Iatrogenic ureteral injury during colorectal surgery has a significant impact on patient outcomes: a French multicentric retrospective cohort study.

AIM: The long-term urological sequelae after iatrogenic ureteral injury (IUI) during colorectal surgery are not clearly known. The aims of this work were to report the incidence of IUI and to analyse the long-term consequences of urological late complications and their impact on oncological results of IUI occurring during colorectal surgery through a French multicentric experience (GRECCAR group). METHOD: All the patients who presented with IUI during colorectal surgery between 2010 and 2019 were retrospectively included. Patients with ureteral involvement needing en bloc resection, delayed ureteral stricture or noncolorectal surgery were not considered. RESULTS: A total of 202 patients (93 men, mean age 63 ± 14 years) were identified in 29 centres, corresponding to 0.32% of colorectal surgeries (n = 63 562). Index colorectal surgery was mainly oncological (n = 130, 64%). IUI was diagnosed postoperatively in 112 patients (55%) after a mean delay of 11 ± 9 days. Intraoperative diagnosis of IUI was significantly associated with shorter length of stay (21 ± 22 days vs. 34 ± 22 days, p < 0.0001), lower rates of postoperative hydronephrosis (2% vs. 10%, p = 0.04), anastomotic complication (7% vs. 22.5%, p = 0.002) and thromboembolic event (0% vs. 6%, p = 0.02) than postoperative diagnosis of IUI. Delayed chemotherapy because of IUI was reported in 27% of patients. At the end of the follow-up [3 ± 2.6 years (1 month-13 years)], 72 patients presented with urological sequalae (36%). Six patients (3%) required a nephrectomy. CONCLUSION: IUI during colorectal surgery has few consequences for the patients if recognized early. Long-term urological sequelae can occur in a third of patients. IUI may affect oncological outcomes in colorectal surgery by delaying adjuvant chemotherapy, especially when the ureteral injury is not diagnosed peroperatively.

Right Colectomy with Intracorporeal Anastomosis: A European Multicenter Propensity Score Matching Retrospective Study of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Procedures.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of robotic (RRC-IA) versus laparoscopic (LRC-IA) right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis using a propensity score matching (PSM) analysis based on a large European multicentric cohort of patients with nonmetastatic right colon cancer. METHODS: Elective curative-intent RRC-IA and LRC-IA performed between 2014 and 2020 were selected from the MERCY Study Group database. The two PSM-groups were compared for operative and postoperative outcomes, and survival rates. RESULTS: Initially, 596 patients were selected, including 194 RRC-IA and 402 LRC-IA patients. After PSM, 298 patients (149 per group) were compared. There was no statistically significant difference between RRC-IA and LRC-IA in terms of operative time, intraoperative complication rate, conversion to open surgery, postoperative morbidity (19.5% in RRC-IA vs. 26.8% in LRC-IA; p = 0.17), or 5-yr survival (80.5% for RRC-IA and 74.7% for LRC-IA; p = 0.94). R0 resection was obtained in all patients, and > 12 lymph nodes were harvested in 92.3% of patients, without group-related differences. RRC-IA procedures were associated with a significantly higher use of indocyanine green fluorescence than LRC-IA (36.9% vs. 14.1%; OR: 3.56; 95%CI 2.02-6.29; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Within the limitation of the present analyses, there is no statistically significant difference between RRC-IA and LRC-IA performed for right colon cancer in terms of short- and long-term outcomes.

Benefit of a flash dose of corticosteroids in digestive surgical oncology: a multicenter, randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled trial (CORTIFRENCH).

BACKGROUND: The modulation of perioperative inflammation seems crucial to improve postoperative morbidity and cancer-related outcomes in patients undergoing oncological surgery. Data from the literature suggest that perioperative corticosteroids decrease inflammatory markers and might be associated with fewer complications in esophageal, liver, pancreatic and colorectal surgery. Their benefit on cancer-related outcomes has not been assessed. METHODS: The CORTIFRENCH trial is a phase III multicenter randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial to assess the impact of a flash dose of preoperative corticosteroids versus placebo on postoperative morbidity and cancer-related outcomes after elective curative-intent surgery for digestive cancer. The primary endpoint is the frequency of patients with postoperative major complications occurring within 30 days after surgery (defined as all complications with Clavien-Dindo grade > 2). The secondary endpoints are the overall survival at 3 years, the disease-free survival at 3 years, the frequency of patients with intraabdominal infections and postoperative infections within 30 days after surgery and the hospital length of stay. We hypothesize a reduced risk of major complications and a better disease-survival at 3 years in the experimental group. Allowing for 5% of drop-out, 1 200 patients (600 per arm) should be included. DISCUSSION: This will be the first trial focusing on the impact of perioperative corticosteroids on cancer related outcomes. If significant, it might be a strong improvement on oncological outcomes for patients undergoing surgery for digestive cancers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03875690, Registered on March 15, 2019, URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03875690 .

Impact of operation duration on postoperative outcomes of minimally-invasive right colectomy.

AIM: Operation time (OT) is a key operational factor influencing surgical outcomes. The present study aimed to analyse whether OT impacts on short-term outcomes of minimally-invasive right colectomies by assessing the role of surgical approach (robotic [RRC] or laparoscopic right colectomy [LRC]), and type of ileocolic anastomosis (i.e., intracorporal [IA] or extra-corporal anastomosis [EA]). METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of the Minimally-invasivE surgery for oncological Right ColectomY (MERCY) Study Group database, which included adult patients with nonmetastatic right colon adenocarcinoma operated on by oncological RRC or LRC between January 2014 and December 2020. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used. RESULTS: The study sample was composed of 1549 patients who were divided into three groups according to the OT quartiles: (1) First quartile, <135 min (n = 386); (2) Second and third quartiles, 135-199 min (n = 731); and (3) Fourth quartile ≥200 min (n = 432). The majority (62.7%) were LRC-EA, followed by LRC-IA (24.3%), RRC-IA (11.1%), and RRC-EA (1.9%). Independent predictors of an OT ≥ 200 min included male gender, age, obesity, diabetes, use of indocyanine green fluorescence, and IA confection. An OT ≥ 200 min was significantly associated with an increased risk of postoperative noninfective complications (AOR: 1.56; 95% CI: 1.15-2.13; p = 0.004), whereas the surgical approach and the type of anastomosis had no impact on postoperative morbidity. CONCLUSION: Prolonged OT is independently associated with increased odds of postoperative noninfective complications in oncological minimally-invasive right colectomy.

Does conversion during minimally invasive rectal surgery for cancer have an impact on short-term and oncologic outcomes? Results of a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Although minimally invasive rectal surgery (MIRS) for cancer provides better recovery for similar oncologic outcomes over open approach, conversion is still required in 10% and its impact on short-term and long-term outcomes remains unclear. The aim of our study was to evaluate the impact of conversion on postoperative and oncologic outcomes in patients undergoing MIRS for cancer. METHODS: From June 2011 to March 2020, we reviewed 257 minimally invasive rectal resections for cancer recorded in a prospectively maintained database, with 192 robotic and 65 laparoscopic approaches. Patients who required conversion to open (Conversion group) were compared to those who did not have conversion (No conversion group) in terms of short-term, histologic, and oncologic outcomes. Univariate and multivariate analyses of the risk factors for postoperative morbidity were performed. RESULTS: Eighteen patients (7%) required conversion. The conversion rate was significantly higher in the laparoscopic approach than in the robotic approach (16.9% vs 3.6%, p < 0.01). Among the 4 reactive conversions, 3 (75%) were required during robotic resections. Patients in the Conversion group had a higher morbidity rate (83.3% vs 43.1%, p = 0.01) and more severe complications (38.9%, vs 18.8%, p = 0.041). Male sex [HR = 2.46, 95%CI (1.41-4.26)], total mesorectal excision [HR = 2.89, 95%CI (1.57-5.320)], and conversion (HR = 4.87, 95%CI [1.34-17.73]) were independently associated with a higher risk of overall 30-day morbidity. R1 resections were more frequent in the Conversion group (22.2% vs 5.4%, p = 0.023) without differences in the overall (82.7 ± 7.0 months vs 79.4 ± 3.3 months, p = 0.448) and disease-free survivals (49.0 ± 8.6 months vs 70.2 ± 4.1 months, p = 0.362). CONCLUSION: Conversion to laparotomy during MIRS for cancer was associated with poorer postoperative results without impairing oncologic outcomes. The high frequency of reactive conversion due to intraoperative complications in robotic resections confirmed that MIRS for cancer is a technically challenging procedure.

Transitioning From Open to Robotic Liver Resection. Results of 46 Consecutive Procedures Including a Majority of Major Hepatectomies.

Aims. Minimally invasive liver resection is a complex and challenging operation. Although authors have reported robotic liver resection shows improved safety and efficacy compared with open liver resection, robotic major liver resections for malignant liver lesions treatment remain inadequately evaluated. The aims of the present study were to evaluate the feasibility and safety of transitioning from open to robotic liver resection in a nonuniversity hospital. Patients and Methods. From December 2015 to March 2020, 46 patients underwent totally robotic-assisted liver resections out of 446 robotic procedures. Also, we retrospectively reviewed the last 27 open right hepatectomies (ORHs) and compared then with the first 25 anatomic robotic-assisted right hepatectomies (RRHs). Results. Mean operative time, mean blood lost, rate of complications, and mean hospital stay were associated with the complexity of the procedure. The comparison between ORH and RRH showed that intraoperative complications were less frequently observed during ORH whereas RRH showed a trend in favor of less blood loss. ORH had a trend toward smaller surgical margins and higher rate of R1 resections. Recurrence occurred in 31 (59%) patients and was more frequently observed after ORH. However, the mean follow-up was significantly shorter after RRH. Conclusion. Our study demonstrated the technical feasibility and safety of transitioning from open to robotic liver resection (including major hepatectomies) in a nonuniversity setting. Higher costs remain an important drawback for robotic surgery.

Teaching robotic rectal cancer surgery at your workplace: does the presence of visiting surgeons in the operating room have a detrimental effect on outcomes?

BACKGROUND: Surgery demonstration (SD) is considered to be a mainstay of surgical education, but controversy exists concerning the patient's safety. Indeed, the presence of visiting surgeons is a source of distraction and may have an impact on surgeon's performance. This study's objective was to evaluate possible differences in outcomes between robotic sphincter-saving rectal cancer surgery (RRCS) performed during routine surgical practice versus in the presence of visiting surgeons in the operating room (OR) with direct access to the surgeon. METHODS: Retrospective case-matched studies were conducted from a prospectively collected database. 114 patients (38 with the presence of visiting surgeons) who underwent RRCS between January 2013 and September 2018 were included. Patients were matched in a 1:2 basis after propensity score analysis using five criteria: gender, body mass index, preoperative chemoradiation, type of mesorectum excision, and synchronous liver metastasis. RESULTS: There was no difference between the two groups with regard to mean operating time, estimated blood loss, conversion, and hospital stay. Also, overall (44% vs. 40%; P = 0.6), major morbidity (26% vs. 19%; P = 0.5), and unplanned reoperation (17% vs. 15%; P = 1.0) rates were not statistically different. No difference was noted with regard to the quality of mesorectum excision, or positive rate of circumferential and distal longitudinal resection margins. The mean number of harvested lymph nodes (17 vs. 14.5; P = 0.04) was lower in the SD group and the number of patients with < 12 harvested lymph nodes (31% vs. 16%; P = 0.09) was greater after SD although it did not reach statistical significance. No differences were observed in disease-free or overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of visiting surgeons in the OR seems not to interfere in the quality of rectal resection and does not compromise patient's short-term outcome and survival. However, mild differences in the extent of lymphadenectomy were observed and the surgeons performing SD may be aware of this.

Minimally invasive versus open right hepatectomy: comparative study with propensity score matching analysis.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive liver resections (MILRs) have been increasingly performed in recent years. However, the majority of MILRs are actually minor or limited resections of peripheral lesions. Due to the technical complexity major hepatectomies remain challenging for minimally invasive surgery. The aim of this study was to compare the short and long-term outcomes of patients undergoing minimally invasive right hepatectomies (MIRHs) with contemporary patients undergoing open right hepatectomies (ORHs) METHODS: Consecutive patients submitted to anatomic right hepatectomies between January 2013 and December 2018 in two tertiary referral centers were studied. Study groups were compared on an intention-to-treat basis after propensity score matching (PSM). Overall survival (OS) analyses were performed for the entire cohort and specific etiologies subgroups RESULTS: During study period 178 right hepatectomies were performed. After matching, 37 patients were included in MIRH group and 60 in ORH group. The groups were homogenous for all baseline characteristics. MIRHs had significant lower blood loss (400 ml vs. 500 ml, P = 0.01), lower rate of minor complications (13.5% vs. 35%, P = 0.03) and larger resection margins (10 mm vs. 5 mm, P = 0.03) when compared to ORHs. Additionally, a non-significant decrease in hospital stay (ORH 9 days vs. MIRH 7 days, P = 0.09) was observed. No differences regarding the use of Pringle's maneuver, operative time, overall morbidity or perioperative mortality were observed. OS was similar between the groups (P = 0.13). Similarly, no difference in OS was found in subgroups of patients with primary liver tumors (P = 0.09) and liver metastasis (P = 0.80). CONCLUSIONS: MIRHs are feasible and safe in experienced hands. Minimally invasive approach was associated with less blood loss, a significant reduction in minor perioperative complications, and did not negatively affect long-term outcomes.

Organ preservation for rectal cancer (GRECCAR 2): a prospective, randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Organ preservation is a concept proposed for patients with rectal cancer after a good clinical response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, to potentially avoid morbidity and side-effects of rectal excision. The objective of this study was to compare local excision and total mesorectal excision in patients with a good response after chemoradiotherapy for lower rectal cancer. METHODS: We did a prospective, randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial at 15 tertiary centres in France that were experts in the treatment of rectal cancer. Patients aged 18 years and older with stage T2T3 lower rectal carcinoma, of maximum size 4 cm, who had a good clinical response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (residual tumour ≤2 cm) were centrally randomly assigned by the surgeon before surgery to either local excision or total mesorectal excision surgery. Randomisation, which was done via the internet, was not stratified and used permuted blocks of size eight. In the local excision group, a completion total mesorectal excision was required if tumour stage was ypT2-3. The primary endpoint was a composite outcome of death, recurrence, morbidity, and side-effects at 2 years after surgery, to show superiority of local excision over total mesorectal excision in the modified intention-to-treat (ITT) population (expected proportions of patients having at least one event were 25% vs 60% for superiority). This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00427375. FINDINGS: From March 1, 2007, to Sept 24, 2012, 186 patients received chemoradiotherapy and were enrolled in the study. 148 good clinical responders were randomly assigned to treatment, three were excluded (because they had metastatic disease, tumour >8 cm from anal verge, and withdrew consent), and 145 were analysed: 74 in the local excision group and 71 in the total mesorectal excision group. In the local excision group, 26 patients had a completion total mesorectal excision. At 2 years in the modified ITT population, one or more events from the composite primary outcome occurred in 41 (56%) of 73 patients in the local excision group and 33 (48%) of 69 in the total mesorectal excision group (odds ratio 1·33, 95% CI 0·62-2·86; p=0·43). In the modified ITT analysis, there was no difference between the groups in all components of the composite outcome, and superiority was not shown for local excision over total mesorectal excision. INTERPRETATION: We failed to show superiority of local excision over total mesorectal excision, because many patients in the local excision group received a completion total mesorectal excision that probably increased morbidity and side-effects, and compromised the potential advantages of local excision. Better patient selection to avoid unnecessary completion total mesorectal excision could improve the strategy. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute of France, Sanofi, Roche Pharma.

Robotic versus laparoscopic rectal resection for sphincter-saving surgery: pathological and short-term outcomes in a single-center analysis of 130 consecutive patients.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive sphincter-saving rectal resection represents a challenging procedure. Robotic surgery for rectal cancer has several advantages over conventional surgery in performing precise dissection and was proved to be safe and effective in previous studies. However, comparison between laparoscopic and robotic rectal resection has drawn contradictory results. The aim of the present study was to compare robotic and laparoscopic sphincter-saving rectal resections for short-term and pathological outcomes. METHODS: Between January 2013 and May 2016, we performed a total of 258 robotic surgeries, including 146 colorectal resections (56%). For this study, we included the first 65 sphincter-saving robotic resections and compared them to the last 65 consecutive laparoscopic resections. The laparoscopic group was constituted by the last 65 consecutively operated patients who matched the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: Patients' baseline characteristics were similar in both the groups. Conversion rate was greater in the laparoscopic group (17 vs. 5%, p=0.044). Reoperation rate, overall and severe morbidity, and median hospital stay were similar in both the groups. Quality of mesorectal excision specimen was considered complete or near complete in 97 and 96% in the laparoscopic and robotic groups, respectively. There was no difference in the rates of negative circumferential radial margin, distal margin, and surgical success measured by composite criteria. CONCLUSION: The main finding of this study was that robotic proctectomy for sphincter-saving procedures offers similar quality of TME with a statistically significant lower rate of conversion when compared to laparoscopic proctectomy.

Long-term assessment of parastomal hernia prevention by intra-peritoneal mesh reinforcement according to the modified Sugarbaker technique.

BACKGROUND: Parastomal hernia (PSH) is a very frequent complication after creation of a permanent colostomy. The aim of that study is to assess the safety and the long-term efficacy of an intra-peritoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) positioned at the time of primary stoma formation to prevent PSH occurrence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: That multicentre prospective study concerned 29 consecutive patients operated for cancer of the low rectum between 2008 and 2014. There were 14 men and 15 women with a median age of 73 years (range 39-88) and a BMI of 28 (range 21-43). All the patients had potentially curative abdominoperineal excision associated with IPOM reinforcement of the abdominal wall with a round non-slit composite mesh centred on the stoma site and covering the lateralized colon according to the modified Sugarbaker technique. The major outcomes analysed were operative time, complications related to mesh and PSH incidence. Patients were evaluated at 6-month intervals for the first 2 years and thereafter annually with physical examination and CT scan control. For PSH evaluation, we used the classification of Moreno-Matias. RESULTS: Surgery was performed by laparoscopy in 24 patients and by laparotomy in 5; 17 had a trans-peritoneal colostomy and 12 an extra-peritoneal colostomy. The median size of the mesh was 15 cm (range 12-20), the operative time 225 min. (range 123-311) and the specific time for mesh placement 15 min. (range 10-30). With a median follow-up of 48 months (range 6-88), no mesh infection or complication requiring mesh removal were recorded. No patient developed a true PSH; two of them had a type Ia PSH (only containing the bowel forming the colostomy with a sac < 5 cm) and were totally asymptomatic. CONCLUSION: In our series, the incidence of PSH was 7 % and no specific mesh-related complication was noted. Prophylactic mesh reinforcement according to the modified Sugarbaker is an effective technique that addresses the issues related to the occurrence of PSH.

Survival Outcomes in Patients with Monobloc-Resected Stage IIC (pT4bN0) Colon Cancer: A Retrospective Observational Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Stage II colon cancer (CC) exhibits considerable prognostic heterogeneous. Our objective was to assess survival but also the prognosis impact of microsatellite instability (MSI) in patients with stage IIC (T4bN0M0) CC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational study including all patients who had primary stage IIC CC resection between 2010 and 2020 in 2 expert centers. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) and time-to-relapse (TTR) were secondary endpoints. RESULTS: Sixty-six patients, median age of 74 years [30-95], were included, with 37.9% presenting MSI (n = 25). Organ invasion involved the last ileal loop (n = 17), another colonic segment (n = 15), omentum (n = 13), visceral peritoneum (n = 13), and the bladder (n = 4). Surgical quality criteria showed complete monobloc resection in all patients and 93.9% R0 resection. After a median follow-up of 5 years [3.5-6.6], the entire population showed a 5-year OS of 65.2% [53.0-80.3] and 5-year DFS of 53.5% [41.1-69.6], with 18.9% [6.8-29.4] experiencing relapses at 5 years. The MSI phenotype correlated with improved 5-year OS (75.5% [56.5-100] vs. 59.5% [44.9-79.0], HR 0.41 [0.17-0.99]; P = .04), but DFS and TTR did not differ. Adjuvant chemotherapy was administered to 34.9% of patients. Univariate analysis identified age > 65 years, MSI status, and the number of nodes as factors associated with OS. CONCLUSION: These data underline, in relation to a low rate of relapse, the lack of consensus regarding the appropriate indication for adjuvant chemotherapy in this high-risk stage II population.

Robotic, transanal, and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for locally advanced mid/low rectal cancer: European multicentre, propensity score-matched study.

BACKGROUND: Total mesorectal excision (TME) is the standard surgery for low/mid locally advanced rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to compare three minimally invasive surgical approaches for TME with primary anastomosis (laparoscopic TME, robotic TME, and transanal TME). METHODS: Records of patients undergoing laparoscopic TME, robotic TME, or transanal TME between 2013 and 2022 according to standardized techniques in expert centres contributing to the European MRI and Rectal Cancer Surgery III (EuMaRCS-III) database were analysed. Propensity score matching was applied to compare the three groups with respect to the complication rate (primary outcome), conversion rate, postoperative recovery, and survival. RESULTS: A total of 468 patients (mean(s.d.) age of 64.1(11) years) were included; 190 (40.6%) patients underwent laparoscopic TME, 141 (30.1%) patients underwent robotic TME, and 137 (29.3%) patients underwent transanal TME. Comparative analyses after propensity score matching demonstrated a higher rate of postoperative complications for laparoscopic TME compared with both robotic TME (OR 1.80, 95% c.i. 1.11-2.91) and transanal TME (OR 2.87, 95% c.i. 1.72-4.80). Robotic TME was associated with a lower rate of grade A anastomotic leakage (2%) compared with both laparoscopic TME (8.8%) and transanal TME (8.1%) (P = 0.031). Robotic TME (1.4%) and transanal TME (0.7%) were both associated with a lower conversion rate to open surgery compared with laparoscopic TME (8.8%) (P < 0.001). Time to flatus and duration of hospital stay were shorter for patients treated with transanal TME (P = 0.003 and 0.001 respectively). There were no differences in operating time, intraoperative complications, blood loss, mortality, readmission, R0 resection, or survival. CONCLUSION: In this multicentre, retrospective, propensity score-matched, cohort study of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer, newer minimally invasive approaches (robotic TME and transanal TME) demonstrated improved outcomes compared with laparoscopic TME.

Conservative treatment of intrarectal mesh migration after ventral laparoscopic rectopexy for rectal prolapse.

OBJECTIVE: Ventral rectopexy is a validated treatment for rectal prolapse with a low morbidity rate but a risk of intrarectal mesh migration. The purpose of this study was to report the results of local transanal mesh excision for intrarectal mesh migration after ventral rectopexy. METHODS: Between January 2004 and March 2011, 312 patients underwent laparoscopic ventral rectopexy in two hospitals. Six patients were treated for intrarectal mesh migration. RESULTS: Delay between ventral rectopexy and the onset of symptoms was 53 months (4-124 months). All patients have symptoms. Imaging revealed a pelvic abscess in two cases. Intrarectal mesh migration was confirmed by anorectoscopy or clinical examination. Five patients were only treated by local transanal partial mesh excision, and one required a colostomy. Morbidity and mortality were zero. The median hospitalization time was 5 days (3-8 days). After a median postoperative follow-up period of 9 months (1-40 months), one recurrence was observed 2 months after surgery. CONCLUSION: Local transanal mesh excision for intrarectal mesh migration after laparoscopic ventral rectopexy is a feasible conservative treatment. This simple treatment produced a cure of the pelvic inflammation and closure of the fistula without compromising a more aggressive secondary treatment which was not necessary in our series.

Comparison between single-incision and conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective trial of the Club Coelio.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) and conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC). METHOD: Patients' inclusion criteria were uncomplicated gallstones, BMI ≤30, ASA score ≤2, and no past surgery in the upper abdomen. Five surgeons performed only SILC and seven only CLC. Data analyzed included operative time, morbidity, quality of life (QOL), cosmetic result, and global patient satisfaction. The last three parameters were evaluated 3 months after surgery. QOL was assessed with the Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index (GIQLI) questionnaire. Cosmetic result and patient satisfaction were rated using a 5-grade Likert scale. RESULTS: This study included 104 patients operated on between April and June 2010. A SILC was performed in 35 patients and a CLC in 69. The preoperative characteristics of the two groups were similar. Median operative time for SILC was higher than that for CLC: 55 versus 40 min (p < 0.001). Postoperative complications (0 vs. 2) and postoperative GIQLI scores (123 ± 13 vs. 121 ± 18) were not significantly different between groups. Cosmetic result and patient satisfaction were better for SILC than for CLC. The percentages of results rated as excellent were 68 versus 37 % (p < 0.006) and 80 versus 57 % (p < 0.039), respectively. For the whole group, multivariate statistical analysis revealed that postoperative GIQLI score and cosmetic result were independent predictive factors of patient satisfaction. The percentages of satisfaction rated as excellent were greater in patients who had a postoperative GIQLI score ≥130 (92 vs. 49 %, odds ratio [OR] = 4, p < 0.001) and in patients who had an excellent cosmetic result (82 vs. 47 %, OR = 7, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to CLC, SILC is associated with a longer operative time, an equivalent morbidity and QOL, and a better cosmetic result. The improved aesthetic result also leads to a better global patient satisfaction.

Conversion to Open Surgery During Minimally Invasive Right Colectomy for Cancer: Results from a Large Multinational European Study.

Background: The risk of conversion to open surgery is inevitably present during any minimally invasive colorectal surgical procedure. Conversions have been associated with adverse postoperative and oncologic outcomes. No previous study has evaluated the specific causes and consequences of conversion during a minimally invasive right colectomy (MIS-RC). Materials and Methods: We analyzed the Minimally invasivE surgery for oncologic Right ColectomY (MERCY) study database including patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic RC because of colon cancer between 2014 and 2020. Descriptive analyses were performed to determine the different reasons for conversion. Uni- and multivariate logistic regressions were run to identify potential variables associated with this outcome. Cox regression analyses were used to evaluate the impact of conversion on tumor recurrence. Results: Over a total of 1574 MIS-RC, 120 (7.6%) were converted to open surgery. The main reasons for conversion were procedural difficulties related to adherences from previous abdominal surgical procedures (39.2%), or owing to large tumor size or infiltration of adjacent structures (26.7%). Only 16.7% of the conversions were caused by intraoperative medical or surgical complications. Converted patients required longer operative times and developed more postoperative complications, both overall (39.2% versus 27.5%; P = .006) and severe ones (13.3% versus 8.3%; P = .061). Male gender (odds ratio [OR] = 1.89 [95% confidence interval: 1.31-2.71]), obesity (OR = 1.99 [1.4-2.83]), prior abdominal surgery (OR = 1.68 [1.19-2.37]), and pT4 cancers (OR = 4.04 [2.86-5.69]) were independently associated with conversion. Conversion to open surgery was not significantly associated with tumor recurrence (hazard ratios = 1.395 [0.724-2.687]). Conclusions: Although conversion to open surgery during MIS-RC for cancer is associated with worsened postoperative outcomes, it seems not to impact on the oncologic prognosis.

[Robots set up in the operating theater]. / Les robots s'installent au bloc opératoire.

"Robots set up in the operating theater. The patient's benefit after a minimally invasive approach stimulated the robotic approach of abdominal and thoracic surgical procedures. Although much more expensive, the robots improve the vision of the operating field, the precision of the gestures with a faster training course for the surgeon who operates more comfortably. Surgeons eager for technological progress quickly adopted this technique in urology and gynecology and then in thoracic and digestive procedures. In France, the support for this innovation by academic and medical institutions is limited by several factors including the supremacy of Intuitive which imposes its prices, the absence of scientifically proven superiority, the absence of surveys under the responsibility of scientific societies and the lack of criteria concerning the surgeon training."

"Les robots s'installent au bloc opératoire. Les bénéfices de l'approche mini-invasive abdominale et thoracique ont stimulé l'approche robotique. Bien que beaucoup plus coûteux, les robots améliorent la vision du champ opératoire, la précision des gestes avec un apprentissage plus rapide pour le chirurgien qui opère plus confortablement. Les chirurgiens avides de progrès technologiques s'emparent rapidement de cette technique en urologie et en gynécologie puis en thoracique et en digestif. Le monopole imposé par la société Intuitive qui impose ses prix, l'absence de supériorité démontrée scientifiquement, de registres sous la responsabilité de sociétés scientifiques et de critères concernant la formation des chirurgiens à cette nouvelle technique ne favorise pas le soutien des institutions françaises pour accompagner cette innovation."

Cholecystocholedocholithiasis: a case-control study comparing the short- and long-term outcomes for a "laparoscopy-first" attitude with the outcome for sequential treatment (systematic endoscopic sphincterotomy followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy).

BACKGROUND: No unanimous consensus has been achieved regarding the ideal management of cholecystocholedocholithiasis. The treatment of gallbladder and common bile duct (CBD) stones may be achieved currently according to a two-step-protocol (endoscopic sphincterotomy associated with laparoscopic cholecystectomy) or by a one-step laparoscopic procedure, including exploration of the CBD and cholecystectomy. Endoscopic sphincterotomy is reported to have considerable morbidity/mortality and CBD stone recurrence rates, whereas laparoscopic CBD clearance is a demanding procedure, which to date has not spread beyond specialized environments. METHODS: To evaluate our "laparoscopy first" (LF) approach for patients affected by gallbladder/CBD stones (laparoscopic exploration and intraoperative decision whether to proceed with laparoscopic CBD exploration or to postpone CBD stone treatment to a postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography [ERCP]), we performed a retrospective, two-center case-control comparison of the postoperative outcome for 49 consecutive patients treated for gallbladder/CBD stones from January 2000 through December 2004. The results obtained with this LF approach were compared with those achieved with the traditional, "endoscopy-first" (EF) approach (ERCP plus endoscopic sphincterotomy, followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy). The mean follow-up period was 6.4 years (range, 4-8 years). RESULTS: No difference emerged concerning early and late complications, mortality, or laparotomies needed to accomplish cholecystectomy and CBD clearance. The postoperative hospital stay was shorter for the LF group. In the LF group, only 22 patients underwent choledochotomy (45%), and 15 patients underwent perioperative ERCP (30%). Conversions decreased with practice. After choledochotomy, an increasing number of patients underwent primary closure of the CBD (with no biliary drain), without complications. CONCLUSIONS: An LF approach to gallbladder/CBD stones is safe and feasible. It may allow the majority of surgeons to avoid excessively difficult/dangerous surgical procedures as well as unnecessary ERCPs in most cases. A tendency toward a lower incidence of conversions and a rarer use of biliary drains may lead to an improved immediate outcome for patients undergoing an LF approach.

PERINEAL REPAIR AFTER ABDOMINOPERINEAL EXCISION WITH RECTUS ABDOMINIS MYOCUTANEOUS FLAP.

BACKGROUND: Myocutaneous flap of the rectus abdominis filling the perineal defect after APR.. Abdominoperineal excision of the rectum (APR) remains the only potential curative treatment for very low rectal adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma of the anus. Yet, it implies a significant perineal exenteration and has set the attention on the perineal reconstruction. AIM: To present technique used in one case of APR for anal cancer, with resection of the vaginal posterior wall with large perineal defect which has called for the necessity of a flap for reconstruction. METHOD: To cover the large perineal defect and reconstruct the posterior vaginal wall was perform a standardized and reproducible surgical technique using oblique rectus abdominis myocutaneous (ORAM) flap. The overlying skin of this flap is thick and well vascularized by both superficial branches and perforators of the superior epigastric artery and the deep inferior epigastric artery which serves as the vascular pedicle for the ORAM flap. RESULTS: This procedure was applied in a 65-year-old woman with recurrent squamous cell carcinoma of the anus infiltrating the posterior wall of the vagina. Was performed an APR with en-bloc resection of the vaginal posterior wall in order to achieve tumor-free margins. Postoperative course was uneventful and she was discharged home at postoperative day 9. Final pathological report confirmed the oncological adequacy of the procedure (R0) and showed a rypT4N0 lesion. CONCLUSION: Flap reconstruction is an effective way to cover the perineal wound reducing both perineal complication rate and wound healing delay. The ORAM is particularly interesting for female whose tumors require resection and subsequent reconstruction of the posterior wall of the vagina.