Prospective cohort study of surgical trainee experience of access to gastrointestinal endoscopy training in the UK and Ireland.

INTRODUCTION: Surgical trainees are reporting barriers to training in gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy. This snapshot survey aimed to gather data on variation in access to quality GI endoscopy training for Colorectal and Upper Gastrointestinal (GI) surgical trainees across the UK and Ireland. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An online 20-point survey was designed and distributed nationally to surgical trainee members of the Association of Surgeons in Training (ASiT), Dukes and The Roux Group (formerly Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons of Great Britain and Ireland Trainees). The survey was designed in collaboration with The Roux Group for Upper GI trainees and the Dukes' Club for Colorectal trainees. RESULTS: 218 responses were received, most with a Colorectal or Upper GI sub-specialty interest (colorectal 56.0%; upper GI surgery 25.7%). Only 28.6% of trainees attended a dedicated training endoscopy list at least once a week with 28.1% not attending any at all. Less than half of trainees reported having endoscopy formally timetabled on rotas (36.9%). Most trainees (88.0%) encountered difficulties in gaining endoscopy training including lack of available lists (77.2%), conflicting operative commitments (59.4%), preferential allocation of lists to gastroenterology trainees (57.9%) and resistance from endoscopy departmental leads (38.6%). Regarding JAG accreditation, 77.1% respondents felt it should be mandatory prior to CCT with 80.3% believing this would lead to better access to dedicated endoscopy training equivalent to gastroenterology trainees. 93.1% trainees felt that attaining JAG accreditation by surgical trainees was important to patient care. DISCUSSION: This study demonstrates significant barriers in accessing GI endoscopy training for general surgical trainees which urgently needs to be improved. In order to meet JAG training requirements for surgical trainees, a multifaceted collaborative approach from surgical and gastroenterology training bodies, local JAG trainers and the General Surgery SAC and JCST is required. This is to ensure that endoscopy is promoted and a robust model of training is successfully designed and delivered to general surgery trainees.

Rectal trauma injuries: outcomes from the U.S. National Trauma Data Bank.

BACKGROUND: There is a  lack of general consensus and a little published data regarding the management of trauma-related rectal injuries and outcomes. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the surgical management and corresponding outcomes for this patient cohort, using a nationwide trauma database. METHODS: Rectal injuries and procedures performed over a 2-year period (2013 and 2014) were identified through ICD-9 clinical modification codes, from the United States National Trauma Data Bank. Patient factors, management variables, and outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: Of 1.7 million patients, 1472 (0.1%) sustained a rectal injury; 81% male, median age 30 years (range 16-89 years) and 60% due to penetrating trauma. Seven hundred and seventy-eight (52.8%) had an isolated extraperitoneal injury and 694 (47.2%) had isolated Intraperitoneal or combined intra- and extraperitoneal injuries. Overall, 726 patients (49.3%) underwent fecal diversion. Injuries following blunt trauma were associated with higher injury severity scores (ISS), lower stoma rates, longer hospital and intensive-care unit (ICU) stay, and higher mortality rates than penetrating trauma (all p ≤ 0.001). Patients with stoma formation had lower mortality than undiverted patients (8.6 vs. 4.0%, p < 0.001) despite a higher ISS and more intraperitoneal injuries, but longer hospital and ICU stay (all p ≤ 0.001). On multivariate regression analysis, older age, higher ISS, intraperitoneal injury, and return to the ICU were independently associated with higher rates of mortality, while stoma formation was associated with a lower mortality rate. For isolated extraperitoneal rectal injuries, 494 patients (63.5%) were managed by resection/repair without stoma and had significantly lower overall postoperative morbidity rates (12.7 vs. 30.2%, p = 0.009) and shorter hospital stay (14 vs. 23 days, p < 0.001), than those who underwent resection/repair + stoma (n = 284; 36.5%), despite no significant difference in ISS (29 vs. 27, p = 0.780). There was no significant difference in mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Our results showed that trauma-related rectal injuries are rare and there is wide variation in their management. These data support a low threshold for stoma formation in patients with intraperitoneal or combined injuries, while suggesting that isolated extraperitoneal defects may be safely managed without fecal diversion.

Factors associated with degree of tumour response to neo-adjuvant radiotherapy in rectal cancer and subsequent corresponding outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Tumour response to neo-adjuvant radiotherapy for rectal cancer varies significantly between patients, as classified by Tumour Regression Grade (TRG 0-3), with 0 equating to pathological complete response (pCR) and 3 denoting minimal/no response. pCR is associated with significantly better local recurrence rates and survival, but is achieved in only 20-30% of patients. The literature contains limited data reporting factors predictive of tumour response and corresponding outcomes according to degree of regression. METHODS: All patients with rectal cancer who received neo-adjuvant radiotherapy, entered into the National Cancer Database (NCDB) in 2009-2013, were included. Data were analysed on procedure performed, tumour details, pathological findings, chemo-radiotherapy regimens, patient demographics, outcomes and survival. Multivariate regression analysis was used to identify factors independently associated with pCR. RESULTS: Of 13,742 patients, 32.4% achieved pCR/TRG0 (4452). Factors associated with pCR (vs. TRG3) included adenocarcinoma rather than mucinous adenocarcinoma histology; well/moderately differentiated grade; lower clinical tumour (cT1, cT2, cT3) and nodal (N0 and N1) stage, and the addition of neo-adjuvant chemotherapy. Elevated CEA levels were associated with TRG3. pCR patients had higher rates of local excision, shorter mean length of stay and lower unplanned readmission rates, than TRG3. R0 resection rates and overall survival were significantly higher in all grades of regression, compared to TRG3 (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Tumour regression correlates with outcomes. Identifying factors predictive of response may facilitate higher pCR rates, the tailoring of therapy, and improve outcomes.

Potentiating the effects of radiotherapy in rectal cancer: the role of aspirin, statins and metformin as adjuncts to therapy.

BACKGROUND: Complete tumour response (pCR) to neo-adjuvant chemo-radiotherapy for rectal cancer is associated with a reduction in local recurrence and improved disease-free and overall survival, but is achieved in only 20-30% of patients. Drug repurposing for anti-cancer treatments is gaining momentum, but the potential of such drugs as adjuncts, to increase tumour response to chemo-radiotherapy in rectal cancer, is only just beginning to be recognised. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted and all studies investigating the use of drugs to enhance response to neo-adjuvant radiation in rectal cancer were included. 2137 studies were identified and following review 12 studies were extracted for full text review, 9 studies were included in the final analysis. RESULTS: The use of statins or aspirin during neo-adjuvant therapy was associated with a significantly higher rate of tumour downstaging. Statins were identified as a significant predictor of pCR and aspirin users had a greater 5-year progression-free survival and overall survival. Metformin use was associated with a significantly higher overall and disease-free survival, in a subset of diabetic patients. CONCLUSIONS: Aspirin, metformin and statins are associated with increased downstaging of rectal tumours and thus may have a role as adjuncts to neoadjuvant treatment, highlighting a clear need for prospective randomised controlled trials to determine their true impact on tumour response and overall survival.

ECSPECT prospective multicentre registry for single-port laparoscopic colorectal procedures.

BACKGROUND: The international multicentre registry ECSPECT (European Consensus of Single Port Expertise in Colorectal Treatment) was established to evaluate the general feasibility and safety of single-port colorectal surgery with regard to preoperative risk assessment. METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing single-port colorectal surgery were enrolled from 11 European centres between March 2010 and March 2014. Data were analysed to assess patient-, technique- and procedure-dependent parameters. A validated sex-adjusted risk chart was developed for prediction of single-port colorectal surgery-related conversion and complications. RESULTS: Some 1769 patients were enrolled, 937 with benign and 832 with malignant conditions. Procedures were completed without additional trocars in 1628 patients (92·0 per cent). Conversion to open surgery was required in 75 patients (4·2 per cent) and was related to male sex and ASA fitness grade exceeding I. Conversions were more frequent in pelvic procedures involving the rectum compared with abdominal procedures (8·1 versus 3·2 per cent; odds ratio 2·69, P < 0·001). Postoperative complications were observed in a total of 224 patients (12·7 per cent). Independent predictors of complications included male sex (P < 0·001), higher ASA grade (P = 0·006) and rectal procedures (P = 0·002). The overall 30-day mortality rate was 0·5 per cent (8 of 1769 patients); three deaths (0·2 per cent; 1 blood loss, 2 leaks) were attributable to surgical causes. CONCLUSION: The feasibility and safety, conversion and complication profile demonstrated here provides guidance for patient selection.

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: early results and medium-term oncological outcome.

AIM: Conventional laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer management is now widely accepted as an alternative to open surgery, bestowing specific advantages without causing detriment to oncological outcome. Evolving from this, single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) has been successfully utilized for the removal of colonic tumours, but the literature lacks data analysing the suitability of SILS for rectal cancer resection, particularly on oncological outcome. We report the medium-term oncological outcome from a prospective observational study of SILS for rectal cancer, including high and low anterior resections. METHOD: A prospective electronic database was collated of all patients undergoing SILS rectal cancer resection in our institution, between 2009 and 2014. In addition to patient, tumour and operative data, histopathological and medium-term oncological end-points were recorded. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to analyse survival. RESULTS: Sixty-one patients underwent SILS for rectal cancer by high anterior resection (n = 34), low anterior resection with total mesorectal excision (TME) (n = 24) and low anterior resection with TME and hand-sewn colo-anal anastomosis (n = 3). The median operation time was 105 (37-280) min and 92% of cases were completed by SILS. The mean interval to resuming oral feeding was 11 h and the median length of stay was 2 (1-8) days. The median number of lymph nodes found by the histopathologist in the resected specimen was 18 (6-44) and all operations completely removed the tumour (R0 resection). At a median follow-up of 46 (16-64) months, eight (13%) patients developed metastatic disease, of whom three had local recurrence. Overall, three patients have died, of whom all had metastatic disease. CONCLUSION: Anterior resection with TME for rectal cancer can be safely performed using the SILS technique, with acceptable histopathological results and good oncological outcome.

Development and evaluation of a cadaveric training curriculum for low rectal cancer surgery in the English LOREC National Development Programme.

AIM: The National Development Programme for Low Rectal Cancer in England (LOREC) was commissioned in response to wide variation in the outcome of patients with low rectal cancer. One of the aims of LOREC was to enhance surgical techniques in managing low rectal cancer. This study reports on the development and evaluation of a novel national technical skills cadaveric training curriculum in extralevator abdominoperineal excision. METHOD: Three sites were commissioned for the cadaveric workshops, each delivering the same training curriculum. Training was undertaken in pairs using a fresh-frozen cadaveric model under the supervision of expert mentors. Global assessment score (GAS) forms were developed to promote reflective learning. Feedback on the impact of the workshop was obtained from a sample of delegates at the end of the course, and also after 3-23 months via an online questionnaire. RESULTS: Overall 112 consultant colorectal surgeons attended one of 15 cadaveric technical skills training workshops. Seventy-six per cent of delegates reported easy identification of anatomy in the cadaveric model; 67% found tissue planes easy to interpret. Ninety-six per cent of delegates felt the workshop would influence their future practice; 96% reported increased awareness of important anatomy. Only 2% of delegates wished to pursue supplementary formal training from LOREC. CONCLUSION: Fresh-frozen cadavers could provide an effective training model for low rectal surgery. A structured 1-day cadaveric workshop has facilitated the dissemination of technical skills for management of low rectal cancer. Attending the cadaveric workshop enhanced delegates' confidence in performing this procedure.

Comparison of single-incision laparoscopic high anterior resection with standard laparoscopic high anterior resection.

AIM: Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) is gaining momentum. The aim of the present study was to compare the outcome of SILS for high anterior resection with that of standard laparoscopic resection (StdLS). METHOD: Patients undergoing laparoscopic high anterior resection were prospectively entered into an institutional approved database. Patients treated with SILS were compared with those undergoing StdLS. RESULTS: Between April 2000 and April 2009, 327 (143 cancer) consecutive unselected patients underwent StdLS; there were three (1%) conversions and 12 (3.6%) covering ileostomies. After April 2009, 55 (29 cancer) consecutive, unselected patients underwent SILS; there were two conversions to a three-port technique (3.6%), no conversions to open resection and two (3.6%) covering ileostomies. There were no significant differences in age, sex, body mass index, hospital of operation or American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) grade between the two groups. The operating time for SILS was significantly shorter (113 ± 44 min for StdLS vs 79 ± 37 min for SILS; P < 0.0001). SILS patients tolerated a normal diet earlier [10 (2-24) h for SILS vs 18 (2-96) h for StdLS] and were discharged faster [1 (1-8) days for SILS vs 3 (1-24) days for StdLS]. There were no significant differences in return to theatre, readmissions or 30-day mortality. CONCLUSION: SILS for high anterior resection is feasible, safe and quicker to perform than standard three-port laparoscopic colectomy. It seems to be associated with a faster recovery and earlier discharge.

Enhanced recovery after laparoscopic colorectal resection with primary anastomosis: accelerated discharge is safe and does not give rise to increased readmission rates.

AIMS: Enhanced recovery programmes after colorectal surgery are promoted to minimize complications and expedite recovery, thus reducing length of hospital stay where appropriate and improving the overall standard of patient care. There are few published trials of enhanced recovery programmes in the context of laparoscopic colorectal surgery. METHODS: Data were prospectively collected on all laparoscopic colorectal resections carried out in our institution from May 2004 to November 2009. An informal move to 48-h discharge was introduced in May 2004 and the official enhanced recovery programme was launched in November 2008. We identified all patients with a primary anastomosis discharged within 3 days of surgery. Early outcomes - leaks, complications, readmission rates and returns to theatre - were analysed. RESULTS: In all, 606 resections were performed in this period. Median length of stay was 4 (0-52) days. Of these patients, 279 (46%) met the criteria of accelerated discharge by day 3: 2 (0.7%) were discharged on the day of surgery, 70 (25.1%) within 24 h, 116 (41.6%) within 48 h and 91 (32.6%) by 72h. Age was not a significant factor in determining length of stay. Patients undergoing right hemicolectomy were more likely to be discharged by 24 h than those with left-sided anastomoses, and patients having total mesorectal excision resections were more likely to stay 3 days. The readmission rate was 4%, regardless of day of discharge. CONCLUSION: Accelerated discharge is feasible and safe. High readmission rates reported in enhanced recovery programmes after open colorectal surgery have not occurred in our laparoscopic experience.

Single incision laparoscopic (SILS) restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis.

BACKGROUND: Restorative proctocolectomy with ileoanal pouch is the definitive procedure in ulcerative colitis. The potential benefits afforded by a single incision laparoscopic (SILS) approach make it appropriate to consider. METHODS: Electronic data were prospectively collected from all patients who underwent SILS restorative proctocolectomy (SILS-RPC) between June 2009 and June 2010. RESULTS: Ten consecutive patients (4 male), with median BMI = 22 (range = 20-28 kg/m(2)) underwent SILS-LRPC over a 1-year period. Three had undergone a previous emergency laparoscopic colectomy. A single-port device (Covidien SILS™ or Olympus TriPort™) was positioned at the site of the existing or proposed temporary ileostomy (2.5-cm incision). The colon and rectum were extracted through the SILS site (n = 8) or transanally following a mucosectomy (n = 2). A 20-cm J pouch was constructed extracorporeally and returned via the ileostomy site. Pouch-anal anastomosis was performed intracorporeally (n = 8) or hand-sutured (n = 2) and a diverting loop ileostomy was created at the SILS port site. The median operation time was 185 min (range = 100-381). There were no conversions or additional ports required. Median time to full diet was 36 h (range = 4-48 h) with a median hospital stay of 3 days (range = 2-8 days). There were no 30-day readmissions. Complications included surgical emphysema with temperature and a panic attack. Nine stomas have been closed. All patients have spontaneity of defecation, with a median pouch frequency of four per day, including once at night. All are fully continent and able to defer during the day. One reported a dry ejaculate for 10 weeks. CONCLUSION: SILS restorative proctocolectomy is safe with good early functional outcomes when performed by an experienced laparoscopic surgeon.

Small bowel ischaemia resulting from delayed presentation of an incarcerated right-sided diaphragmatic hernia.

A 51 year old man presented with a short history of severe upper abdominal pain and vomiting. An initial chest radiograph demonstrated gas in the right subphrenic space and a subsequent CT scan demonstrated a hernia through the mid-part of the right hemi-diaphragm, containing small bowel and omentum. A detailed history revealed that there had been trauma to the right side of the chest approximately 12 years previously. An emergency laparoscopy revealed a right sided diaphragmatic hernia containing non-viable small bowel and omentum. After converting to a small midline laparotomy, a small bowel resection and primary anastomosis was performed. The patient was discharged from hospital 12 days later. In any patient presenting with symptoms of upper abdominal pain, with a prior history of trauma, the diagnosis of diaphragmatic hernia should therefore be considered.

Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery is feasible in complex colorectal resections and could enable day case colectomy.

BACKGROUND: Fast-track surgery accelerates recovery, reduces morbidity, and shortens hospital stay. However, the benefits of laparoscopic versus open surgery remain unproven within a fast-track program. Case reports of laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) colectomies are appearing with claims of cosmetic advantage and decreased parietal trauma. This report describes the largest case series of LESS colorectal surgery and its effects on recovery. METHODS: In this series, 20 consecutive unselected patients underwent LESS colorectal surgery including right hemicolectomy (n = 3), extended right hemicolectomy, high anterior resection (n = 2), low anterior resection involving total mesorectal excision (TME; n = 3), ileocolic anastomosis (n = 2, including 1 redo surgery), colectomy and ileorectal anastomosis (n = 4, including 1 with ventral mesh rectopexy), panproctocolectomy (n = 2), proctocolectomy and ileoanal pouch (n = 2) and an abdominoperineal excision of rectum. Single-port conventional instrumentation and transversus abdominus plane (TAP) block analgesia were used. The indications included cancer (n = 8), Crohn's disease (n = 4), ulcerative colitis (n = 3) complicated diverticulosis (n = 2), and slow-transit constipation (n = 3). Eight of the patients had undergone previous surgery. RESULTS: Most of the cases (90%) were managed successfully using the LESS technique and conventional instrumentation. Two operations (10%) were converted to standard laparoscopy, due to insufficient theater time and an unstable port. The operative time ranged from 45 to 240 min (median, 110 min). A normal diet was tolerated within 6 h by 7 patients and in 12 to 16 h (overnight) by 11 patients. Complications included anastomotic bleed (n = 1), ileus (n = 2), acute renal failure secondary to hyperphosphatemia and hypocalcemia (n = 1), urine retention (n = 1), and wound infection (n = 1). The median hospital stay was 46 h (range, 7-384 h). Eight patients were discharged within 24 h. There was one readmission (5%). CONCLUSION: Laparoendoscopic single-site colorectal resection using conventional instrumentation is feasible and safe when performed by an experienced team. The LESS approach may have advantages in terms of minimal pain, cosmesis, lower costs, and faster recovery. A randomized trial is required to confirm whether LESS offers a true patient benefit over standard laparoscopic resection.

The role of laparoscopic surgery for the management of acute large bowel obstruction.

AIM: The aim of this study was to analyse the outcome of laparoscopic management of large bowel obstruction (LBO). METHOD: A prospective electronic database (April 2001-June 2009) was used to identify outcomes in consecutive patients presenting with LBO. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients (13 male) median age 68 years (range 56-92 years), ASA grade I (2), II (6), III (14) and IV (2), underwent surgery for LBO secondary to cancer (21) and diverticulosis (3). Supervised trainees performed four operations. Operations included anterior resection (10), Hartmann's resection (6), right/extended hemicolectomy (7) and colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis (1). The median operating time was 100 min (range 65-180 min). There were two (8%) conversions. The median time to normal diet was 24 h (range 2-192 h) and median hospital stay 3 days (range 1-30 days). Complications, seen in six patients, included atrial fibrillation (2), wound infection (2), ileus (2), CO(2) retention (1), stoma necrosis (1), circulatory collapse/bowel ischaemia (1) and anastomotic leak (1). There was one (4%) readmission and two (8%) returns to theatre. One patient died. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic resectional surgery in acute LBO is feasible and safe with a low complication rate that enables early hospital discharge.

Emergency subtotal colectomy for fulminant Clostridium difficile colitis--is a surgical solution considered for all patients?

INTRODUCTION: Clostridium difficile has been an increasing problem in UK hospitals. At the time of this study, there was a high incidence of C. difficile within our trust and a number of patients developed acute fulminant colitis requiring subtotal colectomy. We review a series of colectomies for C. difficile, examining the associated morbidity and mortality and the factors that predispose to acute fulminant colitis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective study of patients undergoing subtotal colectomy for C. difficile colitis in an NHS trust over 18 months. Case notes were reviewed for antibiotic use, duration of diarrhoea, treatment, blood results, preoperative imaging and surgical morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 1398 patients tested positive for C. difficile in this period. Of these, 18 (1.29%) underwent colectomy. All were emergency admissions, 35% medical, 35% surgical, 24% neurosurgical and 6% orthopaedic. In the cohort, 29% were aged less than 65 years. Patients had a median of three antibiotics (range, 1-6), for a median of 10 days (range, 0-59 days). Median length of stay prior to C. difficile diagnosis was 13 days. Subtotal colectomy was performed a median of 4 days (range, 0-23 days) after diagnosis. Postoperative mortality was 53% (9 of 17). The median C-reactive protein level for those who died was 302 mg/l, in contrast to 214 mg/l in the survival group. Whilst 62% of all C. difficile cases were medical, the colectomy rate was only 0.7%. In the surgical specialties, the colectomy rates were 3.2% for general surgical, 1.2% for orthopaedic and 8% for neurosurgical patients. CONCLUSIONS: Colectomy for C. difficile colitis has a high mortality but can be life-saving, even in extremely sick patients. Although heavy antibiotic use is a predisposing factor, this is not an obligatory prerequisite in the development of C. difficile. Neither is it a disease of the elderly, making it difficult to predict vulnerable patients. There are large differences in colectomy rates between specialties and we suggest there may be a place for a surgical opinion in all cases of severe C. difficile colitis.