Side-to-side esophagogastric anastomosis for minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy: operative technique and short-term outcomes.

Totally minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy (TMIIL) is associated to lower rate of post-operative complication, decreases length of hospital stay and improves quality of life compared to open approach. Nevertheless, adaptation of TMIIL still proceeds at slow pace, mainly due to the difficulty to perform the intra-thoracic anastomosis and heterogeneity of surgical techniques. We present our experience with TMIIL utilizing a stapled side-to-side anastomosis. We retrospectively evaluated 36 patients who underwent a planned TMIIL from January 2017 to September 2020. Esophagogastric anastomoses were performed using a 3-cm linear-stapled side-to-side technique. General features, operative techniques, pathology data and short-term outcomes were analyzed. The median operative time was 365 min (ranging from 240 to 480 min) with a median blood loss of 100 ml (50-1000 ml). The median overall length of stay was 13 (7-64) days and in-hospital mortality rate was 2.8%. Two patients (5.6%) had an anastomotic leak, without need for operative intervention and another patient developed an anastomotic stricture, resolved with a single endoscopic dilation. Chylothorax occurred in three patients; two of these required a surgical intervention. Pulmonary complications occurred in six patients (16.7%). Based on Comprehensive Complications Index (CCI), median values of complications were 27.9 (ranging from 20.9 to 100). The results of our study suggest that TMIIL with a 3-cm linear-stapled anastomosis seems to be safe and effective, with low rates of post-operative anastomotic leak and stricture.

Current status on the adoption of high energy devices in Italy: An Italian Society for Endoscopic Surgery and New Technologies (SICE) national survey.

BACKGROUND: In the past three decades, different High Energy Devices (HED) have been introduced in surgical practice to improve the efficiency of surgical procedures. HED allow vessel sealing, coagulation and transection as well as an efficient tissue dissection. This survey was designed to verify the current status on the adoption of HED in Italy. METHODS: A survey was conducted across Italian general surgery units. The questionnaire was composed of three sections (general information, elective surgery, emergency surgery) including 44 questions. Only one member per each surgery unit was allowed to complete the questionnaire. For elective procedures, the survey included questions on thyroid surgery, lower and upper GI surgery, proctologic surgery, adrenal gland surgery, pancreatic and hepatobiliary surgery, cholecystectomy, abdominal wall surgery and breast surgery. Appendectomy, cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis and bowel obstruction due to adhesions were considered for emergency surgery. The list of alternatives for every single question included a percentage category as follows: " < 25%, 25-50%, 51-75% or > 75%", both for open and minimally-invasive surgery. RESULTS: A total of 113 surgical units completed the questionnaire. The reported use of HED was high both in open and minimally-invasive upper and lower GI surgery. Similarly, HED were widely used in minimally-invasive pancreatic and adrenal surgery. The use of HED was wider in minimally-invasive hepatic and biliary tree surgery compared to open surgery, whereas the majority of the respondents reported the use of any type of HED in less than 25% of elective cholecystectomies. HED were only rarely employed also in the majority of emergency open and laparoscopic procedures, including cholecystectomy, appendectomy, and adhesiolysis. Similarly, very few respondents declared to use HED in abdominal wall surgery and proctology. The distribution of the most used type of HED varied among the different surgical interventions. US HED were mostly used in thyroid, upper GI, and adrenal surgery. A relevant use of H-US/RF devices was reported in lower GI, pancreatic, hepatobiliary and breast surgery. RF HED were the preferred choice in proctology. CONCLUSION: HED are extensively used in minimally-invasive elective surgery involving the upper and lower GI tract, liver, pancreas and adrenal gland. Nowadays, reasons for choosing a specific HED in clinical practice rely on several aspects, including surgeon's preference, economic features, and specific drawbacks of the energy employed.

Cisplatin plus capecitabine concomitant with intensity-modulated radiation therapy in non-metastatic anal squamous cell carcinoma: the experience of a single research cancer center.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The standard treatment of non-metastatic anal squamous cell carcinoma (ASCC) consists of chemotherapy with mitomycin (MMC) plus 5-fluorouracil (5FU) for 1-2 cycles concomitant with pelvic radiotherapy. Subsequent studies introduced cisplatin (CDDP) combined with 5FU, with unclear results. We evaluated the doublet capecitabine (C) and CDDP as a possible alternative to MMC-5FU regimen concomitant with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We carried out a retrospective study on 67 patients affected by stage I-III ASCC, treated with CDDP (60-70 mg/m2 every 21 days for two courses) plus C (825 mg/m2 twice daily for 5 days/week) chemotherapy concomitant with IMRT for curative intent. RESULTS: At a median follow up of 41 months, the clinical complete response calculated at the 6-month time-point (6-moCR), the 6-month objective response rate and the 6-month disease control rate were 93%, 94%, and 99%, respectively.Disease-free survival rates at 1, 2, and 3 years were 89%, 87%, and 85%, while the overall survival rates at 1 and 2 years were 100% and 95%. The colostomy-free survival rates were 90% at 1 year and 88% at 2 years. Grade 3-4 acute adverse events were reported in 61% of patients; predominantly skin toxicity (46%) and limited hematological toxicity (12%). CONCLUSION: In this retrospective study, chemotherapy with C plus CDDP concomitant with IMRT proved safe and effective, and may represent a possible alternative option to standard MMC-containing regimen for curative intent.

Is tumor testing efficiency for Lynch syndrome different in rectal and colon cancer?

BACKGROUND: Tumor testing utility in Lynch syndrome (LS) diagnosis is established. AIMS: Analyze the differences between tumor testing efficiency in rectal (RC) and colon cancer (CC). METHODS: We performed immunohistochemistry (IHC) for MisMatch Repair (MMR) proteins (IHC-MMR) and MicroSatellite Instability analysis (MSI) on 482 unselected primary tumors: 320 CCs and 162 RCs. Samples had proficient-IHC, deficient-IHC or borderline-IHC ("patchy" expression). MSI-H borderline-IHC tumors were considered as likely MMR-deficient. Germline testing was offered to MMR-deficient patients without BRAF mutation or MLH1 promoter hypermetilation (MLH1-Hy). RESULTS: We identified 51/482 (10.6%) MMR-defective tumors. Multivariable analysis demonstrated a significant correlation between tumor testing results with histotype, lymph-node involvement and tumor location. In particular, RC showed a lower MMR-deficiency rate than CC (p<0.0001). Interestingly, MLH1 loss was detected in 0% RCs and 76.1% CCs, with 80% of them showing BRAF mutation/MLH1-Hy. A germline variant was detected in 12 out of 18 patients (mutation detection rate of 66.7%). CONCLUSION: Tumor testing results showed molecular differences between CCs and RCs, in terms of MMR proteins expression, and presence of BRAF mutation/MLH1-Hy. MSH6 variants were the most frequent ones (50%). Although young age at diagnosis was associated with mutation detection (p = 0.045), 33.3% of LS patients were >50 years.

Acute cholecystitis during COVID-19 pandemic: a multisocietary position statement.

Following the spread of the infection from the new SARS-CoV2 coronavirus in March 2020, several surgical societies have released their recommendations to manage the implications of the COVID-19 pandemic for the daily clinical practice. The recommendations on emergency surgery have fueled a debate among surgeons on an international level.We maintain that laparoscopic cholecystectomy remains the treatment of choice for acute cholecystitis, even in the COVID-19 era. Moreover, since laparoscopic cholecystectomy is not more likely to spread the COVID-19 infection than open cholecystectomy, it must be organized in such a way as to be carried out safely even in the present situation, to guarantee the patient with the best outcomes that minimally invasive surgery has shown to have.

Correction to: Laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: the SICE (Società Italiana di Chirurgia Endoscopica e Nuove Tecnologie) network prospectivetrial on 1225 cases comparing intra corporeal versus extra corporeal ileo­colic side­to­side anastomosis.

Due to an error in production the members of SICE CoDIG (Colon Dx Italian Group) listed in the Acknowledgments were not tagged correctly as authors in the XML of this article. This listing is presented again here.

Laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: the SICE (Società Italiana di Chirurgia Endoscopica e Nuove Tecnologie) network prospective trial on 1225 cases comparing intra corporeal versus extra corporeal ileo-colic side-to-side anastomosis.

BACKGROUND: While laparoscopic approach for right hemicolectomy (LRH) is considered appropriate for the surgical treatment of both malignant and benign diseases of right colon, there is still debate about how to perform the ileo-colic anastomosis. The ColonDxItalianGroup (CoDIG) was designed as a cohort, observational, prospective, multi-center national study with the aims of evaluating the surgeons' attitude regarding the intracorporeal (ICA) or extra-corporeal (ECA) anastomotic technique and the related surgical outcomes. METHODS: One hundred and twenty-five Surgical Units experienced in colorectal and advanced laparoscopic surgery were invited and 85 of them joined the study. Each center was asked not to change its surgical habits. Data about demographic characteristics, surgical technique and postoperative outcomes were collected through the official SICE website database. One thousand two hundred and twenty-five patients were enrolled between March 2018 and September 2018. RESULTS: ICA was performed in 70.4% of cases, ECA in 29.6%. Isoperistaltic anastomosis was completed in 85.6%, stapled in 87.9%. Hand-sewn enterotomy closure was adopted in 86%. Postoperative complications were reported in 35.4% for ICA and 50.7% for ECA; no significant difference was found according to patients' characteristics and technologies used. Median hospital stay was significantly shorter for ICA (7.3 vs. 9 POD). Postoperative pain in patients not prescribed opioids was significantly lower in ICA group. CONCLUSIONS: In our survey, a side-to-side isoperistaltic stapled ICA with hand-sewn enterotomy closure is the most frequently adopted technique to perform ileo-colic anastomosis after any indications for elective LRH. According to literature, our study confirmed better short-term outcomes for ICA, with reduction of hospital stay and postoperative pain. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trial (Identifier: NCT03934151).