Completion total mesorectal excision following transanal endoscopic microsurgery does not compromise outcomes in patients with rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) represents a choice of treatment in patients with neoplastic lesions in the rectum. When TEM fails, completion total mesorectal excision (cTME) is often required. However, a concern is whether cTME increases the rate of abdominoperineal resections (APR) and is associated with higher risk of incomplete mesorectal fascia (MRF) resection. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of cTME with primary TME (pTME) in patients with rectal cancer. METHODS: This was a nationwide study on all patients with cTME from the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group database between 2005 and 2015. Patients with cTME were compared to patients with pTME after propensity score matching (matching ratio 1:2). Matching variables were age, gender, tumor distance from anal verge, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score and American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage. RESULTS: A total of 60 patients with cTME were compared with 120 patients with pTME. Patients with cTME experienced more intraoperative complications as compared to pTME patients (18.3% vs. 6.7%, p = 0.021). However, there was no difference in the rate of perforations at or near the tumor/previous TEM site (6.7% vs. 2.5%, p = 0.224), conversion to open surgery (p = 0.733) or 30-day morbidity (p = 0.86). On multivariate analysis, cTME was not a risk factor for APR (OR 2.49; 95% CI 0.95-6.56; p = 0.064) or incomplete MRF (OR 1.32; 95% CI 0.48-3.63; p = 0.596). There was no difference in the rate of local recurrence between cTME and pTME (5.2% vs. 4.3%, p = 0.1), distant metastases (6.8% vs. 6.8%, p = 1), or survival (p = 0.081). The mean follow-up time was 6 years. CONCLUSION: In our study, the largest so far on the subject, we find no difference in postoperative short- or long-term outcomes between cTME and pTME.

Readmission and reoperation rates following negative diagnostic laparoscopy for clinically suspected appendicitis: The "normal" appendix should not be removed - A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: In cases with clinically suspected appendicitis, there is controversy regarding the decision to remove a macroscopically normal appearing appendix during laparoscopy when no other intra-abdominal pathology is found. The aim of this study was to examine the rate of appendicitis, along with readmission and reoperation rates following diagnostic laparoscopy of clinically suspected appendicitis in patients where the appendix was not removed. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of patients who underwent a diagnostic laparoscopy due to clinical suspicion of appendicitis where no other pathology was found and the appendix was not removed. The study period was from 2008 to 2013 and involved patients from two university hospitals in the Copenhagen area. RESULTS: Of the 271 patients included (81.6% women, median age 27), 56 (20.7%) were readmitted with right iliac fossa pain after a median time of 10 months (range 1-84). Twenty-two patients (8.1%) underwent a new laparoscopic procedure. Appendix was removed in 18 patients, of which only one showed histological signs of inflammation. The median follow-up time was 5.6 years (range 1-109 months). CONCLUSION: There was a low rate of appendicitis after a previous negative diagnostic laparoscopy. Therefore, based on results from the current study, we do not consider that it is necessary to remove a macroscopic normal appendix during laparoscopy for clinically suspected appendicitis. The high readmission rate warrants the need for further investigation or follow-up.

Transanal completion proctectomy with close rectal dissection and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis.

INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic dissection in the pelvis is still a challenge. A transanal approach to rectal dissection allows better visualization during the dissection of the rectum and the creation of an anastomosis. Although initially used for patients with rectal cancer, the transanal approach may also have benefits in the surgical treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC). The aim of this study was to describe our initial experience with transanal completion proctectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for UC. METHODS: This study included all consecutive patients who underwent transanal completion proctectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for UC between September 2017 and February 2018. RESULTS: Eleven patients were included in the study; they had a median age of 30 years (range, 13-51 years). The median operative time was 285 min (range, 190-375 min). There were no intraoperative complications or conversions to open surgery. Postoperative complications occurred in only one patient (anastomotic leak), and the median length of hospital stay was 7 days (range, 5-37 days). CONCLUSION: Our initial experience with transanal completion proctectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis shows promising results, demonstrating the feasibility of the transanal approach in patients with UC.