were significantly less in group II. Postoperative morbidity occurred overall in 14 patients (30.4%), mostly Clavien-Dindo class I-II (26.1%) and significantly less in group II (p = 0.017), Clavien-Dindo III-IV distributed equally (one patient each group) without postoperative mortality. Definitive histopathology showed invasive adenocarcinoma in 8.3% without differences between groups. Two patients with invasive adenocarcinoma after CELS were advised for oncological resection. CONCLUSION: CELS is safe and efficient to treat complex, benign colonic polyps by a complete minimal invasive laparoscopic approach. CELS showed better surgical outcomes with less morbidity, no mortality and appropriate pathological results avoiding unnecessary laparoscopic surgery with intestinal anastomosis.

Incidence, features, outcome and impact on health system of de-novo abdominal surgical diseases in patients admitted with COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: to assess the epidemiology and features of de novo surgical diseases in patients admitted with COVID-19, and their impact on patients and healthcare system. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Gastrointestinal involvement has been described in COVID-19; however, no clear figures of incidence, epidemiology and economic impact exist for de-novo surgical diseases in hospitalized patients. METHODS: This is a prospective study including all patients admitted with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 rT-PCR, between 1 March and 15 May 2020 at two Tertiary Hospitals. Patients with known surgical disease at admission were excluded. Sub-analyses were performed with a consecutive group of COVID-19 patients admitted during the study period, who did not require surgical consultation. RESULTS: Ten out of 3089 COVID-19 positive patients (0.32%) required surgical consultation. Among those admitted in intensive care unit (ICU) incidence was 1.9%. Mortality was 40% in patients requiring immediate surgery and 20% in those suitable for conservative management. The overall median length of stay (LOS) of patients admitted to ICU was longer in those requiring surgical consultation compared with those who did not (51.5 vs 25 days, p = 0.0042). Patients requiring surgical consultation and treatment for de-novo surgical disease had longer median ICU-LOS (31.5 vs 12 days, p = 0.0004). A median of two post-surgical complications were registered for each patient undergoing surgery. Complication-associated costs were as high as 38,962 USD per patient. CONCLUSIONS: Incidence of de-novo surgical diseases is low in COVID-19, but it is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Future studies should elucidate the mechanism underlying the condition and identify strategies to prevent the need for surgery.

Phase II randomized trial of capecitabine with bevacizumab and external beam radiation therapy as preoperative treatment for patients with resectable locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma: long term results.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative chemoradiotherapy with capecitabine is considered as a standard of care for locally advanced rectal cancer. The "Tratamiento de Tumores Digestivos" group (TTD) previously reported in a randomized Ph II study that the addition of Bevacizumab to capecitabine-RT conferred no differences in the pre-defined efficacy endpoint (pathological complete response). We present the follow-up results of progression-free survival, distant relapse-free survival, and overall survival data at 3 and 5 years. METHODS: Patients (pts) were randomized to receive 5 weeks of radiotherapy (45 Gy/25 fractions) with concurrent Capecitabine 825 mg/m2 twice daily, 5 days per week with (arm A) or without (arm b) bevacizumab (5 mg/kg once every 2 weeks). RESULTS: In our study, the addition of bevacizumab to capecitabine and radiotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting shows no differences in pathological complete response (15.9% vs 10.9%), distant relapse-free survival (81.0 vs 80.4 and 76.2% vs 78.2% at 3 and 5 years respectively), disease-free survival (75% vs 71.7 and 68.1% vs 69.57% at 3 and 5 years respectively) nor overall survival at 5-years of follow-up (81.8% vs 86.9%). CONCLUSIONS: the addition of bevacizumab to capecitabine plus radiotherapy does not confer statistically significant advantages neither in distant relapse-free survival nor in disease-free survival nor in Overall Survival in the short or long term. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT number: 2009-010192-24 . Clinicaltrials.gov number: NCT01043484 .

Procedural Surgical RCTs in Daily Practice: Do Surgeons Adopt Or Is It Just a Waste of Time?

OBJECTIVE: To assess the adoption of recommendation from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and investigate factors favoring or preventing adoption. BACKGROUND: RCT are considered to be the cornerstone of evidence-based medicine by representing the highest level of evidence. As such, we expect RCT's recommendations to be followed rigorously in daily surgical practice. METHODS: We performed a structured search for RCTs published in the medical and surgical literature from 2009 to 2013, allowing a minimum of 5-year follow-up to convincingly test implementation. We focused on comparative technical or procedural RCTs trials addressing the domains of general, colorectal, hepatobiliary, upper gastrointestinal and vascular surgery. In a second step we composed a survey of 29 questions among ESA members as well as collaborators from their institutions to investigate the adoption of surgical RCTs recommendation. RESULTS: The survey based on 36 RCTs (median 5-yr citation index 85 (24-474), from 21 different countries, published in 15 high-ranked journals with a median impact factor of 3.3 (1.23-7.9) at the time of publication. Overall, less than half of the respondents (47%) appeared to adhere to the recommendations of a specific RCT within their field of expertise, even when included in formal guidelines. Adoption of a new surgical practice was favored by watching videos (46%) as well as assisting live operations (18%), while skepticism regarding the methodology of a surgical RCT (40%) appears to be the major reason to resist adoption. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, surgical RCTs appear to have moderate impact on daily surgical practice. While RCTs are still accepted to provide the highest level of evidence, alternative methods of evaluating surgical innovations should also be explored.

Short-term Outcomes of Transanal Hemorrhoidal Dearterialization With Mucopexy Versus Vessel-Sealing Device Hemorrhoidectomy for Grade III to IV Hemorrhoids: A Prospective Randomized Multicenter Trial.

BACKGROUND: Transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization with mucopexy and vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy seem to reduce postoperative pain compared with classic excisional hemorrhoidectomy, but whether one of them is superior remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: We compared transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization with mucopexy and vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy. DESIGN: This was a multicenter, randomized controlled trial. SETTING: The study was conducted at 6 Spanish centers. PATIENTS: Patients aged ≥18 years with grade III to IV hemorrhoids were included. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization with mucopexy (n = 39) or vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy (n = 41). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was the mean postoperative number of days in which patients needed nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Secondary outcomes were postoperative pain, 30-day morbidity, patient satisfaction, Vaizey score, hemorrhoid symptoms score, return to work, and quality of life. RESULTS: More patients were still taking analgesia in the vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy group during the second postoperative week compared with the transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization with mucopexy group (87.8% vs 53.8%; p = 0.002). For the transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization with mucopexy group, analgesia consumption continued until day 10.1 (mean; SD = 7.22 d), whereas in the vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy group it continued until day 15.2 (mean; SD = 8.70 d; p = 0.006). The mean daily average pain was similar during the first (p = 0.900) and second postoperative weeks (p = 0.265). Mean operative time was higher for the transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization with mucopexy group versus the vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy group (45 min; range, 40-60 vs 20 min; range, 15-41 min; p < 0.001). Postoperative complications rate, use of laxatives, patient satisfaction, Vaizey score, hemorrhoids symptoms score, return to work, and quality of life at 1 month after surgery were similar between groups. LIMITATIONS: The main limitation of this study was that the 2 groups did not contain equal numbers of grade III and IV hemorrhoids. CONCLUSIONS: Transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization with mucopexy is associated with a shorter need for postoperative analgesia compared with vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A915. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02654249.

Emergency surgery for obstructing and perforated colon cancer: patterns of recurrence and prognostic factors.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to analyze the incidence, patterns and prognostic factors of recurrence in patients with complicated colon cancer who had emergency surgery within 24 h of admission. METHODS: A retrospective observational study was performed on patients with obstructing or perforated colon cancer having resection with curative intent between 1996 and 2014 at a single center. Data were obtained from a prospectively maintained database. Patients who had rectal cancer, iatrogenic endoscopic perforation, stage IV disease, palliative surgery, a colonic stent or decompressive colostomy were excluded. RESULTS: The study included 393 patients. Obstruction was observed in 320 patients (81.4%) and perforation in 73 (18.6%). Hartmann's procedure was more frequently performed by general surgeons (7.5% vs 23.3%; p = 0.023). 30-day postoperative mortality was 13.5% (53/393), including 47 (14.7%) obstructed and 6 (8.2%) perforated patients. Postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo III-IV) occurred in 87 patients (22.1%), including 68 (21.2%) of obstructed and 19 (26.0%) of perforated patients. Anastomotic dehiscence was diagnosed in 52 of 329 (15.8%) patients with primary anastomosis and was higher in the obstructing group than in the perforated group (17.4% vs 7.6%). There was a significantly higher anastomotic dehiscence rate after procedures performed by general surgeons when compared with those performed by colorectal surgeons (10.3% vs 21.3%; p = 0.005; OR 2.81, 95% CI 1.4-5.9). With a median follow-up of 6 years, the recurrence rate was 30.1% (67.4% distant, 22.8% local, 9.8% both). Overall and cancer-related survivals were 68.7% and 77.8%, respectively. The presence of positive nodes, male gender, anastomotic dehiscence and diffuse peritonitis were independent predictors for local recurrence while type of surgeon (general) was an independent factor for distant recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Male gender, diffuse peritonitis, positive lymph nodes, type of surgeon and postoperative anastomotic dehiscence significantly influence recurrence of colorectal cancer in this series.

A teaching project on rectal cancer and concentration of procedures: a comparison of oncological results between Catalonia and the rest of autonomous communities.

INTRODUCTION: the goal of this study was to compare the oncological results (local recurrence, metastasis and overall survival) obtained by the Proyecto Docente del Cáncer de Recto of the Spanish Association of Surgeons (AEC) (Proyecto Vikingo, PV) in Catalonia versus the rest of Spanish autonomous communities. METHODS: the PV database includes 4,508 patients who underwent a curative resection between March 2006 and December 2010, from the first 59 hospitals included in PV; 1,163 were from Catalonia and 3,345 were from the rest of Spain. There was a minimum follow-up of five years. RESULTS: in Catalonia, the five-year cumulative incidence was 8% (95% CI: 6.4-9.9) for local recurrence, 17.7% (95% CI: 15.4-20.2) for metastasis and 75% (95% CI: 72.4-77.7) for overall survival. In the rest of autonomous communities, these figures were 7% (95% CI: 6.2-8.2) for local recurrence, 22.3% (95% CI: 20.7-23.9) for metastasis, and 71% (95% CI: 69.4-72.9) for overall survival. Variables associated with tumor recurrence in PV included Hartmann's procedure, intraoperative perforation and circumferential margin involvement. CONCLUSION: the results obtained by the Proyecto Docente del Cáncer de Recto were homogeneous between Catalonia and the rest of the autonomous communities.

The Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI®) is a Novel Cost Assessment Tool for Surgical Procedures.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify a readily available, reproducible, and internationally applicable cost assessment tool for surgical procedures. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Strong economic pressure exists worldwide to slow down the rising of health care costs. Postoperative morbidity significantly impacts on cost in surgical patients. The comprehensive complication index (CCI), reflecting overall postoperative morbidity, may therefore serve as a new marker for cost. METHODS: Postoperative complications and total costs from a single tertiary center were prospectively collected (2014 to 2016) up to 3 months after surgery for a variety of abdominal procedures (n = 1388). CCI was used to quantify overall postoperative morbidity. Pearson correlation coefficient (rpears) was calculated for cost and CCI. For cost prediction, a linear regression model based on CCI, age, and type of surgery was developed and validated in an international cohort of patients. RESULTS: We found a high correlation between CCI and overall cost (rpears = 0.75) with the strongest correlation for more complex procedures. The prediction model performed very well (R = 0.82); each 10-point increase in CCI corresponded to a 14% increase to the baseline cost. Additional 12% of baseline cost must be added for patients older than 50 years, or 24% for those over 70 years. The validation cohorts showed a good match of predicted and observed cost. CONCLUSION: Overall postoperative morbidity correlates highly with cost. The CCI together with the type of surgery and patient age is a novel and reliable predictor of expenses in surgical patients. This finding may enable objective cost comparisons among centers, procedures, or over time obviating the need to look at complex country-specific cost calculations (www.assessurgery.com).

Toward a Consensus on Centralization in Surgery.

OBJECTIVES: To critically assess centralization policies for highly specialized surgeries in Europe and North America and propose recommendations. BACKGROUND/METHODS: Most countries are increasingly forced to maintain quality medicine at a reasonable cost. An all-inclusive perspective, including health care providers, payers, society as a whole and patients, has ubiquitously failed, arguably for different reasons in environments. This special article follows 3 aims: first, analyze health care policies for centralization in different countries, second, analyze how centralization strategies affect patient outcome and other aspects such as medical education and cost, and third, propose recommendations for centralization, which could apply across continents. RESULTS: Conflicting interests have led many countries to compromise for a health care system based on factors beyond best patient-oriented care. Centralization has been a common strategy, but modalities vary greatly among countries with no consensus on the minimal requirement for the number of procedures per center or per surgeon. Most national policies are either partially or not implemented. Data overwhelmingly indicate that concentration of complex care or procedures in specialized centers have positive impacts on quality of care and cost. Countries requiring lower threshold numbers for centralization, however, may cause inappropriate expansion of indications, as hospitals struggle to fulfill the criteria. Centralization requires adjustments in training and credentialing of general and specialized surgeons, and patient education. CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATIONS: There is an obvious need in most areas for effective centralization. Unrestrained, purely "market driven" approaches are deleterious to patients and society. Centralization should not be based solely on minimal number of procedures, but rather on the multidisciplinary treatment of complex diseases including well-trained specialists available around the clock. Audited prospective database with monitoring of quality of care and cost are mandatory.