Robotic colorectal resections are associated with less postoperative pain, decreased opioid use, and earlier return to work as compared to the laparoscopic approach.

While robotic and laparoscopic surgeries are both minimally invasive in nature, they are intrinsically different approaches and it is critical to understand outcome differences between the two. Studies evaluating pain outcomes and opioid requirement differences between the robotic and laparoscopic colorectal resections are conflicting and often underpowered. In this retrospective, cohort study, we compare postoperative opioid requirements, reported as morphine milligram equivalents (MME), postoperative average and highest pain scores across postoperative days (POD) 0-5, and return to work in patients who underwent robotic versus laparoscopic colorectal resections. The sample size was selected based on power calculations. Daily pain scores and MME were used as outcomes in linear mixed effect models with unstructured covariance between time points. Propensity score weighting was used to adjust for imbalances. Patients in the robotic group required significantly less opioids as measured by MME on all postoperative days (p = 0.004), as well as lower average and highest daily pain scores for POD 0-5 (p = 0.02, and p = 0.006, respectively). In a linear mixed-effects model, robotic resections were associated with a decrease in average pain scores by 0.36 over time (p = 0.03) and 35 fewer MME requirements than the laparoscopic group (p = 0.0004). Patients in the robotic arm had earlier return to work (2.1 vs 3.8 days, p = 0.036). The robotic approach to colorectal resections is associated with significantly less postoperative pain, decreased opioid requirements, and earlier return to work when compared to laparoscopy, suggesting that the robotic platform provides important clinical advantages over the laparoscopic approach.

Perianal pyoderma gangrenosum after excision and fulguration of anal condyloma acuminatum.

INTRODUCTION: Pyoderma gangrenosum (PG) is a rare, inflammatory skin pathology frequently associated with systemic inflammatory disease. While rare after surgery, recognition of this disease in the post-surgical setting is important as it can mimic wound infection. PRESENTATION OF CASE: We herein present a dramatic presentation of perianal PG four days after routine excision and fulguration of anal condyloma acuminatum. The affected area did not improve with broad spectrum antibiotics or surgical debridement. A diagnosis of PG was made from clinical suspicion and pathology findings, and further confirmed with rapid improvement after starting steroids. Diagnosis of this disease in the postoperative period requires high suspicion when the characteristic ulcerative or bullae lesions are seen diffusely and show minimal improvement with antibiotic treatment or debridement. DISCUSSION: Our case highlights the importance of recognizing this disease in the post-operative period, to allow for early initiation of appropriate treatment and prevent unnecessary surgical debridement of a highly sensitive area. There have been 32 case reports of PG in the colorectal literature, mostly following stoma creation. There is one case report of idiopathic perianal pyoderma gangrenosum with no known prior trauma. To our knowledge there are no previously reported cases of perianal PG after routine elective anorectal surgery. CONCLUSION: This is the first reported case of perianal pyoderma gangrenosum in the post-surgical setting. Increased awareness of pyoderma gangrenosum in the surgical literature will aid in prompt diagnosis and proper medical management of this uncommon postoperative morbidity.