A systematic review and meta-analysis of the use of methylene blue to improve the lymph node harvest in rectal cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND: Methylene blue staining of the resected specimen has been described as an alternative to the conventional palpation and visual inspection method to improve lymph node harvest. This meta-analysis evaluates the usefulness of this technique in surgery for rectal cancer, particularly after neoadjuvant therapy. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing lymph node harvest in methylene blue-stained rectal specimens to those of unstained specimens were identified from the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Non-randomized studies and those with only colonic resections were excluded. The quality of RCTs was assessed using Cochrane's risk of bias tool. A weighted mean difference (WMD) was calculated for overall harvest, harvest after neoadjuvant therapy, and metastatic nodal yield. In contrast, the risk difference (RD) was calculated to compare yields of less than 12 lymph nodes between the stained and unstained specimens. RESULTS: Study selection comprised seven RCTs with 343 patients in the unstained group and 337 in the stained group. Overall lymph node harvest and harvest after neoadjuvant therapy were significantly higher in stained specimens with a WMD of 13.4 and 10.6 and a 95% confidence interval (CI) of 9.5-17.2 and 4.8-16.3, respectively. Harvest of metastatic lymph nodes was significantly higher in the stained group (WMD 1.0, 95% CI 0.6-1.4). The yield of less than 12 lymph nodes was significantly higher in the unstained group with RD of 0.292 and 95% CI of 0.182-0.403. CONCLUSION: Despite a small number of patients, this meta-analysis confirms improved lymph node harvest in surgical specimens stained with methylene blue compared with unstained specimens.

A Meta-analysis of Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery versus Total Mesorectal Excision in the Treatment of Rectal Cancer.

Background Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEMS) has been suggested as an alternative to total mesorectal excision (TME) in the treatment of early rectal cancers. The extended role of TEMS for higher stage rectal cancers after neoadjuvant therapy is also experimented. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the oncological outcomes and report on the evidence-based clinical supremacy of either technique. Methods Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for the randomized controlled trials comparing the oncological and perioperative outcomes of TEMS and a radical TME. A local recurrence and postoperative complications were analyzed as primary end points. Intraoperative blood loss, operation time, and duration of hospital stay were compared as secondary end points. Results There was no statistical difference in the local recurrence or postoperative complications with a risk ratio of 1.898 and 0.753 and p -values of 0.296 and 0.306, respectively, for TEMS and TME. A marked statistical significance in favor of TEMS was observed for secondary end points. There was standard difference in means of -4.697, -6.940, and -5.685 with p -values of 0.001, 0.005, and 0.001 for blood loss, operation time, and hospital stay, respectively. Conclusion TEMS procedure is a viable alternative to TME in the treatment of early rectal cancers. An extended role of TEMS after neoadjuvant therapy may also be offered to a selected group of patients. TME surgery remains the standard of care in more advanced rectal cancers.

A Case Series of Laparoscopic Colorectal Resections with Natural Orifice Specimen Extraction and Systematic Literature Review.

Background Minimal access surgery is associated with improved cosmetic and other short-term outcomes. Conventionally, an abdominal incision is made for specimen extraction. We assessed the feasibility of specimen extraction through one of the natural orifices and analyzed its impact on short-term outcomes. Methods A prospectively collected data were reviewed on consecutive patients who underwent natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) after laparoscopic colorectal surgery. The results were compared with a matched group who had transabdominal extraction (TAE) of the specimens. A systematic literature review was performed to compare our results. Results The combined median operating time for right and left colectomies was significantly higher in the NOSE group as compared with TAE group (260 vs. 150). There was no mortality in either group and no conversions to TAE in the NOSE group. No local metastasis or major iatrogenic injuries were reported at the time of retrieval. The results were comparable to those of a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Conclusion The results of NOSE are comparable to those of TAEs. The absence of a minilaparotomy for specimen extraction may lead to a speedy recovery and better cosmesis.

A meta-analysis of low Hartmann's procedure versus abdominoperineal resection for non-restorative treatment of rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Non-restorative surgery for rectal cancer is indicated in patients with comorbidities, advanced disease and poor continence. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the postoperative morbidity of Hartmann's procedure (HP) with that of extrasphincteric and intersphincteric abdominoperineal resection (APR) in the treatment of rectal cancer. METHODS: The Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched for publications comparing postoperative morbidity of HP and APR. The incidence of overall surgical complications, pelvic-perineal complications and pelvic abscess was analysed as primary endpoints. Readmissions requiring reintervention and postoperative mortality were also compared. RESULTS: A cumulative analysis showed a significantly higher rate of overall complications (odds ratio (OR) 0.553, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.320 to 0.953 and P value 0.033) and pelvic-perineal complications (OR 0.464, 95% CI 0.250 to 0.861 and P value 0.015) after APR. The incidence of isolated pelvic abscess formation was significantly higher after HP (OR 2.523, 95% CI 1.383 to 4.602 and P value 0.003). A subgroup analysis of intersphincteric APR compared with HP did not show any significant difference in the incidence of overall complications, pelvic-perineal complications or pelvic abscess formation (P values of 0.452, 0.258 and 0.100, respectively). There was no significant difference in readmissions, reinterventions and mortality after HP and APR (P 0.992, 0.198 and 0.151). CONCLUSION: An extrasphincteric APR is associated with higher overall and pelvic-perineal complications and may be reserved for tumours invading the anal sphincter complex. In the absence of sphincter involvement, both HP and intersphincteric APR are better alternatives with comparable morbidity.

A meta-analysis of the role of diverting ileostomy after rectal cancer surgery.

PURPOSE: Anastomotic leak is a feared complication of rectal cancer surgery. A diverting stoma is believed to act as a safety mechanism against this undesirable outcome. This meta-analysis aimed to examine the role of loop ileostomy in the prevention of this complication. METHODS: The Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing anastomotic complications after rectal cancer surgery in the presence or absence of diverting ileostomy. The need for reoperation and postoperative complications were also analysed. The length of hospital stay, intraoperative blood loss and operating time were analysed as secondary endpoints. RESULTS: A significantly higher number of anastomotic leaks was detected in patients with no diverting ileostomies than in those with diversion (odds ratio (OR) 0.292 and 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.177-0.481), and more patients required reoperations in this group (OR 0.219 and 95% CI 0.114-0.422). The rate of complications other than anastomotic leak was significantly higher in patients with diverting ileostomies than in those without (OR 3.337 and 95% CI of 1.570-7.093). The operating time was longer in the ileostomy group than in the no ileostomy group (P 0.001), but no significant differences in the intraoperative blood loss or postoperative hospital stay length were observed between the two groups(P 0.199 and 0.191 respectively). CONCLUSION: A lower leak rate in the presence of diverting ileostomy is supported by relatively weak evidence. While mitigating the consequences of leakage, diverting ileostomies lead to numerous other complications. High-quality RCTs are needed before routine ileostomy diversions can be recommended after rectal cancer surgery.

Laparoscopic Ventral Mesh Rectopexy: Functional Outcomes after Surgery.

Aims Rectal prolapse is a debilitating and unpleasant condition adversely affecting the quality of life. Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (LVMR) is recognized as one of the treatment options. The aim of this study was to evaluate the functional outcomes after a standardized LVMR. Methods A cohort of patients who underwent LVMR from 2011 to 2015 were contacted and asked to fill questionnaires about their symptoms before and after the surgery. Three questionnaires based on measurement of Wexner fecal incontinence (WFI), obstructive defecation syndrome (ODS), and Birmingham Bowel and Urinary Symptom (BBUS) scores were used to assess the changes in postoperative functional outcomes. Some additional questions were also added to further assess bowel dysfunction. Results There were 58 female patients with a mean age of 62.74 ± 15.20 (26-86) years in this cohort. About 70% of the patients participated in the study and returned the filled questionnaires. There was a significant overall improvement across all three scores (WFI: p = 0.001, ODS: p = 0.001, and BBUS: p = 0.001). Some individual components in the scoring systems did not improve to patient's satisfaction. No perioperative complication or conversion to an open procedure was reported in this study. Three recurrences were seen in the redo cases. Conclusion LVMR is a promising way of dealing with rectal prolapse. A careful patient selection, appropriate preoperative workup, and a meticulous surgical technique undoubtedly transform the postoperative outcomes.

Rigid or flexible sigmoidoscopy in colorectal clinics? Appraisal through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIM: Rigid sigmoidoscopy is sometimes performed at first presentation in colorectal clinics. We assessed the feasibility of flexible sigmoidoscopy in similar situations by comparing it with rigid sigmoidoscopy as a first investigative tool. METHODS: The Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for randomized and non-randomized clinical trials comparing the usefulness of rigid and flexible sigmoidoscopy. The risk difference (RD) and weighted mean difference (WMD) were calculated for the cancers/abnormalities detected and discomfort associated with the procedure, respectively. The standard mean difference (SMD) was calculated for the depth of examination and duration of the procedure. RESULTS: Flexible sigmoidoscopy had a significantly higher rate of detection of cancers and total abnormalities (RD of 0.020 and 0.138 and 95% confidence interval [CI] of 0.006-0.034 and 0.077-0.200, respectively), and rigid sigmoidoscopy caused significantly more patient discomfort (WMD of 0.981 and 95% CI of 0.693-1.269). Flexible sigmoidoscopy provided significantly greater depth of examination (SMD of 3.175, 95% CI of 2.397-3.954), and rigid sigmoidoscopy required less time (SMD of -1.601, 95% CI of -2.728 to -0.474). CONCLUSIONS: Flexible sigmoidoscopy is a better investigative tool in colorectal clinics than the rigid sigmoidoscopy. Implementation of this idea can help in early diagnosis at first presentation and can certainly expedite the management of colorectal malignancies.

Routine testing of liver function before and after elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy: is it necessary?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Liver function tests (LFTs) include alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase (GGT), alkaline phosphatase (ALP), and bilirubin. The role of routine testing before and after laparoscopic cholecystectomy was evaluated in this study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 355 patients were retrospectively analyzed by examining the LFTs the day before, the day after, and 3 weeks after the surgery. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test and Student t test were performed to determine statistical significance. RESULTS: Alterations in the serum AST, ALT, and GGT were seen on the first postoperative day. Minor changes were seen in bilirubin and ALP. An overall disturbance in the LFTs was seen in more than two-thirds of the cases. Repeat LFTs performed after 3 weeks on follow-up were found to be within normal limits. CONCLUSION: Mild-to-moderate elevation in preoperative LFTs may not be associated with any deleterious effect, and, in the absence of clinical indications, routine preoperative or postoperative liver function testing is unnecessary.

Meta-analysis of the effectiveness of surgical scalpel or diathermy in making abdominal skin incisions.

BACKGROUND: Surgical scalpels are traditionally used to make skin incisions. Diathermy incisions on contrary are less popular among the surgeons. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the effectiveness of both techniques and address the common fallacies about diathermy incisions. METHODS: A literature search of MEDLINE and Cochrane databases was done, using the keywords diathermy, cold scalpel, and incisions. Eleven clinical trials comparing both methods of making skin incisions were selected for meta-analysis. The end points compared included postoperative wound infection, pain in first 24 hours after surgery, time taken to complete the incisions, and incision-related blood loss. RESULTS: Postoperative wound infection rate was comparable in both techniques (P = 0.147, odds ratio = 1.257 and 95% CI = 0.923-1.711). Postoperative pain was significantly less with diathermy incisions in first 24 hours (P = 0.031, weighted mean difference = 0.852 and 95% CI = 0.076-1.628). Similarly, the time taken to complete the incision and incision-related blood loss was significantly less with diathermy incisions (95% CI = 0.245-0.502 and 0.548-1.020, respectively). CONCLUSION: Diathermy incisions are equally prone to get wound infection, as do the incisions made with scalpel. Furthermore, lower incidence of early postoperative pain, swiftness of the technique, and a reduced blood loss are the encouraging facts supporting routine use of diathermy for abdominal skin incisions after taking careful precautions.