Remote ischemic preconditioning versus sham-control for prevention of anastomotic leakage after resection for rectal cancer (RIPAL trial): a pilot randomized controlled, triple-blinded monocenter trial.

PURPOSE: Remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) reportedly reduces ischemia‒reperfusion injury (IRI) in various organ systems. In addition to tension and technical factors, ischemia is a common cause of anastomotic leakage (AL) after rectal resection. The aim of this pilot study was to investigate the potentially protective effect of RIPC on anastomotic healing and to determine the effect size to facilitate the development of a subsequent confirmatory trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-four patients with rectal cancer (RC) who underwent anterior resection were enrolled in this prospectively registered (DRKS0001894) pilot randomized controlled triple-blinded monocenter trial at the Department of Surgery, University Medicine Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany, between 10/12/2019 and 19/06/2022. The primary endpoint was AL within 30 days after surgery. The secondary endpoints were perioperative morbidity and mortality, reintervention, hospital stay, readmission and biomarkers of ischemia‒reperfusion injury (vascular endothelial growth factor, VEGF) and cell death (high mobility group box 1 protein, HMGB1). RIPC was induced through three 10-min cycles of alternating ischemia and reperfusion to the upper extremity. RESULTS: Of the 207 patients assessed, 153 were excluded, leaving 54 patients to be randomized to the RIPC or the sham-RIPC arm (27 each per arm). The mean age was 61 years, and the majority of patients were male (37:17 (68.5:31.5%)). Most of the patients underwent surgery after neoadjuvant therapy (29/54 (53.7%)) for adenocarcinoma (52/54 (96.3%)). The primary endpoint, AL, occurred almost equally frequently in both arms (RIPC arm: 4/25 (16%), sham arm: 4/26 (15.4%), p = 1.000). The secondary outcomes were comparable except for a greater rate of reintervention in the sham arm (9 (6-12) vs. 3 (1-5), p = 0.034). The median duration of endoscopic vacuum therapy was shorter in the RIPC arm (10.5 (10-11) vs. 38 (24-39) days, p = 0.083), although the difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: A clinically relevant protective effect of RIPC on anastomotic healing after rectal resection cannot be assumed on the basis of these data.

Oncological right hemicolectomy in a trimodal comparison: open surgery versus laparoscopic procedures with extra- and intracorporeal anastomosis technique.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to investigate the surgical short- and mid-term outcomes, as well as the impact on quality of life and recovery, following oncological right hemicolectomy. To accomplish this, three patient cohorts were examined, which included laparotomy OA), laparoscopy with intracorporeal anastomosis (LIA), and laparoscopy with extracorporeal anastomosis (LEA). Our hypothesis was that the group undergoing intracorporeal anastomosis would demonstrate superior outcomes compared to the other cohorts. METHODS: The analysis included a total of 135 patients who were enrolled between 2015 and 2020. In addition to retrospectively collected data, we conducted follow-up surveys using a validated Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index (GIQLI) questionnaire and semi-structured interviews. These surveys were conducted between July and September 2021 to gather comprehensive information regarding the patients' quality of life. RESULTS: The study cohort was divided into OA (n = 67), LEA (n = 14), and LIA (n = 54). The duration of surgery was significantly longer in the laparoscopic groups (median = 200.5 (LEA) and 184.0 (LIA) min vs 170.0 min (OA); p = 0.007), while the length of hospital stay was significantly shorter (median = 6.0 and 7.0 days vs 9.0 days; p = 0.005). The overall postoperative complication rate was significantly higher in the laparotomy group compared to the intracorporeal group (64.2% vs 35.2%; p = 0.006), with the extracorporeal group having a rate of 42.9%. Reoperation within 30 days occurred exclusively in the open surgery group (n = 9; 13.43%; p = 0.007). The overall response rate to the survey was 75%. Overall, the GIQLI score was comparable among the three groups, and there were no significant differences in the questions related to recovery, regained function, and contentment. CONCLUSION: The laparoscopic approaches demonstrated significantly lower complication rates compared to laparotomy, while no significant differences were observed between the two laparoscopic techniques.

Robotic or laparoscopic repeat hepatectomy after open hepatectomy: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Repeat hepatectomies are technically complex procedures. The evidence of robotic or laparoscopic (= minimally invasive) repeat hepatectomies (MIRH) after previous open hepatectomy is poor. Therefore, we compared postoperative outcomes of MIRH vs open repeat hepatectomies (ORH) in patients with liver tumors after previous open liver resections. METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent repeat hepatectomies after open liver resections were identified from a prospective database between April 2018 and May 2023. Postoperative complications were graded in line with the Clavien-Dindo classification. We stratified patients by intention to treat into MIRH or ORH and compared outcomes. Logistic regression analysis was performed to define variables associated with the utilization of a minimally invasive approach. RESULTS: Among 46 patients included, 20 (43%) underwent MIRH and 26 (57%) ORH. Twenty-seven patients had advanced or expert repeat hepatectomies (59%) according to the IWATE criteria. Baseline characteristics were comparable between the study groups. The use of a minimally invasive approach was not dependent on preoperative or intraoperative variables. All patients had negative resection margins on final histology. MIRH was associated with less blood loss (450 ml, IQR (interquartile range): 200-600 vs 600 ml, IQR: 400-1500 ml, P = 0.032), and shorter length of stay (5 days, IQR: 4-7 vs 7 days, IQR: 5-9 days, P = 0.041). Postoperative complications were similar between the groups (P = 0.298). CONCLUSIONS: MIRH is feasible after previous open hepatectomy and a safe alternative approach to ORH. (German Clinical Trials Register ID: DRKS00032183).

Endoscopic papillectomy for ampullary lesions in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis compared with sporadic lesions: a propensity score-matched cohort.

BACKGROUND: Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) is a rare inherited syndrome that predisposes the patient to cancer. Treatment of FAP-related ampullary lesions is challenging and the role of endoscopic papillectomy has not been elucidated. We retrospectively analyzed the outcomes of endoscopic papillectomy in matched cohorts of FAP-related and sporadic ampullary lesions (SALs). METHODS: This retrospective multicenter study included 1422 endoscopic papillectomy procedures. Propensity score matching including age, sex, comorbidity, histologic subtype, and size was performed. Main outcomes were complete resection (R0), technical success, complications, and recurrence. RESULTS: Propensity score matching identified 202 patients (101 FAP, 101 SAL) with comparable baseline characteristics. FAP patients were mainly asymptomatic (79.2 % [95 %CI 71.2-87.3] vs. 46.5 % [95 %CI 36.6-56.4]); P < 0.001). The initial R0 rate was significantly lower in FAP patients (63.4 % [95 %CI 53.8-72.9] vs. 83.2 % [95 %CI 75.8-90.6]; P = 0.001). After repeated interventions (mean 1.30 per patient), R0 was comparable (FAP 93.1 % [95 %CI 88.0-98.1] vs. SAL 97.0 % [95 %CI 93.7-100]; P = 0.19). Adverse events occurred in 28.7 %. Pancreatitis and bleeding were the most common adverse events in both groups. Severe adverse events were rare (3.5 %). Overall, 21 FAP patients (20.8 % [95 %CI 12.7-28.8]) and 16 SAL patients (15.8 % [95 %CI 8.6-23.1]; P = 0.36) had recurrence. Recurrences occurred later in FAP patients (25 [95 %CI 18.3-31.7] vs. 2 [95 %CI CI 0.06-3.9] months). CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic papillectomy was safe and effective in FAP-related ampullary lesions. Criteria for endoscopic resection of ampullary lesions can be extended to FAP patients. FAP patients have a lifetime risk of relapse even after complete resection, and require long-time surveillance.

Outcomes of rescue procedures in the management of locally recurrent ampullary tumors: A Pancreas 2000/EPC study.

BACKGROUND: Ampullary lesions are rare and can be locally treated either with endoscopic papillectomy or transduodenal surgical ampullectomy. Management of local recurrence after a first-line treatment has been poorly studied. METHODS: Patients with a local recurrence of an ampullary lesion initially treated with endoscopic papillectomy or transduodenal surgical ampullectomy were retrospectively included from a multi-institutional database (58 centers) between 2005 and 2018. RESULTS: A total of 103 patients were included, 21 (20.4%) treated with redo endoscopic papillectomy, 14 (13.6%) with transduodenal surgical ampullectomy, and 68 (66%) with pancreaticoduodenectomy. Redo endoscopic papillectomy had low morbidity with 4.8% (n = 1) severe to fatal complications and a R0 rate of 81% (n = 17). Transduodenal surgical ampullectomy and pancreaticoduodenectomy after a first procedure had a higher morbidity with Clavien III and more complications, respectively, 28.6% (n = 4) and 25% (n = 17); R0 resection rates were 85.7% (n = 12) and 92.6% (n = 63), both without statistically significant difference compared to endoscopic papillectomy (P = .1 and 0.2). Pancreaticoduodenectomy had 4.4% (n = 2) mortality. No deaths were registered after transduodenal surgical ampullectomy or endoscopic papillectomy. Recurrences treated with pancreaticoduodenectomy were more likely to be adenocarcinomas (79.4%, n = 54 vs 21.4%, n = 3 for transduodenal surgical ampullectomy and 4.8%, n = 1 for endoscopic papillectomy, P < .0001). Three-year overall survival and disease-free survival were comparable. CONCLUSION: Endoscopy is appropriate for noninvasive recurrences, with resection rate and survival outcomes comparable to surgery. Surgery applies more to invasive recurrences, with transduodenal surgical ampullectomy rather for carcinoma in situ and early cancers and pancreaticoduodenectomy for more advanced tumors.

Minimally invasive mesohepatectomy for centrally located liver lesions-a case series.

BACKGROUND: Resection of centrally located liver lesions remains a technically demanding procedure. To date, there are limited data on the effectiveness and safety of minimally invasive mesohepatectomy for benign and malignant lesions. It was therefore the objective of this study to evaluate the perioperative outcomes of minimally invasive mesohepatectomy for liver tumors at a tertiary care hospital. METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent a minimally invasive anatomic mesohepatectomy using a Glissonean pedicle approach from April 2018 to November 2021 were identified from a prospective database. Demographics, operative details, and postoperative outcomes were analyzed using descriptive statistics for continuous and categorical variables. RESULTS: A total of ten patients were included, of whom five patients had hepatocellular carcinoma, one patient had cholangiocarcinoma, three patients had colorectal liver metastases, and one patient had a hydatid cyst. Two and eight patients underwent robotic-assisted and laparoscopic resections, respectively. The median operative time was 393 min (interquartile range (IQR) 298-573 min). Conversion to laparotomy was required in one case. The median lesion size was 60 mm and all cases had negative resection margins on final histopathological analysis. The median total blood loss was 550 ml (IQR 413-850 ml). One patient had a grade III complication. The median length of stay was 7 days (IQR 5-12 days). Time-to-functional recovery was achieved after a median of 2 days (IQR 1-4 days). There were no readmissions within 90 days after surgery. CONCLUSION: Minimally invasive mesohepatectomy is a feasible and safe approach in selected patients with benign and malignant liver lesions.

Endoscopic papillectomy or pancreaticoduodenectomy for ampullary lesions: a single center retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare post-operative morbidity, mortality, and completeness of resection following endoscopic vs. radical surgical resection for ampullary lesions. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the prospectively collected data from a surgical database for patients with ampullary lesions at our institution was performed. All consecutive patients undergoing endoscopic papillectomy (EP) or pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for ampullary lesions between 2007 and 2021 were eligible for this analysis. RESULTS: A total of 85 patients were included of whom 42 underwent EP whereas 43 received a PD. The resected lesion was a tubulovillous adenoma in 26 patients (61.9%) in the EP cohort, and 37 patients (86.0%) in the PD cohort had adenocarcinomas. The completeness of resection was equal in both cohorts. Significantly more patients of the PD cohort had to undergo reinterventions. After a mean follow up of 36 months (EP) vs. 16 months (PD), the rate of tumor recurrence did not differ between both groups. CONCLUSION: Equivalently high completeness of resection rates and correspondingly low recurrence rates can be achieved after EP and PD. Our results regarding residual tumor and recurrence rates show that even large tumors can be resected endoscopically with high primary success and completeness of resection rates.

Patient-Tailored Approach for Enhanced Recovery after Surgery.

Background: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS®) is increasingly finding its way into clinical practice. ERAS® protocols have not been universally adopted, and they have often been criticized for being difficult to implement. So, the question for more tailor-made approaches arises. Methods: We conducted a literature search on March 16, 2022, using the following search string, which was modified to fit the input of each of the queried databases: ("ERAS®" or "enhanced recovery after surgery" or "fast recovery" or "fast track") and ("tailored" or "individual"). Results: Despite the massive increase in general hits on the subject, stratification according to phenotypic characteristics such as age or a classification according to disease patterns in the sense of specific guidelines is still fundamentally apparent. Evidence suggests that generic protocols can be followed by almost all patients. Prehabilitation, in particular, can be used as an adaptive tool. Conclusion: ERAS® works only in the totality of its tools and can be followed by almost all patients. Prehabilitation is more adaptive and can also increase adherence to ERAS® protocols. A tailored program outside of disease-specific pathways does not seem to be useful.

Digital Support to Multimodal Community-Based Prehabilitation: Looking for Optimization of Health Value Generation.

Prehabilitation has shown its potential for most intra-cavity surgery patients on enhancing preoperative functional capacity and postoperative outcomes. However, its large-scale implementation is limited by several constrictions, such as: i) unsolved practicalities of the service workflow, ii) challenges associated to change management in collaborative care; iii) insufficient access to prehabilitation; iv) relevant percentage of program drop-outs; v) need for program personalization; and, vi) economical sustainability. Transferability of prehabilitation programs from the hospital setting to the community would potentially provide a new scenario with greater accessibility, as well as offer an opportunity to effectively address the aforementioned issues and, thus, optimize healthcare value generation. A core aspect to take into account for an optimal management of prehabilitation programs is to use proper technological tools enabling: i) customizable and interoperable integrated care pathways facilitating personalization of the service and effective engagement among stakeholders; ii) remote monitoring (i.e. physical activity, physiological signs and patient-reported outcomes and experience measures) to support patient adherence to the program and empowerment for self-management; and, iii) use of health risk assessment supporting decision making for personalized service selection. The current manuscript details a proposal to bring digital innovation to community-based prehabilitation programs. Moreover, this approach has the potential to be adopted by programs supporting long-term management of cancer patients, chronic patients and prevention of multimorbidity in subjects at risk.

Less is more-the best test for anastomotic leaks in rectal cancer patients prior to ileostomy reversal.

PURPOSE: No clear consensus exists on how to routinely assess the integrity of the colorectal anastomosis prior to ileostomy reversal. The objective of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of contrast enema, endoscopic procedures, and digital rectal examination in rectal cancer patients in this setting. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed. Studies assessing at least one index test for which a 2 × 2 table was calculable were included. Hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curves were calculated and used for test comparison. Paired data were used where parameters could not be calculated. Methodological quality was assessed with the QUADAS-2 tool. RESULTS: Two prospective and 11 retrospective studies comprising 1903 patients were eligible for inclusion. Paired data analysis showed equal or better results for sensitivity and specificity of both endoscopic procedures and digital rectal examination compared to contrast enema. Subgroup analysis of contrast enema according to methodological quality revealed that studies with higher methodological quality reported poorer sensitivity for equal specificity and vice versa. No case was described where a contrast enema revealed an anastomotic leak that was overseen in digital rectal examination or endoscopic procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopy and digital rectal examination appear to be the best diagnostic tests to assess the integrity of the colorectal anastomosis prior to ileostomy reversal. Accuracy measures of contrast enema are overestimated by studies with lower methodological quality. Synopsis of existing evidence and risk-benefit considerations justifies omission of contrast enema in favor of endoscopic and clinical assessment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42019107771.

Enteral resorbable diet versus standard diet in primary sphincter reconstruction: a prospective randomised trial.

AIM: Bowel movements after reconstructive anorectal surgery may negatively affect surgical outcome. This study was aimed to assess any differences between a standard diet (SD) and the enteral resorbable diet (ED) in terms of operative outcomes and patient tolerance after fistulectomy with primary sphincter reconstruction. METHOD: Adult patients undergoing elective fistulectomy with primary sphincter reconstruction for anorectal and rectovaginal fistulas were eligible for inclusion. Patients were intraoperatively randomised to receive either the ED and peristalsis-inhibiting medication (ED) or a SD. The primary endpoint was the healing rate. Secondary endpoints included continence scores, complications and quality of life. Sample size calculation resulted in the analysis of 60 patients to detect a difference in fistula recurrence of 30% with 70% power and a 5% significance level. RESULTS: Sixty-six patients (24 women) were prospectively and randomly assigned to the ED (n = 34: 51%) or a SD (n = 32; 48%); mean age was 47 (18-74) years. The primary healing rate was 64 out of 66 patients (96%). No statistical difference in healing rate was seen between the groups. However, patient satisfaction was significantly higher in the SD group (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Fistulectomy with primary sphincter reconstruction is a safe method with low complication rates. Postoperative stool behaviour has no significant influence on the healing rate but has a significant negative impact on patient satisfaction. Therefore, maintaining a standard diet seems to be preferable following reconstructive anal surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered with the German Clinical Trials Register ( DRKS00020524 ).

Appendicitis during the COVID-19 lockdown: results of a multicenter analysis in Germany.

PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic has transformed medical care worldwide. General surgery has been affected in elective procedures, yet the implications for emergency surgery are unclear. The current study analyzes the effect of the COVID-19 lockdown in spring 2020 on appendicitis treatment in Germany. METHODS: Hospitals that provided emergency surgical care during the COVID-19 lockdown were invited to participate. All patients diagnosed with appendicitis during the lockdown period (10 weeks) and, as a comparison group, patients from the same period in 2019 were analyzed. Clinical and laboratory parameters, intraoperative and pathological findings, and postoperative outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 1915 appendectomies from 41 surgical departments in Germany were included. Compared to 2019 the number of appendectomies decreased by 13.5% (1.027 to 888, p=0.003) during the first 2020 COVID-19 lockdown. The delay between the onset of symptoms and medical consultation was substantially longer in the COVID-19 risk group and for the elderly. The rate of complicated appendicitis increased (58.2 to 64.4%), while the absolute number of complicated appendicitis decreased from 597 to 569, (p=0.012). The rate of negative appendectomies decreased significantly (6.7 to 4.6%; p=0.012). Overall postoperative morbidity and mortality, however, did not change. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 lockdown had significant effects on abdominal emergency surgery in Germany. These seem to result from a stricter selection and a longer waiting time between the onset of symptoms and medical consultation for risk patients. However, the standard of emergency surgical care in Germany was maintained.

[Initial experiences with the implementation of the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS®) protocol]. / Erste Erfahrungen in der Umsetzung eines ERAS®("enhanced recovery after surgery")-Konzepts.

BACKGROUND: To further improve treatment quality and patient orientation, a multiprofessional enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS®) transformation program was initiated in our clinic in January 2020. The ERAS® treatment pathway for colorectal surgery was established in October 2020. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to show that the perioperative treatment quality can be increased by implementing a certified ERAS® program in the setting of a fast-track pathway that has been established since 2008. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The first ERAS® patients from October/November 2020 (ERAS®) were compared with those of a representative consecutive control cohort (pre-ERAS®) who had undergone interventions from August to December 2019. Patient care and data collection of the ERAS® patients were ensured by an ERAS® nurse in daily visits. For the comparison cohorts, the electronic patient files were analyzed and historical colon pathway data from our clinic from 2008 were used. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: A total of 10 ERAS® and 50 pre-ERAS® patients were included. After the ERAS® transformation, an increase in overall compliance with ERAS® guideline recommendations from 45% (pre-ERAS®) to 75% (ERAS®) was achieved. The number of days to tolerance of solid food decreased from 2 days (pre-ERAS®) to 1 day (ERAS®). The general postoperative complication rate was comparable (22% pre-ERAS® vs. 20% ERAS®). Most noticeable was the reduction of the median hospital stay of 9 days in the historical cohort to 3 days after ERAS® implementation. We attribute the necessary high ERAS® pathway compliance of 75% to a successful combination of process standards and multiprofessional ERAS® teams.

Newly established gastrointestinal cancer cell lines retain the genomic and immunophenotypic landscape of their parental cancers.

Human cancer cell lines are frequently used as model systems to study molecular mechanisms and genetic changes in cancer. However, the model is repeatedly criticized for its lack of proximity to original patient tumors. Therefore, understanding to what extent cell lines cultured under artificial conditions reflect the phenotypic and genomic profiles of their corresponding parental tumors is crucial when analyzing their biological properties. To directly compare molecular alterations between patient tumors and derived cell lines, we have established new cancer cell lines from four patients with gastrointestinal tumors. Tumor entities comprised esophageal cancer, colon cancer, rectal cancer and pancreatic cancer. Phenotype and genotype of both patient tumors and derived low-passage cell lines were characterized by immunohistochemistry (22 different antibodies), array-based comparative genomic hybridization and targeted next generation sequencing (48-gene panel). The immunophenotype was highly consistent between patient tumors and derived cell lines; the expression of most markers in cell lines was concordant with the respective parental tumor and characteristic for the respective tumor entities in general. The chromosomal aberration patterns of the parental tumors were largely maintained in the cell lines and the distribution of gains and losses was typical for the respective cancer entity, despite a few distinct differences. Cancer gene mutations (e.g., KRAS, TP53) and microsatellite status were also preserved in the respective cell line derivates. In conclusion, the four examined newly established cell lines exhibited a phenotype and genotype closely recapitulating their parental tumor. Hence, newly established cancer cell lines may be useful models for further pharmacogenomic studies.

Correction to: Trocar Site Hernias in Bariatric Surgery-an Underestimated Issue: a Qualitative Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

The review was not registered for systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and should be disregarded.

[Still no evidence for drains in bariatric surgery]. / Weiterhin keine Evidenz für Drainagen in der Bariatrie.

BACKGROUND: Registry data show that placement of a drain during bariatric surgery is still the normal practice in many surgical departments. Retrospective studies and a review article could show that the routine placement of a drain in bariatric surgery is useless and also potentially dangerous. Due to the lack of randomized controlled studies there is insufficient evidence on this topic in the literature. OBJECTIVE: In order to further question the use of drains in bariatric interventions, the prospective in-house databank of patients who received a gastric sleeve (SG) or a Roux-en­Y gastric bypass (RYGB) between January 2010 and June 2016 was retrospectively evaluated. SETTING: A German university hospital. METHODS: During the investigation period a total of 361 operations (219 gastric bypasses and 142 gastric sleeve operations) were carried out. A change in the internal treatment pathway with respect to the placement of drains in 2013 led to the formation of two groups: one where a drain was routinely placed in operations (n = 166) and a second group where a drain was not routinely placed (n = 195). The demographic data were statistically adjusted between the two groups using multiple regression analysis. The results of the operation and the 30-day morbidity were compared. Complications were evaluated according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. RESULTS: In the group with no drain, complications occurred in seven patients. In the group with drainage there were 6 complications. The insufficiency and reoperation rates were not statistically significantly different between the two groups. The average postoperative hospital stay was 1.3 days longer in patients with a drain. Multivariate analysis showed that the placement of a drain was the greatest risk factor for a longer hospital stay. CONCLUSION: Placement of a drain during bariatric interventions should only be considered on an individual basis. The routine placement should be discouraged.

Contralateral Liver Hypertrophy and Oncological Outcome Following Radioembolization with 90Y-Microspheres: A Systematic Review.

Radioembolization with 90Y-microspheres has been reported to induce contralateral liver hypertrophy with simultaneous ipsilateral control of tumor growth. The aim of the present systematic review was to summarize the evidence of contralateral liver hypertrophy and oncological outcome following unilateral treatment with radioembolization. A systematic literature search using the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane libraries for studies published between 2008 and 2020 was performed. A total of 16 studies, comprising 602 patients, were included. The median kinetic growth rate per week of the contralateral liver lobe was 0.7% and declined slightly over time. The local tumor control was 84%. Surgical resection after radioembolization was carried out in 109 out of 362 patients (30%). Although the available data suggest that radioembolization prior to major hepatectomy is safe with a promising oncological outcome, the definitive role of radioembolization requires assessment within controlled clinical trials.

Trocar Site Hernias in Bariatric Surgery-an Underestimated Issue: a Qualitative Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

The reported incidence of trocar site hernias in bariatric surgery ranges between 0.5 and 3%. The best available evidence derives from retrospective studies analysing prospective databases, thus including only patients who presented with symptoms or received surgical treatment due to trocar site hernias after a laparoscopic bariatric procedure. A systematic literature research was conducted up until September 2017. Search strategies included proper combinations of the MeSH terms 'laparoscopy' and 'bariatric surgery', 'trocar/port' and 'hernia'. Searches were not limited by publication type or language. The review was registered in PROSPERO (ID 85102) and performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. Sixty-eight publications were included. Pooled hernia incidence was 3.22 (range 0-39.3%). Thirteen trials reported systematic closure of the fascia; 12 trials reported no closure. Data availability did not allow for pooling to calculate relative risk. Higher BMI and specific hernia examination using imaging modalities were associated with a significantly higher incidence of trocar site hernias. Studies dedicated to detection of TsH reported a pooled incidence of 24.5%. Trocar site hernias are an underestimated complication of minimally invasive multiportal bariatric surgery. While high-quality trials are not available allowing for a precise calculation of the incidence, existing data are indicative of very high incidence rates. Risk factors for developing a trocar site hernia in bariatric surgery have not yet been systematically analysed. Prospective studies in this field are necessary.