Early Experience with EndoRobotic Submucosal Dissection (ERSD): Pathologic and Short-term Outcomes in the First 28 Patients.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and feasibility of single-port endorobotic submucosal dissection (ERSD) using the Da Vinci SP platform for the management of rectal neoplasms. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) offers a potential organ-sparing treatment for advanced colorectal neoplasms but demands high technical skill and a steep learning curve. Advances in semiflexible robotic platforms, such as the Da Vinci SP, promise to simplify this procedure, potentially offering improved outcomes for patients with benign rectal neoplasms. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 28 patients who underwent ERSD using the Da Vinci SP platform between 2020 and 2023 was performed. Patient demographics, lesion characteristics, procedure details, outcomes, and complications were reviewed. The primary endpoint was successful en-bloc resection. RESULTS: The cohort had a median age of 60.5 years and a median BMI of 28.2 kg/m², predominantly male(67.8%) with ASA categories 2 or 3(82%). Lesions had a median size of 38 mm and were located a median of 9 cm from the anal verge. The median procedure time was 87.5 minutes. En-bloc resection was achieved in all cases(100%), with no intraoperative complications or mortality. One patient experienced urinary retention, and one had late bleeding requiring blood transfusion. Pathology outcomes included 46.4% tubulovillous adenomas, 21.4% adenocarcinomas, and high-grade dysplasia in 53.6% of patients. CONCLUSION: Single-port ERSD using the Da Vinci SP platform is safe and feasible for the management of colorectal neoplasia, ensuring a high rate of en-bloc resection. It potentially offers advantages over conventional ESD, including shorter dissection times, although further studies are necessary for a definitive comparison.

A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of Single-Port vs. Multi-Port Laparoscopic Total Abdominal Colectomy with End Ileostomy for Medically Refractory Ulcerative Colitis.

BACKGROUND: Medically refractory ulcerative colitis (UC) necessitates surgical intervention, with total abdominal colectomy with end ileostomy being a definitive treatment. The comparison between single-port and multi-port laparoscopic surgery outcomes remains underexplored. OBJECTIVE: To compare the surgical outcomes of single-port versus multi-port laparoscopic surgery in patients undergoing total abdominal colectomy with end ileostomy for medically refractory UC. DESIGN: A retrospective analysis comparing single-port to multi-port surgery in UC patients from 2010 to 2020. Patients were propensity score-matched 3:1 (multi-port to single-port) on baseline characteristics. SETTINGS: Single center academic hospital. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Binary outcomes were compared using a multivariable logistic regression model, and a subset analysis was conducted for postoperative stump leak based on stump implantation during surgery. These metrics were compared between the single-port and multi-port groups to assess the differences in surgical outcomes. RESULTS: The multi-port and single-port groups included 642 and 114 patients, respectively. Matched cohort included 342 multi-ports and 114 single-ports. We observed a statistically significant difference in mean operation time, with the single-port procedure taking 43 minutes less than the multi-port laparoscopy. There were no significant differences between the two groups in postoperative stump leaks, postoperative ileus, stoma site complications, postoperative readmission within 30 days, postoperative reoperation within 30 days, and subsequent IPAA surgery. In the subset analysis, stump implantation was associated with a higher risk of stump leak in the multiport group. The single-port group had a shorter hospital stay. LIMITATIONS: Retrospective nature, being conducted at a single center. CONCLUSION: Single-incision laparoscopic total abdominal colectomy in the treatment of mucosal ulcerative colitis is a safe, effective, and efficient approach. In our cohort, as compared to multi-port approach, single incision laparoscopy has shown shorter operation times and better overall length of stay. Taking into account less invasive approach, decreased abdominal trauma, and faster recovery, single-port surgery is a viable alternative to multi-port surgery. See Video Abstract.

Epidemiology and age-related trends in surgical outcomes for sigmoid volvulus: a 17-year analysis.

BACKGROUND: Sigmoid volvulus, a gastrointestinal disorder characterized by twisted bowel, often requires medical intervention, either through endoscopic or surgical means, to avoid potentially severe outcomes. This study examined the challenges elderly patients face in undergoing surgical treatment, encompassing both mortality and morbidity. Furthermore, it aimed to determine how medical practices and outcomes have changed over a period of 17 years. METHODS: We utilized data from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Project, which covers the period from 2005 to 2021, to identify patients who underwent left hemicolectomy for colonic volvulus. The patients were categorized into three age groups: < 60 years, 60-75 years, and > 75 years. We performed a meticulous logistic regression analysis, carefully adjusted for risk factors, to compare mortality, morbidity, and types of surgical treatment administered among the different age groups. RESULTS: Our study included 6775 patients. The breakdown of the patient population was as follows: 2067 patients were < 60 years of age, 2239 were between 60 and 75 years of age, and 2469 were > 75 years of age. The elderly cohort, those aged above 75 years, were predominantly male, had lower BMIs, underwent fewer laparoscopic surgeries, required more diverting stomas and end-ostomies, and had longer hospital stays. Notably, the elderly population faced a mortality risk that was 5.67 times (95% CI 3.64, 9.20) greater than that of their youngest counterparts, with this risk increasing by 10% (95% CI 1.06, 1.14) for each additional year of age. Furthermore, the odds of mortality associated with emergency surgery were 1.63 times (95% CI 1.21, 2.22) higher than those associated with elective surgery. The postoperative morbidity odds were also elevated for emergency surgeries, 1.30 times (95% CI 1.08, 1.58) greater than that for elective cases. Over the 17-year period, we observed a decline in mortality rates, an increase in the utilization of laparoscopic procedures, and overall stability of morbidity rates. CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight the increased vulnerability of patients over 75 years of age, who are not only at an elevated risk of mortality compared to their younger counterparts, but also a continuously increasing risk with age. By focusing on elective surgeries for younger patients and minimizing emergency surgeries for the elderly, it may be possible to reduce the mortality risk associated with surgical interventions in this population.

Ventral mesh rectopexy for recurrent rectal prolapse after Altemeier perineal proctosigmoidectomy: feasibility and outcomes.

PURPOSE: Recurrence of rectal prolapse following the Altemeier procedure is reported with rates up to 40%. The optimal surgical management of recurrences has limited data available. Ventral mesh rectopexy (VMR) is a favored procedure for primary rectal prolapse, but its role in managing recurrences after Altemeier is unclear. VMR for recurrent prolapse involves implanting the mesh on the colon, which has a thinner wall, more active peristalsis, no mesorectum, less peritoneum available for covering the mesh, and potential diverticula. These factors can affect mesh-related complications such as erosion, migration, or infection. This study assessed the feasibility and perioperative outcomes of VMR for recurrent rectal prolapse after the Altemeier procedure. METHODS: We queried our prospectively maintained database between 01/01/2008 and 06/30/2022 for patients who had experienced a recurrence of full-thickness rectal prolapse following Altemeier's perineal proctosigmoidectomy and subsequently underwent ventral mesh rectopexy. RESULTS: Ten women with a median age of 67 years (range 61) and a median BMI of 27.8 kg/m2 (range 9) were included. Five (50%) had only one Altemeier, and five (50%) had multiple rectal prolapse surgeries, including Altemeier before VMR. No mesh-related complications occurred during a 65-month (range 165) median follow-up period. Three patients (30%) experienced minor postoperative complications unrelated to the mesh. Long-term complications were chronic abdominal pain and incisional hernia in one patient, respectively. One out of five (20%) patients with only one previous prolapse repair had a recurrence, while all patients (100%) with multiple prior repairs recurred. CONCLUSION: Mesh implantation on the colon is possible without adverse reactions. However, high recurrence rates in patients with multiple previous surgeries raise doubts about using VMR for secondary or tertiary recurrences.

What is the Optimal Strategy for Pouch Salvage at the Time of Redo Ileal-Pouch Anal Anastomosis? Pouch Repair with Re-Anastomosis vs Pouch Excision with Neo-Pouch.

BACKGROUND: The long-term risk of pouch failure after restorative proctocolectomy with ileal-pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) range from 5 and 15%. Salvage surgery for failing IPAA's may be achieved by disconnecting the IPAA and either repairing and re-using the existing pouch (REP) or constructing a neo-pouch (NEO). We aimed to evaluate whether there are differences in long-term functional pouch survival and functional outcomes between the REP group and the NEO group. We hypothesized patients undergoing REP have higher long-term pouch survival rates compared to patients who require NEO pouch construction. METHODS: Our prospectively maintained Pouch Registry was queried for patients who underwent a pouch salvage surgery with either pouch REP or NEO from 1988 - 2020. Patients who underwent pouch repair without disconnection from the anus were excluded. The primary endpoint was long-term pouch survival after redo pouch surgery. Secondary outcomes were patient reported quality of life and pouch function. RESULTS: Of 653 patients undergoing redo IPAA, 462 met inclusion criteria of transabdominal redo surgery with pouch reconnection: 243 (52.6%) had REP and 219 (47.4%) had NEO. Median age was 39 years and 59% were female. Median time between index and redo IPAA was 34 months for REP vs 54 months for NEO (p=0.002). The 5-year pouch survival after redo IPAA was similar between REP (79.5%) and NEO (76.8%) groups (p=0.4). Fewer patients in the REP group reported nighttime pad use (51.4% vs 68.2%, p=0.04). CONCLUSION: Pouch survival and functional outcomes after salvage surgery for failing ileoanal pouch was similar regardless of pouch salvage procedure. When performing redo pouch surgery, surgeons should not hesitate to construct a new pouch if indicated.

Diagnosis and treatment of primary ileal pouch leaks: a 27-year experience at a referral center.

BACKGROUND: Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) is considered the preferred restorative surgical procedure for patients with ulcerative colitis and familial adenomatous polyposis requiring proctocolectomy. Unfortunately, postoperative leaks remain a complication with potentially significant ramifications. This study aimed to provide a comprehensive description of the evaluation, management, and outcomes of leaks after primary IPAA procedures. METHODS: Between 1995 and 2022, a total of 4058 primary IPAA procedures were performed at Cleveland Clinic. From a prospectively maintained pouch registry, we retrospectively reviewed the data of 237 patients who presented to the pouch center for management. Of these, 114 (3%) had undergone the index IPAA procedure at our clinic (de novo cases), whereas 123 patients had their index IPAA performed elsewhere. Data were missing for 43 patients, resulting in a final cohort of 194 patients. RESULTS: Our cohort had an average age of 41 years (range, 16-76) at the time of leak diagnosis. Overall, 55.2% were males, average body mass index was 24.4 kg/m2, and pain was the most prevalent presenting symptom (61.8%), followed by fever (34%). Leaks were confirmed through diagnostic testing in 141 cases, whereas 27.3% were detected intraoperatively. The most common initial diagnoses were pelvic abscess (47.4%) and enteric fistulas (26.8%), including cutaneous (9.8%), vaginal (7.2%), and bladder fistulas (3.1%). By location, leaks occurred at the tip of the "J" (52.6%), at the pouch-anal anastomotic site (35%), and in the body of the pouch (12.4%). A nonoperative management approach was initially attempted in 49.5% of cases, including antibiotic therapy, drainage, endoclip, and endo-sponge, with a success rate of 18.5%. Surgery was eventually required in 81.4% of patients, including (1) sutured or stapled pouch repair (52.5%), with diversion performed in 87.9% of these cases either before or during the salvage surgery; (2) pouch excision with neo-IPAA (22.7%), including 9 patients from the first group; and (3) pouch disconnection, repair, and reanastomosis (9.3%). Pouch failure occurred in 8.4%, with either pouch excision (11.1%) or permanent diversion (4.5%). Ultimately, 12.4% of patients (24 of 194) required permanent diversion, with all necessitating pouch excision. In the 30-day follow-up after salvage surgery, short-term complications arose in 38.7% of patients. The most common complications observed were ileus, pelvic abscess/sepsis, and fever. CONCLUSION: Leaks after primary IPAA procedures represent an infrequent, yet challenging, complication. Despite attempts at nonoperative management, the success rate is limited. Salvage surgery is associated with a high pouch retention rate, underscoring its importance in the management of post-IPAA leaks.

Delayed healing of rectal mucosa after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) with nintedanib use.

Nintedanib is a novel antifibrotic agent used in the treatment of interstitial lung diseases. It has been associated with delayed wound healing and wound dehiscence in case reports after major surgeries when used perioperatively. This report presents an unprecedented case of a non-healing ulcer following an endorobotic submucosal dissection of a recurrent, adenomatous rectal polyp, likely due to nintedanib use. In this article, key components of the case were described with the aim to highlight a noteworthy differential diagnosis when suspecting recurrent rectal polyps as well as the need for further research on the effects of nintedanib on healing of polypectomy sites postoperatively.