A Randomized Phase III Trial of Complete Mesocolic Excision Compared with Conventional Surgery for Right Colon Cancer: Interim Analysis of a Nationwide Multicenter Study of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology Colorectal Cancer Network (CoME-in trial).

BACKGROUND: Although complete mesocolic excision (CME) is supposed to be associated with a higher lymph node (LN) yield, decreased local recurrence, and survival improvement, its implementation currently is debated because the evidence level of these data is rather low and still not supported by randomized controlled trials. METHOD: This is a multicenter, randomized, superiority trial (NCT04871399). The 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) was the primary end point of the study. The secondary end points were safety (duration of operation, perioperative complications, hospital length of stay), oncologic outcomes (number of LNs retrieved, 3- and 5-year overall survival, 5-year DFS), and surgery quality (specimen length, area and integrity rate of mesentery, length of ileocolic and middle-colic vessels). The trial design required the LN yield to be higher in the CME group at interim analysis. RESULTS: Interim data analysis is presented in this report. The study enrolled 258 patients in nine referral centers. The number of LNs retrieved was significantly higher after CME (25 vs. 20; p = 0.012). No differences were observed with respect to intra- or post-operative complications, postoperative mortality, or duration of surgery. The hospital stay was even shorter after CME (p = 0.039). Quality of surgery indicators were higher in the CME arm of the study. Survival data still were not available. CONCLUSIONS: Interim data show that CME for right colon cancer in referral centers is safe and feasible and does not increase perioperative complications. The study documented with evidence that quality of surgery and LN yield are higher after CME, and this is essential for continuation of patient recruitment and implementation of an optimal comparison. Trial registration The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov with the code NCT04871399 and with the acronym CoME-In trial.

Bowel preparation for elective colorectal resection: multi-treatment machine learning analysis on 6241 cases from a prospective Italian cohort.

BACKGROUND: Current evidence concerning bowel preparation before elective colorectal surgery is still controversial. This study aimed to compare the incidence of anastomotic leakage (AL), surgical site infections (SSIs), and overall morbidity (any adverse event, OM) after elective colorectal surgery using four different types of bowel preparation. METHODS: A prospective database gathered among 78 Italian surgical centers in two prospective studies, including 6241 patients who underwent elective colorectal resection with anastomosis for malignant or benign disease, was re-analyzed through a multi-treatment machine-learning model considering no bowel preparation (NBP; No. = 3742; 60.0%) as the reference treatment arm, compared to oral antibiotics alone (oA; No. = 406; 6.5%), mechanical bowel preparation alone (MBP; No. = 1486; 23.8%), or in combination with oAB (MoABP; No. = 607; 9.7%). Twenty covariates related to biometric data, surgical procedures, perioperative management, and hospital/center data potentially affecting outcomes were included and balanced into the model. The primary endpoints were AL, SSIs, and OM. All the results were reported as odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). RESULTS: Compared to NBP, MBP showed significantly higher AL risk (OR 1.82; 95% CI 1.23-2.71; p = .003) and OM risk (OR 1.38; 95% CI 1.10-1.72; p = .005), no significant differences for all the endpoints were recorded in the oA group, whereas MoABP showed a significantly reduced SSI risk (OR 0.45; 95% CI 0.25-0.79; p = .008). CONCLUSIONS: MoABP significantly reduced the SSI risk after elective colorectal surgery, therefore representing a valid alternative to NBP.

Right-sided colonic diverticulitis. Short and long-term surgical outcomes and 2-year quality of life.

AIM: We aimed to investigate the short and the long-term outcomes and 2-year Quality of Life (QoL) of patients with right-sided colonic diverticulitis (RCD) surgically managed. METHOD: We conducted an ambidirectional cohort study of patients with RCD undergoing surgery between 2012/2022. A colonoscopy was performed at 1-year post surgery. The enrolled patients completed the EuroQoL (EQ-5D-3L) during a regular follow-up visit at 12 and 24 months after surgery. RESULTS: Three hundred nineteen patients with RCD were selected: 223 (70%) patients were treated by non-operative management (NOM) while 33 underwent surgery. Acute diverticulitis occurred in 30 patients: 9 (27.2%) were classified by CT as uncomplicated and 21 (63.6%) as complicated diverticulitis. Additionally, chronic diverticulitis occurred in 3 cases (9.2%). Specifically, 27 patients were classified by CT as 1a (81.8%) and 6 patients as 3 (18.2%). Right hemicolectomy was performed in 30 patients (90.8%), and ileo-caecectomy in 3 (9.2%). Nine (27.27%) experienced postoperative complications: 7 (77.7%) were classified according to the Clavien-Dindo as grade I-II, and 2 (22.2%) as grade III. No disease recurrence or colorectal cancer (CRC) was detected on colonoscopy. Thirty (90.8%) patients completed the 24-month follow-up. A statistically significant difference between preoperative and 24-month QoL index values (median 0.72; IQR = 0.57-0.8 vs. median 0.9; IQR = 0.82-1; p = 0.0003) was observed. CONCLUSIONS: The study results demonstrate satisfactory surgical outcomes and a better QoL after surgery. No disease recurrence or CRC was observed at colonoscopy 1 year after surgery.

Minimally invasive vs. open segmental resection of the splenic flexure for cancer: a nationwide study of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology-Colorectal Cancer Network (SICO-CNN).

BACKGROUND: Evidence on the efficacy of minimally invasive (MI) segmental resection of splenic flexure cancer (SFC) is not available, mostly due to the rarity of this tumor. This study aimed to determine the survival outcomes of MI and open treatment, and to investigate whether MI is noninferior to open procedure regarding short-term outcomes. METHODS: This nationwide retrospective cohort study included all consecutive SFC segmental resections performed in 30 referral centers between 2006 and 2016. The primary endpoint assessing efficacy was the overall survival (OS). The secondary endpoints included cancer-specific mortality (CSM), recurrence rate (RR), short-term clinical outcomes (a composite of Clavien-Dindo > 2 complications and 30-day mortality), and pathological outcomes (a composite of lymph nodes removed ≧12, and proximal and distal free resection margins length ≧ 5 cm). For these composites, a 6% noninferiority margin was chosen based on clinical relevance estimate. RESULTS: A total of 606 patients underwent either an open (208, 34.3%) or a MI (398, 65.7%) SFC segmental resection. At univariable analysis, OS and CSM were improved in the MI group (log-rank test p = 0.004 and Gray's tests p = 0.004, respectively), while recurrences were comparable (Gray's tests p = 0.434). Cox multivariable analysis did not support that OS and CSM were better in the MI group (p = 0.109 and p = 0.163, respectively). Successful pathological outcome, observed in 53.2% of open and 58.3% of MI resections, supported noninferiority (difference 5.1%; 1-sided 95%CI - 4.7% to ∞). Successful short-term clinical outcome was documented in 93.3% of Open and 93.0% of MI procedures, and supported noninferiority as well (difference - 0.3%; 1-sided 95%CI - 5.0% to ∞). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with SFC, the minimally invasive approach met the criterion for noninferiority for postoperative complications and pathological outcomes, and was found to provide results of OS, CSM, and RR comparable to those of open resection.

ERAS program adherence-institutionalization, major morbidity and anastomotic leakage after elective colorectal surgery: the iCral2 multicenter prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs influence morbidity rates and length of stay after colorectal surgery (CRS), and may also impact major complications and anastomotic leakage rates. A prospective multicenter observational study to investigate the interactions between ERAS program adherence and early outcomes after elective CRS was carried out. METHODS: Prospective enrolment of patients submitted to elective CRS with anastomosis in 18 months. Adherence to 21 items of ERAS program was measured upon explicit criteria in every case. After univariate analysis, independent predictors of primary endpoints [major morbidity (MM) and anastomotic leakage (AL) rates] were identified through logistic regression analyses including all significant variables, presenting odds ratios (OR). RESULTS: Institutional ERAS protocol was declared by 27 out of 38 (71.0%) participating centers. Median overall adherence to ERAS program items was 71.4%. Among 3830 patients included in the study, MM and AL rates were 4.7% and 4.2%, respectively. MM rates were independently influenced by intra- and/or postoperative blood transfusions (OR 7.79, 95% CI 5.46-11.10; p < 0.0001) and standard anesthesia protocol (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.48-0.96; p = 0.028). AL rates were independently influenced by male gender (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.06-2.07; p = 0.021), intra- and/or postoperative blood transfusions (OR 4.29, 95% CI 2.93-6.50; p < 0.0001) and non-standard resections (OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.01-2.22; p = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: This study disclosed wide room for improvement in compliance to several ERAS program items. It failed to detect any significant association between institutionalization and/or adherence rates to ERAS program with primary endpoints. These outcomes were independently influenced by gender, intra- and postoperative blood transfusions, non-standard resections, and standard anesthesia protocol.

ICG fluorescence imaging in colorectal surgery: a snapshot from the ICRAL study group.

BACKGROUND: Fluorescence-guided visualization is a recently proposed technology in colorectal surgery. Possible uses include evaluating perfusion, navigating lymph nodes and searching for hepatic metastases and peritoneal spread. Despite the absence of high-level evidence, this technique has gained considerable popularity among colorectal surgeons due to its significant reliability, safety, ease of use and relatively low cost. However, the actual use of this technique in daily clinical practice has not been reported to date. METHODS: This survey was conducted on April 2020 among 44 centers dealing with colorectal diseases and participating in the Italian ColoRectal Anastomotic Leakage (iCral) study group. Surgeons were approximately equally divided based on geographical criteria from multiple Italian regions, with a large proportion based in public (89.1%) and nonacademic (75.7%) centers. They were invited to answer an online survey to snapshot their current behaviors regarding the use of fluorescence-guided visualization in colorectal surgery. Questions regarding technological availability, indications and techniques, personal approaches and feelings were collected in a 23-item questionnaire. RESULTS: Questionnaire replies were received from 37 institutions and partially answered by 8, as this latter group of centers do not implement fluorescence technology (21.6%). Out of the remaining 29 centers (78,4%), fluorescence is utilized in all laparoscopic colorectal resections by 72.4% of surgeons and only for selected cases by the remaining 27.6%, while 62.1% of respondents do not use fluorescence in open surgery (unless the perfusion is macroscopically uncertain with the naked eye, in which case 41.4% of them do). The survey also suggests that there is no agreement on dilution, dosing and timing, as many different practices are adopted based on personal judgment. Only approximately half of the surgeons reported a reduced leak rate with fluorescence perfusion assessment, but 65.5% of them strongly believe that this technique will become a minimum requirement for colorectal surgery in the future. CONCLUSION: The survey confirms that fluorescence is becoming a widely used technique in colorectal surgery. However, both the indications and methods still vary considerably; furthermore, the surgeons' perceptions of the results are insufficient to consider this technology essential. This survey emphasizes the need for further research to reach recommendations based on solid scientific evidence.

Robotic pelvic dissection as surgical treatment of complicated diverticulitis in elective settings: a comparative study with fully laparoscopic procedure.

BACKGROUND: Recently, minimally invasive treatment of complicated sigmoid diverticulitis is becoming a valid alternative to standard procedures. Robotic approach may be useful to allow more precise dissection in arduous pelvic dissection as in complicated diverticulitis. The aim of this study is to investigate effectiveness, potential benefits and short-term outcomes of robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgical resection, compared with fully laparoscopic resection in complicated diverticulitis. METHODS: Between January 2009 and December 2017, 156 consecutive patients with history of complicated diverticular disease were referred to our Department of General, Mininvasive and Robotic Surgery. All patients underwent elective colonic resections performed by the same colorectal surgeon and followed a perioperative ERAS program. Demographic and clinical features, surgical data, postoperative data, 30-day morbidity and mortality, VAS for surgeon's compliance were evaluated. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-six consecutive patients underwent elective colonic resection: 92 fully laparoscopic (FL) colorectal resections and 64 procedures with robotic hybrid approach (RHA). Conversion rate was none in the RHA group versus 6.5% in the FL group, because of poor vision due to bowel distension, inflammatory pseudotumor and peritoneal adhesions. No 30-day mortality was observed. Mean operative time was 167.5 ± 54.4 min (80-420) in the FL group and 172.5 ± 55.64 min (110-325) in the RHA group (p 0.079), mean intraoperative blood loss was 144.6 ± 40.6 ml (40-200) with the FL technique and 138.4 ± 28.3 ml (20-185) with the RHA (p 0.295). Mean hospital stay for FL was 5 ± 4.1 days (range 3-45) and 5 ± 2.7 days (range 3-20) for RHA (p 0.974). Overall postoperative morbidity rate was 21.6% in the FL group and 12.3% in the RHA (p 0.067). Major postoperative morbidity (Clavien-Dindo 3 and 4) represented 13% and 4.6%, respectively (p 0.091). VAS for surgeon's compliance revealed a better performance in the robotic arm (p 0.059). CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary study highlights the potential benefits of robotic-assisted laparoscopy in colorectal resections for complicated diverticular disease in terms of surgical efficacy, postoperative morbidity and better surgeon's compliance.

Emergency Hartmann's Procedure and Its Reversal: A Totally Laparoscopic 2-Step Surgery for the Treatment of Hinchey III and IV Diverticulitis.

BACKGROUND: Hartmann's procedure (HP) followed by reversal restoration is the first choice for treatment of diffuse diverticular peritonitis. There is no unanimous consensus regarding the use of laparoscopy to treat the same condition. METHODS: Data from 60 patients with diverticular diffuse peritonitis who underwent urgent HP followed by laparoscopic reversal were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to the open or laparoscopic HP (OHP, 24 patients; LHP, 36 patients). Outcomes were measured in terms of functional recovery, morbidity, mortality, and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: HPs showed no differences among the groups in terms of operative time, blood loss, and length of intensive care unit stay. Overall morbidity was significantly lower in LHP than in OHP, corresponding to 33.3% and 66.7% respectively ( P = .018). The incidence of both surgical and medical complications was higher in OHP than in LHP (41.7% vs 22.2% [ P = .044] and 45.8% vs 24.3% [ P = .023], respectively). Mortality was 16.6% for each group. LHP showed a faster return to bowel movements and a shorter hospital stay than OHP. The secondary intestinal reversal was possible in 92% of cases, successfully completed laparoscopically in 91.3%. No patients of LHP group required a conversion to open intestinal reversal. CONCLUSION: LHP for treatment of diverticular diffuse peritonitis showed significantly lower morbidity, faster recovery, shorter hospital stay, and higher rates of successful laparoscopic reversal when compared with OHP.

Robotic hybrid technique in rectal surgery for deep pelvic endometriosis.

BACKGROUND: Deep pelvic endometriosis is a complex disorder that affects 6% to 12% of all women in childbearing age. The incidence of bowel endometriosis ranges between 5.3% and 12%, with rectum and sigma being the most frequently involved tracts, accounting for about 80% of cases. It has been reported that segmental colorectal resection is the best surgical option in terms of recurrence rate and improvement of symptoms. The aim of this study is to analyze indications, feasibility, limits, and short-term results of robotic (Da Vinci Surgical System)-assisted laparoscopic rectal sigmoidectomy for the treatment of deep pelvic endometriosis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between January 2006 and December 2010, 19 women with bowel endometriosis underwent colorectal resection through the robotic-assisted laparoscopic approach. Intraoperative and postoperative data were collected. All procedures were performed in a single center and short-term complications were evaluated. RESULTS: Nineteen robotic-assisted laparoscopic colorectal resections for infiltrating endometriosis were achieved. Additional procedures were performed in 7 patients (37%). No laparotomic conversion was performed. No intraoperative complications were observed. The mean operative time was 370 minutes (range = 250-720 minutes), and the estimated blood loss was 250 mL (range = 50-350 mL). The overall complication rate was 10% (2 rectovaginal fistulae). CONCLUSIONS: Deep pelvic endometriosis is a benign condition but may have substantial impact on quality of life due to severe pelvic symptoms. We believe that robotic-assisted laparoscopic colorectal resection is a feasible and relatively safe procedure in the context of close collaboration between gynecologists and surgeons for treatment of deep pelvic endometriosis with intestinal involvement, with low rates of complications and significant improvement of intestinal symptoms.

Mechanical bowel preparation in elective colorectal surgery: a propensity score-matched analysis of the Italian colorectal anastomotic leakage (iCral) study group prospective cohorts.

Retrospective evaluation of the effects of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) on data derived from two prospective open-label observational multicenter studies in Italy regarding elective colorectal surgery. MBP for elective colorectal surgery remains a controversial issue with contrasting recommendations in current guidelines. The Italian ColoRectal Anastomotic Leakage (iCral) study group, therefore, decided to estimate the effects of no MBP (treatment variable) versus MBP for elective colorectal surgery. A total of 8359 patients who underwent colorectal resection with anastomosis were enrolled in two consecutive prospective studies in 78 surgical centers in Italy from January 2019 to September 2021. A retrospective PSMA was performed on 5455 (65.3%) cases after the application of explicit exclusion criteria to eliminate confounders. The primary endpoints were anastomotic leakage (AL) and surgical site infections (SSI) rates; the secondary endpoints included SSI subgroups, overall and major morbidity, reoperation, and mortality rates. Overall length of postoperative hospital stay (LOS) was also considered. Two well-balanced groups of 1125 patients each were generated: group A (No MBP, true population of interest), and group B (MBP, control population), performing a PSMA considering 21 covariates. Group A vs. group B resulted significantly associated with a lower risk of AL [42 (3.5%) vs. 73 (6.0%) events; OR 0.57; 95% CI 0.38-0.84; p = 0.005]. No difference was recorded between the two groups for SSI [73 (6.0%) vs. 85 (7.0%) events; OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.63-1.22; p = 0.441]. Regarding the secondary endpoints, no MBP resulted significantly associated with a lower risk of reoperation and LOS > 6 days. This study confirms that no MBP before elective colorectal surgery is significantly associated with a lower risk of AL, reoperation rate, and LOS < 6 days when compared with MBP.

Abdominal drainage after elective colorectal surgery: propensity score-matched retrospective analysis of an Italian cohort.

BACKGROUND: In Italy, surgeons continue to drain the abdominal cavity in more than 50 per cent of patients after colorectal resection. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of abdominal drain placement on early adverse events in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery. METHODS: A database was retrospectively analysed through a 1:1 propensity score-matching model including 21 covariates. The primary endpoint was the postoperative duration of stay, and the secondary endpoints were surgical site infections, infectious morbidity rate defined as surgical site infections plus pulmonary infections plus urinary infections, anastomotic leakage, overall morbidity rate, major morbidity rate, reoperation and mortality rates. The results of multiple logistic regression analyses were presented as odds ratios (OR) and 95 per cent c.i. RESULTS: A total of 6157 patients were analysed to produce two well-balanced groups of 1802 patients: group (A), no abdominal drain(s) and group (B), abdominal drain(s). Group A versus group B showed a significantly lower risk of postoperative duration of stay >6 days (OR 0.60; 95 per cent c.i. 0.51-0.70; P < 0.001). A mean postoperative duration of stay difference of 0.86 days was detected between groups. No difference was recorded between the two groups for all the other endpoints. CONCLUSION: This study confirms that placement of abdominal drain(s) after elective colorectal surgery is associated with a non-clinically significant longer (0.86 days) postoperative duration of stay but has no impact on any other secondary outcomes, confirming that abdominal drains should not be used routinely in colorectal surgery.

Totally laparoscopic liver resections for primary and metastatic cancer in the elderly: safety, feasibility and short-term outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Standard oncologic liver resections performed on elderly patients (≥70 years old) have been shown to be safe and effective. The aim of this study was to analyze operative and oncologic short-term outcomes of totally laparoscopic liver resections (TLLR) performed on elderly patients for malignancies. METHODS: We performed a retrospective statistical analysis of prospectively recorded data of TLLR performed from October 2008 to February 2012 by a single hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) surgeon. Patients were divided into two groups according to age (<70 vs. ≥ 70 years old) and perioperative outcomes were compared. RESULT: A total of 60 TLLR for malignancies were identified of which 25 patients (42 %) were aged ≥ 70 years (Group A) and 35 (58 %) were aged <70 years (Group B). There was no difference in operative time (170 vs. 180 min, p = 0.267), median blood loss (200 vs. 250 ml, p = 0.183), number and time of Pringle maneuver (p = 0.563 and p = 0.180), blood transfusion rate (4 vs. 17 %, p = 0.222), conversion rate (4 vs. 9 %, p = 0.443), morbidity rate (12 vs. 20 %, p = 0.797), and perioperative mortality rate (0 vs. 3 %, p = 0.688). An R0 resection was achieved in 92 (Group A) versus 83 % (Group B) (p = 0.265). At a median follow-up of 18 months, 12 % of patients in Group A experienced a disease recurrence with a related mortality rate similar to that of Group B (8 vs. 12 %, p = 0.375). CONCLUSION: This retrospective comparative study shows that TLLR performed on elderly for liver neoplasm are feasible and safe and lead to short-term outcomes similar to those of younger patients.

Robotic surgery and standard laparoscopy: a surgical hybrid technique for use in colorectal endometriosis.

AIM: The aim of our work was to assess the feasibility and possible benefits of a novel hybrid surgical technique in rectosigmoidal resection in patients with bowel endometriosis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of seven symptomatic and infertile women with severe bowel endometriosis underwent segmental bowel resection using the da Vinci surgical system and conventional laparoscopy. Statistical analysis was performed by Friedman test for non-parametric multiple comparisons. RESULTS: The surgical procedure has a determined short mean operative time (210min) and short postoperative hospitalization (five days). In 100% of patients, the resected area showed disease-free margins. Follow-up, carried out at three, six and 12months after operation, showed a regression of painful symptoms in all operated patients (100%). Two patients (28.6%) aged≥35years eventually had natural pregnancies. CONCLUSION: To the best of our knowledge, this report is the first concerning the use of a hybrid technique for intestinal resection in severe endometriosis, and comparing our data with that in the literature, its methodological and clinical advantages are evident. Moreover, the complete removal of endometriotic implants seems to offer good results in terms of postoperative fertility, although the study data do not allow us to draw definitive conclusions on the management of fertility.

Three-row versus two-row circular staplers for left-sided colorectal anastomosis: a propensity score-matched analysis of the iCral 2 and 3 prospective cohorts.

BACKGROUND: Since most anastomoses after left-sided colorectal resections are performed with a circular stapler, any technological change in stapling devices may influence the incidence of anastomotic adverse events. The aim of the present study was to analyze the effect of a three-row circular stapler on anastomotic leakage and related morbidity after left-sided colorectal resections. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A circular stapled anastomosis was performed in 4255 (50.9%) out of 8359 patients enrolled in two prospective multicenter studies in Italy, and, after exclusion criteria to reduce heterogeneity, 2799 (65.8%) cases were retrospectively analyzed through a 1:1 propensity score-matching model including 20 covariates relative to patient characteristics, to surgery and to perioperative management. Two well-balanced groups of 425 patients each were obtained: group (A) - true population of interest, anastomosis performed with a three-row circular stapler; group (B) - control population, anastomosis performed with a two-row circular stapler. The target of inferences was the average treatment effect in the treated (ATT). The primary endpoints were overall and major anastomotic leakage and overall anastomotic bleeding; the secondary endpoints were overall and major morbidity and mortality rates. The results of multiple logistic regression analyses for the outcomes, including the 20 covariates selected for matching, were presented as odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). RESULTS: Group A versus group B showed a significantly lower risk of overall anastomotic leakage (2.1 vs. 6.1%; OR 0.33; 95% CI 0.15-0.73; P =0.006), major anastomotic leakage (2.1 vs. 5.2%; OR 0.39; 95% CI 0.17-0.87; P =0.022), and major morbidity (3.5 vs. 6.6% events; OR 0.47; 95% CI 0.24-0.91; P =0.026). CONCLUSION: The use of three-row circular staplers independently reduced the risk of anastomotic leakage and related morbidity after left-sided colorectal resection. Twenty-five patients were required to avoid one leakage.

Fistula Between a Primary Sigmoid Large B-Cell Lymphoma and an Ovarian Teratoma.

Primary colorectal lymphoma is a rare neoplasm. We report the case of a fistula between a diffuse large B-cell lymphoma of the sigmoid colon and an ovarian teratoma. An emergent laparotomy for an acute abdomen in a 90-year-old woman was performed. A pelvic mass of 12 × 9 cm fistulized in the left colon was found with the presence of gas and free liquid within the abdomen. This is an extremely rare condition, and as far as we know, no cases of a fistula between a large B-cell colonic lymphoma and an ovarian teratoma are present in the literature.

Laparoscopic Hartmann's reversal has better clinical outcomes compared to open surgery: An international multicenter cohort study involving 502 patients.

Background: Hartmann's procedure (HP) is used in surgical emergencies such as colonic perforation and colonic obstruction. "Temporary" colostomy performed during HP is not always reversed in part due to potential morbidity and mortality associated with reversal. There are several contributing factors for patients requiring a permanent colostomy following HP. Therefore, there is still some discussion about which technique to use. The aim of this study was to evaluate perioperative variables of patients undergoing Hartmann's reversal using a laparoscopic and open approach. Methods: The multicenter retrospective cohort study was done between January 2009 and December 2019 at 14 institutions globally. Patients who underwent Hartmann's reversal laparoscopic (LS) and open (OS) approaches were evaluated and compared. Sociodemographic, preoperative, intraoperative variables, and surgical outcomes were analyzed. The main outcomes evaluated were 30-day mortality, length of stay, complications, and postoperative outcomes. Results: Five hundred and two patients (264 in the LS and 238 in the OS group) were included. The most prevalent sex was male in 53.7%, the most common indication was complicated diverticular disease in 69.9%, and 85% were American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) II-III. Intraoperative complications were noted in 5.3% and 3.4% in the LS and OS groups, respectively. Small bowel injuries were the most common intraoperative injury in 8.3%, with a higher incidence in the OS group compared with the LS group (12.2% vs. 4.9%, p < 0.5). Inadvertent injuries were more common in the small bowel (3%) in the LS group. A total of 17.2% in the OS versus 13.3% in the LS group required intensive care unit (ICU) admission (p = 0.2). The most frequent postoperative complication was ileus (12.6% in OS vs. 9.8% in LS group, p = 0.4)). Reintervention was required mainly in the OS group (15.5% vs. 5.3% in LS group, p < 0.5); mortality rate was 1%. Conclusions: Laparoscopic Hartmann's reversal is safe and feasible, associated with superior clinical outcomes compared with open surgery.

Right sided diverticulitis in western countries: A review.

BACKGROUND: Although the treatment guidelines for left sided diverticulitis are clear, the management of right colonic diverticulitis is not well established. This disease can no longer be ignored due to significant spread throughout Asia. AIM: To analyse epidemiology, diagnosis and treatment of right-sided diverticulitis in western countries. METHODS: MEDLINE and PubMed searches were performed using the key words "right-sided diverticulitis'', ''right colon diverticulitis'', ''caecal diverticulitis'', ''ascending colon diverticulitis'' and ''caecum diverticula'' in order to find relevant articles published until 2021. RESULTS: A total of 18 studies with 422 patients were found. Correct diagnosis was made only in 32.2%, mostly intraoperatively or via CT scan. The main reason for misdiagnosis was a suspected acute appendicitis (56.8%). The treatment was a non-operative management (NOM) in 184 patients (43.6%) and surgical in 238 patients (56.4%), seven of which after NOM failure. Recurrence rate was low (5.45%), similar to eastern studies and inferior to left -sided diverticulitis. Recurrent patients were successfully conservatively retreated in most cases. CONCLUSION: The management of right- sided diverticulitis is not well clarified in the western world and no selective guidelines have been considered even if principles are similar to those with left- sided diverticulitis. Wrong diagnosis is one of the most important problems and CT scan seems to be the best imaging modality. NOM offers a safe and effective treatment; surgery should be considered only in cases of complicated diverticulitis or if malignancy cannot be excluded. Further studies are needed to clarify the correct treatment.

Operative versus non-operative management in acute surgical diseases during COVID-19 pandemic: a 30-day experience from an Italian hospital in Lombardy.

The spread of COVID-19 pandemic has determined a huge imbalance between real clinical needs of the population and effective resources availability. The aim of this study was to report how this situation forces surgeons to consider a non-operative management as an alternative. This is a retrospective monocentric study and we collected data from 60 patients, split in two groups: info from Group A, 28 patients (11 March to 11 April 2020) were compared with info from group B, 32 patients (11 March to 11 April 2019). The most relevant difference between the groups is related to patient's clinical management. The two groups had a considerably different number of cases that were treated with an operative management: 18 cases (64,7%) in group A vs. 28 cases (87,5%) in group B. Otherwise, non-operative approach occurred in 10 cases (35,7%) in group A and only in 4 patients (12,5%) in group B. These data suggest that the drastic reduction of means narrows the range of therapeutic choices. Indeed, in this emergency scenario, the rationing of healthcare resources was the propelling for surgeons to consider alternative therapeutic pathways.