Robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer.

OBJECTIVES: This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (intervention). The objectives are as follows: To assess the benefits and harms of robot-assisted surgery for rectal cancer resection.

Adherence to fast track measures in colorectal surgery-a survey among German and Austrian surgeons.

PURPOSE: The effectiveness of modern perioperative treatment concepts has been demonstrated in several studies and meta-analyses. Despite good evidence, limited implementation of the fast track (FT) concept is still a widespread concern. To assess the status quo in Austrian and German hospitals, a survey on the implementation of FT measures was conducted among members of the German Society of General and Visceralsurgery (DGAV), the German Society of Coloproctology (DGK) and the Austrian Society of Surgery (OEGCH) to analyze where there is potential for improvement. METHODS: Twenty questions on perioperative care of colorectal surgery patients were sent to the members of the DGAV, DGK and OEGCH using the online survey tool SurveyMonkey®. Descriptive data analysis was performed using Microsoft Excel. RESULTS: While some of the FT measures have already been routinely adopted in clinical practice (e.g. minimally invasive surgical approach, early mobilization and diet buildup), for other components there are discrepancies between current recommendations and present implementation (e.g. the use of local nerve blocks to provide opioid-sparing analgesia or the use of abdominal drains). CONCLUSION: The implementation of the FT concept in Austria and Germany is still in need of improvement. Particularly regarding the use of abdominal drains and postoperative analgesia, there is a tendency to stick to traditional structures. To overcome the issues with FT implementation, the development of an evidence-based S3 guideline for perioperative care, followed by the founding of a surgical working group to conduct a structured education and certification process, may lead to significant improvements in perioperative patient care.

Preoperative combined mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation for preventing complications in elective colorectal surgery.

BACKGROUND: The success of elective colorectal surgery is mainly influenced by the surgical procedure and postoperative complications. The most serious complications include anastomotic leakages and surgical site infections (SSI)s, which can lead to prolonged recovery with impaired long-term health.  Compared with other abdominal procedures, colorectal resections have an increased risk of adverse events due to the physiological bacterial colonisation of the large bowel. Preoperative bowel preparation is used to remove faeces from the bowel lumen and reduce bacterial colonisation. This bowel preparation can be performed mechanically and/or with oral antibiotics. While mechanical bowel preparation alone is not beneficial, the benefits and harms of combined mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation is still unclear. OBJECTIVES: To assess the evidence for the use of combined mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation for preventing complications in elective colorectal surgery. SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL and trial registries on 15 December 2021. In addition, we searched reference lists and contacted colorectal surgery organisations. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of adult participants undergoing elective colorectal surgery comparing combined mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation (MBP+oAB) with either MBP alone, oAB alone, or no bowel preparation (nBP). We excluded studies in which no perioperative intravenous antibiotic prophylaxis was given. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures as recommended by Cochrane. Pooled results were reported as mean difference (MD) or risk ratio (RR) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) using the Mantel-Haenszel method. The certainty of the evidence was assessed with GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: We included 21 RCTs analysing 5264 participants who underwent elective colorectal surgery. None of the included studies had a high risk of bias, but two-thirds of the included studies raised some concerns. This was mainly due to the lack of a predefined analysis plan or missing information about the randomisation process. Most included studies investigated both colon and rectal resections due to malignant and benign surgical indications. For MBP as well as oAB, the included studies used different regimens in terms of agent(s), dosage and timing.  Data for all predefined outcomes could be extracted from the included studies. However, only four studies reported on side effects of bowel preparation, and none recorded the occurrence of adverse effects such as dehydration, electrolyte imbalances or the need to discontinue the intervention due to side effects. Seventeen trials compared MBP+oAB with sole MBP. The incidence of SSI could be reduced through MBP+oAB by 44% (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.74; 3917 participants from 16 studies; moderate-certainty evidence) and the risk of anastomotic leakage could be reduced by 40% (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.99; 2356 participants from 10 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). No difference between the two comparison groups was found with regard to mortality (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.27 to 2.82; 639 participants from 3 studies; moderate-certainty evidence), the incidence of postoperative ileus (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.32; 2013 participants from 6 studies, low-certainty of evidence) and length of hospital stay (MD -0.19, 95% CI -1.81 to 1.44; 621 participants from 3 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). Three trials compared MBP+oAB with sole oAB. No difference was demonstrated between the two treatment alternatives in terms of SSI (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.34 to 2.21; 960 participants from 3 studies; very low-certainty evidence), anastomotic leakage (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.21 to 3.45; 960 participants from 3 studies; low-certainty evidence), mortality (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.30 to 3.50; 709 participants from 2 studies; low-certainty evidence), incidence of postoperative ileus (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.68 to 2.33; 709 participants from 2 studies; low-certainty evidence) or length of hospital stay (MD 0.1 respectively 0.2, 95% CI -0.68 to 1.08; data from 2 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). One trial (396 participants) compared MBP+oAB versus nBP. The evidence is uncertain about the effect of MBP+oAB on the incidence of SSI as well as mortality (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.23 respectively RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.22; low-certainty evidence), while no effect on the risk of anastomotic leakages (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.33 to 2.42; low-certainty evidence), the incidence of postoperative ileus (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.81; low-certainty evidence) or the length of hospital stay (MD 0.1, 95% CI -0.8 to 1; low-certainty evidence) could be demonstrated. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on moderate-certainty evidence, our results suggest that MBP+oAB is probably more effective than MBP alone in preventing postoperative complications. In particular, with respect to our primary outcomes, SSI and anastomotic leakage, a lower incidence was demonstrated using MBP+oAB. Whether oAB alone is actually equivalent to MBP+oAB, or leads to a reduction or increase in the risk of postoperative complications, cannot be clarified in light of the low- to very low-certainty evidence. Similarly, it remains unclear whether omitting preoperative bowel preparation leads to an increase in the risk of postoperative complications due to limited evidence. Additional RCTs, particularly on the comparisons of MBP+oAB versus oAB alone or nBP, are needed to assess the impact of oAB alone or nBP compared with MBP+oAB on postoperative complications and to improve confidence in the estimated effect. In addition, RCTs focusing on subgroups (e.g. in relation to type and location of colon resections) or reporting side effects of the intervention are needed to determine the most effective approach of preoperative bowel preparation.

Surgical treatment of mechanical bowel obstruction: characteristics and outcomes of geriatric patients compared to a younger cohort.

PURPOSE: Mechanical bowel obstruction (MBO) is one of the most common indications for emergency surgery. Recent research justifies the method of attempting 3-5 days of nonoperative treatment before surgery. However, little is known about specific characteristics of geriatric patients undergoing surgery compared to a younger cohort. We aimed to analyze patients with MBO that required surgery, depending on their age, to identify potential targets for use in the reduction in complications and mortality in the elderly. METHODS: Thirty-day and in-hospital mortality were determined as primary outcome. We retrospectively identified all patients who underwent surgery for MBO at the University Hospital of Bonn between 2009 and 2019 and divided them into non-geriatric (40-74 years, n = 224) and geriatric (≥ 75 years, n = 88) patients, using the chi-squared-test and Mann-Whitney U test for statistical analysis. RESULTS: We found that geriatric patients had higher 30-day and in-hospital mortality rates than non-geriatric patients. As secondary outcome, we found that they experienced a longer length of stay (LOS) and higher complication rates than non-geriatric patients. Geriatric patients who suffered from large bowel obstruction (LBO) had a higher rate of bowel resection, stoma creation, and a higher 30-day mortality rate. The time from admission to surgery was not shown to be crucial for the outcome of (geriatric) patients. CONCLUSION: Geriatric patients suffering from mechanical bowel obstruction that had to undergo surgery had higher mortality and morbidity than non-geriatric patients. Especially in regard to geriatric patients, clinicians should treat patients in a risk-adapted rather than time-adapted manner, and conditions should be optimized before surgery.

Transcutaneous vagal nerve simulation to reduce a systemic inflammatory response syndrome and the associated intestinal failure: study protocol of a prospective, two-armed, sham-controlled, double-blinded trial in healthy subjects (the NeuroSIRS-Study).

PURPOSE: Surgery initiates pro-inflammatory mediator cascades leading to a variably pronounced sterile inflammation (SIRS). SIRS is associated with intestinal paralysis and breakdown of intestinal barrier and might result in abdominal sepsis. Technological progress led to the development of a neurostimulator for transcutaneous auricular vagal nerve stimulation (taVNS), which is associated with a decline in inflammatory parameters and peristalsis improvement in rodents and healthy subjects via activation of the cholinergic anti-inflammatory pathway. Therefore, taVNS might be a strategy for SIRS prophylaxis. METHODS: The NeuroSIRS-Study is a prospective, randomized two-armed, sham-controlled, double-blind clinical trial. The study is registered at DRKS00016892 (09.07.2020). A controlled endotoxemia is used as a SIRS-mimicking model. 2 ng/kg bodyweight lipopolysaccharide (LPS) will be administered after taVNS or sham stimulation. The primary objective is a reduction of clinical symptoms of SIRS after taVNS compared to sham stimulation. Effects of taVNS on release of inflammatory cytokines, intestinal function, and vital parameters will be analyzed. DISCUSSION: TaVNS is well-tolerated, with little to no side effects. Despite not fully mimicking postoperative inflammation, LPS challenge is the most used experimental tool to imitate SIRS and offers standardization and reproducibility. The restriction to healthy male volunteers exerts a certain bias limiting generalizability to the surgical population. Still, this pilot study aims to give first insights into taVNS as a prophylactic treatment in postoperative inflammation to pave the way for further clinical trials in patients at risk for SIRS. This would have major implications for future therapeutic approaches.

The Significance of Visceral Protection in Preventing Enteroatmospheric Fistulae During Open Abdomen Treatment in Patients With Secondary Peritonitis: A Propensity Score-matched Case-control Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the influence of a visceral protective layer (VPL) on the formation of enteroatmospheric fistulae (EAF) in open abdomen treatment (OAT) for peritonitis. BACKGROUND: EAF formation is a severe complication of OAT. Despite the widespread use of OAT, there are no robust evidence-based recommendations for preventing EAF. METHODS: A total of 120 peritonitis patients with secondary peritonitis as a result of a perforation of a hollow viscus or anastomotic insufficiency who had undergone OAT were included, and 14 clinical parameters were recorded in prospective OAT databases at 2 tertiary referral centers. For this analysis, patients with a VPL were assigned to the treatment group and those without a VPL to the control group. Propensity Score (PS) matching was performed. Known risk factors in OAT such as malignant disease, mortality, emergency operation, OAT duration, and fascial closure were matching variables. The influence of VPL on EAF formation was statistically evaluated using logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: With 34 patients in each group, no notable differences were identified with regard to age, sex, underlying disease, mortality, emergency operation, fascial closure, and OAT duration. Overall, a mortality rate of 22.1% for OAT due to peritonitis was observed. Mean OAT duration was approximately 9 days, and secondary fascial closure was achieved in more than two-thirds of all patients. Fascial traction was used in more than 75% of cases. EAF formation was significantly more frequent in the control group (EAF formation: VPL group 2.9% vs control 26.5%; P = 0.00). In the final regression analysis, the use of VPL resulted in a significant reduction in the risk of EAF formation (odds ratio 0.08; 95% confidence interval 0.01-0.71, P = 0.02), which translates to a relative risk reduction of 89.1%. CONCLUSION: VPL effectively prevents EAF formation during OAT in patients with peritonitis. We recommend the consistent use of VPL as part of a standardized OAT treatment algorithm.

State-of-the-art colorectal disease: postoperative ileus.

PURPOSE: Postoperative Ileus (POI) remains an important complication for patients after abdominal surgery with an incidence of 10-27% representing an everyday issue for abdominal surgeons. It accounts for patients' discomfort, increased morbidity, prolonged hospital stays, and a high economic burden. This review outlines the current understanding of POI pathophysiology and focuses on preventive treatments that have proven to be effective or at least show promising effects. METHODS: Pathophysiology and recommendations for POI treatment are summarized on the basis of a selective literature review. RESULTS: While a lot of therapies have been researched over the past decades, many of them failed to prove successful in meta-analyses. To date, there is no evidence-based treatment once POI has manifested. In the era of enhanced recovery after surgery or fast track regimes, a few approaches show a beneficial effect in preventing POI: multimodal, opioid-sparing analgesia with placement of epidural catheters or transverse abdominis plane block; µ-opioid-receptor antagonists; and goal-directed fluid therapy and in general the use of minimally invasive surgery. CONCLUSION: The results of different studies are often contradictory, as a concise definition of POI and reliable surrogate endpoints are still absent. These will be needed to advance POI research and provide clinicians with consistent data to improve the treatment strategies.

Safety and Suitability of the SmartPill® after Abdominal Surgery: Results of the Prospective, Two-Armed, Open-Label PIDuSA Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Postoperative ileus (POI) is a common complication after abdominal surgery. Until today, an evidence-based treatment of prolonged POI is still lacking, which can be attributed to the poor quality of clinical trials. Various different surrogate markers used to define POI severity are considered to be the cause of low-quality trials making it impossible to derive treatment recommendation. The SmartPill®, which is able to record pH values, temperature and pressure after ingestion, could be an ideal tool to measure transit times and peristalsis and therefore analyze POI severity. Unfortunately, the device has no approval for postoperative use due to safety concerns. The primary objective of the study is to determine safety of the SmartPill® in patients undergoing surgery. Secondary objectives were the quality of the recorded data and the suitability of the SmartPill® for analyzing intestinal motility after different surgical procedures. METHODS: The PIDuSA Study is a prospective, 2-arm, open-label trial. At the end of surgery, the SmartPill® was applied to 49 patients undergoing abdominal surgery having a high risk for impaired intestinal motility and 15 patients undergoing extra-abdominal surgery. Patients were visited daily to access safety data of the SmartPill® on the basis of adverse and serious adverse events (AEs/SAEs). Suitability and data quality were investigated by analyzing data completeness and feasibility to determine transit times and peristalsis for all sections of the gastrointestinal tract. RESULTS: In total, 179 AEs and 8 SAEs were recorded throughout the study affecting 42 patients in the abdominal (158 AEs) and 9 patients in the extra-abdominal surgery group (21 AEs, p = 0.061); none of them were device related. Primary capsule failure was observed in 5 patients, ultimately resulting in an impossibility of data analysis in only 3 patients (4.4%). 9% of the recorded data were incomplete due to the patient's incompliance in keeping the receiver close to the body. In 3 patients (4.4%), isolated small bowel transit could not be determined due to pH alterations as a result of prolonged POI. DISCUSSION: Our study demonstrates that the use of the SmartPill® is safe after surgery but requires a reasonable patient compliance to deliver meaningful data. An objective analysis of transit times and peristalsis was possible irrespective of type and site of surgery in over 95% indicating that the SmartPill® has the potential to deliver objective parameters for POI severity in future clinical trials. However, in some patients with prolonged POI, analysis of small bowel transit could be challenging.

[Background, Necessity and Methodology of the S3 Guideline "Perioperative Management of Gastrointestinal Tumours (POMGAT)"]. / Hintergrund, Notwendigkeit und Methodik der S3-Leitlinie "Perioperatives Management bei gastrointestinalen Tumoren (POMGAT)".

Malignancies are among the most common diseases, especially in old age, and are responsible for 25% of all deaths in Germany. Especially carcinomas of the gastrointestinal tract can be cured in most cases only through extensive surgery with significant morbidity. About 25 years ago, the multimodal, perioperative Fast Track (FT) concept for reducing postoperative complications was introduced and additional elements were added in the following years. Meanwhile, there is growing evidence that adherence to the key elements of more than 70% leads to reduction in postoperative adverse events as well as a shorter hospital stay and could be associated with an improved oncological outcome. Despite the high level of awareness and the proven advantages of the FT concept, the implementation and maintenance of the measures is difficult and results in an adherence of only 20 - 40%. There are many reasons for this: In addition to a lack of interdisciplinary and interprofessional cooperation and the time consuming and extended logistical efforts, limited human resources are often listed as one of the main causes. We took these aspects as an opportunity and started to develop a S3 guideline for perioperative treatment to accelerate the recovery of patients with gastrointestinal malignancies. By creating a consensus- and evidence-based, multidisciplinary guideline, many of the problems listed above could probably be solved by optimising and standardising interdisciplinary care, which is particularly important in a setting with many different disciplines and their competing interests. Furthermore, the standardisation of the perioperative procedures will reduce the time and logistical effort. The presentation of the evidence allows increased transparency and justifies the additional personnel expenditure on hospital medicine and health insurance companies. In addition, the evidence-based quality indicators generated during the development of the guideline make it possible to include perioperative standards in certification systems and thus to measure and check the quality of perioperative care.

[Evaluation of the Effectiveness of a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for the Perioperative Management of Colorectal Surgery]. / Evaluation der Effektivität einer Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) zur perioperativen Therapie bei kolorektalen Operationen.

INTRODUCTION: In recent years, perioperative care of patients after colorectal surgery has been increasingly standardised according to the fast-track concept and is accepted as a structured method of care to reduce perioperative complications. Indeed, initial studies have indicated that there is a long-term favourable effect on the oncological outcome, if the adherence to the individual measures is at least 70%. Even though there is unambiguous evidence for the efficacy of the modern perioperative treatment concept, it is often difficult to comply with the protocol during normal clinical work, particularly in Germany. The objective of this study was to record the rate of compliance before and after the introduction of the SOP and to evaluate its efficacy. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of the patient data after all elective colorectal surgery in the Bonn University Hospital from 2017 to 2020. 153 patients were operated on before the implementation of the SOP in January 2019 (group I); the remaining 153 patients were operated on after the implementation of the SOP and received appropriate care (group II). Compliance to the protocol was analysed for both the individual key interventions and the overall concept. RESULTS: There was significant improvement in the compliance for both the individual measures (prehabilitation group I: 5.9%, group II: 42.5%, p < 0.001; preparation of the intestine I: 16.5%, II: 73.9%, p < 0.001; intraoperative volume management I: 14,00 ml/kg BW/h, II: 9.12 ml/kg BW/h, p < 0.001, BW: body weight; minimally invasive surgical technique I: 53.6%, II: 73.9%, p < 0.001; etc.) and for the overall perioperative treatment concept (I: 39%, II: 54%, p = 0.02). However, we fell far short of compliance of at least 70%. Nevertheless, patient autonomy was achieved earlier after introduction of the SOP (I: day 15, II: day 9, p < 0.001) and the postoperative hospital stay was shortened (I: 14 [6 - 99] days, II 11 [4 - 64] days; p = 0.007). CONCLUSION: Although the implementation of the SOP led to significant improvements, further optimisation is required to attain the recommended protocol compliance of 70%. Measures within the hospital could include foundation of an interdisciplinary fast-track team and a specialised nurse as the connecting link between the patients, nursing and physicians. On the other hand, implementation throughout Germany can only be achieved by more influential actions. One possible support would be the S3 guideline on perioperative management of gastrointestinal tumours, which is under development. This could, for example, be used to support argumentation with funding providers.

HPV-associated anal lesions in HIV+ patients: long-term results regarding quality of life.

PURPOSE: HIV infection and concomitant HPV-associated anal lesions may significantly impact on patients' quality of life (QoL), as they are predicted to have negative effects on health, psyche, and sexuality. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fifty-two HIV+ patients with HPV-associated anal lesions were enrolled in a survey approach after undergoing routine proctologic assessment and therapy for HPV-associated anal lesions if indicated over a time span of 11 years (11/2004-11/2015). Therapy consisted of surgical ablation and topic treatment. QoL was analyzed using the SF-36 and the CECA questionnaires. RESULTS: Fifty-two of 67 patients (77.6%) were successfully contacted and 29/52 provided full information. The mean age was 43.8 ± 12.8 years. The median follow-up from treatment to answering of the questionnaire was 34 months. Twenty-one percent (6/29) of the patients reported suffering from recurrence of condyloma acuminata, three patients from anal dysplasia (10.3%). In the SF-36, HIV+ patients did not rate their QoL as significantly different over all items after successful treatment of HPV-associated anal lesions. In the CECA questionnaire, patients with persisting HPV-associated anal lesions reported significantly higher emotional stress levels and disturbance of everyday life compared to patients who had successful treatment (71.9/100 ± 18.7 vs. 40.00/100 ± 27.4, p = 0.004). Importantly, the sexuality of patients with anal lesions was significantly impaired (59.8/100 ± 30.8 vs. 27.5/100 ± 12.2, p = 0.032). CONCLUSION: HPV-associated anal lesions impact significantly negative on QoL in HIV+ patients. Successful treatment of HPV-associated anal lesions in HIV+ patients improved QoL. Specific questionnaires, such as CECA, seem to be more adequate than the SF-36 in this setting.

[The Impact of Supra- and Infracolic Reconstruction on Delayed Gastric Emptying Following Pancreatoduodenectomy]. / Varianten der retrokolischen Rekonstruktion nach partieller Pankreatoduodenektomie und deren Einfluss auf die Magenentleerung ­ infra- oder suprakolisch.

BACKGROUND: Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) is the most frequent complication following pancreatoduodenectomy. While antecolic and retrocolic reconstruction does not influence the occurrence of DGE, infracolic reconstruction might alleviate DGE due to the vertical position of the distal stomach compared to supracolic reconstruction. Supra- and infracolic reconstruction have not yet been compared. PATIENTS: 138 patients underwent pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy with retrocolic reconstruction at our department between 2011 and 2017. Of these, 105 were reconstructed with supracolic duodenoenterostomy and 33 with infracolic duodenoenterostomy. Patients were analysed with respect to demographic factors, diagnosis, pre-existing conditions, intraoperative characteristics, hospital stay and morbidity and mortality with special emphasis on DGE. All complications were classified according to the definitions of the International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery. RESULTS: The two groups were comparable with respect to diagnosis, medical history, intraoperative characteristics, morbidity and mortality. DGE was equally distributed between supra- and infracolic reconstruction (DGE stage A/B/C25/14/10 vs. 12/5/2, p = 0.274). With DGE, intensive care unit stay (p = 0.007) and hospital stay (p = 0.001) are significantly delayed. Risk factor analysis showed that pre-existing diabetes (p = 0.047) and major complications (Clavien stage III - V, p = 0.048) are risk factors for DGE, while the use of somatostain-analogues seems to have a protective effect (p = 0.021). CONCLUSION: Supra- or infracolic reconstruction does not influence the frequency of DGE following pancreatoduodenectomy. When DGE occurs, hospital stay is delayed. Somatostatin analogues may act prophylactically on DGE.

Postoperative ileus involves interleukin-1 receptor signaling in enteric glia.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Postoperative ileus (POI) is a common consequence of abdominal surgery that increases the risk of postoperative complications and morbidity. We investigated the cellular mechanisms and immune responses involved in the pathogenesis of POI. METHODS: We studied a mouse model of POI in which intestinal manipulation leads to inflammation of the muscularis externa and disrupts motility. We used C57BL/6 (control) mice as well as mice deficient in Toll-like receptors (TLRs) and cytokine signaling components (TLR-2(-/-), TLR-4(-/-), TLR-2/4(-/-), MyD88(-/-), MyD88/TLR adaptor molecule 1(-/-), interleukin-1 receptor [IL-1R1](-/-), and interleukin (IL)-18(-/-) mice). Bone marrow transplantation experiments were performed to determine which cytokine receptors and cell types are involved in the pathogenesis of POI. RESULTS: Development of POI did not require TLRs 2, 4, or 9 or MyD88/TLR adaptor molecule 2 but did require MyD88, indicating a role for IL-1R1. IL-1R1(-/-) mice did not develop POI; however, mice deficient in IL-18, which also signals via MyD88, developed POI. Mice given injections of an IL-1 receptor antagonist (anakinra) or antibodies to deplete IL-1α and IL-1ß before intestinal manipulation were protected from POI. Induction of POI activated the inflammasome in muscularis externa tissues of C57BL6 mice, and IL-1α and IL-1ß were released in ex vivo organ bath cultures. In bone marrow transplantation experiments, the development of POI required activation of IL-1 receptor in nonhematopoietic cells. IL-1R1 was expressed by enteric glial cells in the myenteric plexus layer, and cultured primary enteric glia cells expressed IL-6 and the chemokine monocyte chemotactic protein 1 in response to IL-1ß stimulation. Immunohistochemical analysis of human small bowel tissue samples confirmed expression of IL-1R1 in the ganglia of the myenteric plexus. CONCLUSIONS: IL-1 signaling, via IL-1R1 and MyD88, is required for development of POI after intestinal manipulation in mice. Agents that interfere with the IL-1 signaling pathway are likely to be effective in the treatment of POI.

[The Association of Surgical Oncology (ACO) curriculum "Surgical oncology"-Prerequisites for participation, registration and course]. / Das ACO-Kurrikulum "Chirurgische Onkologie" ­ Voraussetzungen zur Teilnahme, Anmeldung und Ablauf.

For solid malignancies of the gastrointestinal tract, surgical removal is a central pillar of treatment and often the only possibility to achieve a long-term cure. While there are additional qualifications for an oncological subspecialization in other surgical disciplines, such as gynecology or urology nothing comparable exists for visceral surgery in Germany, despite the fact that interdisciplinary cancer treatment strategies are becoming increasingly more complex. The Association of Surgical Oncology (ACO) in cooperation with the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS) has created the curriculum for surgical oncology, a structured further education concept, which concludes with the European Board of Surgical Qualification (EBSQ) examination. This results in a standardization and improvement in surgical and oncological treatment in Germany. Furthermore, successful graduates receive an ACO as well as a UEMS certificate and are Fellows of the European Board of Surgery (FEBS).

[Indications and surgical strategy for bowel resection in mesenteric ischemia : Resection margins considering current guidelines and literature as well as the influence of new technical possibilities]. / Indikation und Operationsstrategie zur Darmresektion bei Mesenterialischämie : Resektionsgrenzen unter Berücksichtigung aktueller Leitlinien und Literatur sowie des Einflusses neuer technischer Möglichkeiten.

Acute mesenteric ischemia (AMI) is still a time-critical and life-threatening clinical picture. If exploration of the abdominal cavity is necessary during treatment, an intraoperative assessment of which segments of the intestines have a sufficient potential for recovery must be made. These decisions are mostly based on purely clinical parameters, which are subject to high level of uncertainty. This review article provides an overview of how this decision-making process and the determination of resection margins can be improved using technical aids, such as laser Doppler flowmetry (LDF), indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence angiography or hyperspectral imaging (HSI). Furthermore, this article compiles guideline recommendations on the role of laparoscopy and the value of a planned second-look laparotomy. In addition, an overview of strategies for preventing short bowel syndrome is given and other aspects, such as the timing and technical aspects of placement of a preternatural anus and an anastomosis are highlighted.

Perioperative pain management with regional analgesia techniques for visceral cancer surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Regional analgesia following visceral cancer surgery might provide an advantage but evidence for best treatment options related to risk-benefit is unclear. DESIGN: Systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCT) with meta-analysis and GRADE assessment. SETTING: Postoperative pain treatment. PATIENTS: Adult patients undergoing visceral cancer surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Any kind of peripheral (PRA) or epidural analgesia (EA) with/without systemic analgesia (SA) was compared to SA with or without placebo treatment or any other regional anaesthetic techniques. MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcome measures were postoperative acute pain intensity at rest and during activity 24 h after surgery, the number of patients with block-related adverse events and postoperative paralytic ileus. MAIN RESULTS: 59 RCTs (4345 participants) were included. EA may reduce pain intensity at rest (mean difference (MD) -1.05; 95% confidence interval (CI): -1.35 to -0.75, low certainty evidence) and during activity 24 h after surgery (MD -1.83; 95% CI: -2.34 to -1.33, very low certainty evidence). PRA likely results in little difference in pain intensity at rest (MD -0.75; 95% CI: -1.20 to -0.31, moderate certainty evidence) and pain during activity (MD -0.93; 95% CI: -1.34 to -0.53, moderate certainty evidence) 24 h after surgery compared to SA. There may be no difference in block-related adverse events (very low certainty evidence) and development of paralytic ileus (very low certainty of evidence) between EA, respectively PRA and SA. CONCLUSIONS: Following visceral cancer surgery EA may reduce pain intensity. In contrast, PRA had only limited effects on pain intensity at rest and during activity. However, we are uncertain regarding the effect of both techniques on block-related adverse events and paralytic ileus. Further research is required focusing on regional analgesia techniques especially following laparoscopic visceral cancer surgery.

Oral CPSI-2364 treatment prevents postoperative ileus in swine without impairment of anastomotic healing.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative ileus (POI) is an iatrogenic complication of abdominal surgery, mediated by a severe inflammation of the muscularis externa (ME). We demonstrated that orally applicated CPSI-2364 prevents POI in rodents by blockade of p38 MAPK pathway and abrogation of NO production in macrophages. In the present experimental swine study we compared the effect of orally and intravenously administered CPSI-2364 on POI and examined CPSI-2364 effect on anastomotic healing. METHODS: CPSI-2364 was administered preoperatively via oral or intravenous route. POI was induced by intestinal manipulation of the small bowel. ME specimens were examined by quantitative PCR for CCL2 chemokine gene expression and myeloperoxidase activity. Functional analyzes included measurement of ileal smooth-muscle ex vivo contractility, in vivo intestinal and colonic transit. Furthermore, anastomotic healing of a rectorectostomy after CPSI-2364 treatment was assessed by perianastomotic hydroxyproline concentration, a histochemically evaluated healing score and anastomotic bursting pressure (ABP). RESULTS: CPSI-2364 abolished inflammation of the ME and improved postoperative smooth muscle contractility and intestinal transit independently of its application route. Hydroxyproline concentration and ABP measurement revealed no wound healing disturbances after oral or intravenous CPSI-2364 treatment whereas histological scoring demonstrated delayed anastomotic healing after intravenous treatment. CONCLUSION: CPSI-2364 effectively prevents POI in swine independently of its application route. Impairment of anastomotic healing could be observed after intravenous but not oral preoperative CPSI-2364 treatment. Subsumed, an oral preoperative administration of CPSI-2364 appears to be a safe and efficient strategy for prophylaxis of POI.

[Robot-assisted rectal resections-Scoping review for level 1a evidence and retrospective analysis of in-clinic data]. / Robotergestützte Rektumresektionen ­ Scoping-Review für Klasse-1a-Evidenz und retrospektive Analyse klinikinterner Daten.

BACKGROUND: Robot-assisted rectal resections are said to overcome the known difficulties of laparoscopic rectal surgery through technical advantages, leading to better treatment results; however, published studies reported very heterogeneous results. The aim of this paper is therefore to determine whether there is class 1a evidence comparing robotic versus laparoscopic rectal resections. Furthermore, we would like to compare the treatment results of our clinic with the calculated effects from the literature. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A systematic literature search for class 1a evidence was performed and the calculated effects for 7 preselected outcomes were compared. We then analyzed all elective rectal resections performed in our hospital between 2017 and 2020 and compared the treatment outcomes with the results of the identified meta-analyses. RESULTS: The results of the 7 identified meta-analyses did not show homogeneous effects for the outcomes operating time and conversion rate, while the calculated effects of the other outcomes studied were largely consistent. Our patient data showed that robotic rectal resections were associated with significantly longer operation times, while the other outcomes were hardly influenced by the surgical technique. DISCUSSION: Although class 1a meta-analyses comparing robotic and laparoscopic rectal resections already exist, they do not enable an evidence-based recommendation regarding the preference of one of the two surgical techniques. The analysis of our patient data showed that the results achieved in our clinic are largely consistent with the observed effects of the meta-analyses.