The prevalence of, and risk factors for, Barrett's oesophagus after sleeve gastrectomy.

INTRODUCTION: Sleeve gastrectomy has become one of the most performed bariatric procedures. There is increasing evidence that sleeve gastrectomy patients suffer from gastroesophageal reflux disease and its sequelae such as erosive oesophagitis (EO) or Barret's oesophagus (BO). AIM: To evaluate the incidence of EO and BO among patients with normal preoperative oesophagogastroduodenoscopy findings, who underwent sleeve gastrectomy, and investigate factors that may contribute to the development of EO and BO after the surgery. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a single-centre longitudinal study that included patients who underwent sleeve gastrectomy and completed 5 years of follow-up. Gastroscopies were performed in all patients at the end of the follow-up period. Patient- and treatment-related factors were used to search for risk factors of BO. RESULTS: From a total of 30 patients, symptomatic reflux was reported by 17 (56.7%) during the follow-up period. At EGD EO was found in 9 of those patients (30%), whereas BE was diagnosed in 8 (27%) patients. The median BMI at the end of the follow-up period was significantly higher among patients with BE than in the groups with EO and with no endoscopic changes: 40.91 ±6.32, 32.42 ±5.53, and 33.25 ±4.41, respectively (p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of BO in SG patients is considerable. The risk of BE increases in patients with poor bariatric outcome. Endoscopic surveillance should be considered as part of the follow-up, especially in patients with higher overall risk of BE.

Intravenous lipid emulsions and liver function in adult chronic intestinal failure patients: Results after 5 y of home parenteral nutrition.

OBJECTIVES: Intravenous lipid emulsions (ILE) are an essential component of parenteral nutrition (PN); however, pure soybean oil emulsion is considered a risk factor for intestinal failure-associated liver disease (IFALD). Limited data are available on the effect of different ILEs on the liver during long-term PN, and to our knowledge, no study has evaluated outcomes beyond 12 mo. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to assess the influence of mixed ILEs on liver function during long-term PN. METHODS: A randomized, open-label clinical trial was performed at the Intestinal Failure Center in Skawina, Poland. Sixty-seven patients (35 F, 32 M; mean age, 53.2 years) receiving home parenteral nutrition (HPN) due to stable chronic intestinal failure (CIF) were randomized to receive one of the following three ILEs: medium/long-chain triacylglycerides (MCT/LCT), olive oil/soybean oil (OO/SO), or a combination of SO/MCT/OO/fish oil (FO) (SMOFlipid). Patients were followed for 5 y. Liver function was assessed clinically and with biochemical parameters (total bilirubin, serum glutamyl oxalate transaminase, serum glutamyl pyruvate transaminase, γ-glutamyl transpeptidase, and alkaline phosphatase) at baseline and after 24 and 60 mo. RESULTS: The most common etiology for CIF was vascular, followed by Crohn's disease, surgical complications, and radiation enteritis. HPN was effective in improving nutritional status and was associated with low rates of catheter infections and clinical complications. No significant differences were observed between groups in median concentrations serum glutamyl oxalate transaminase, serum glutamyl pyruvate transaminase, γ-glutamyl transpeptidase, or alkaline phosphatase at 24 or 60 mo. A significant reduction in median bilirubin concentration was observed in the SMOFlipid group at 60 mo compared with baseline (6.8 umol/L; interquartile range, 5.2-8.5 versus 7.7 umol/L; interquartile range, 4.9-12.4; P = 0.0138). CONCLUSIONS: Mixed ILEs are safe and effective for use in patients on long-term HPN. A multicomponent ILE with FO can provide additional benefits in terms of liver function during long-term HPN.

High compliance to ERAS protocol does not improve overall survival in patients treated for resectable advanced gastric cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The ERAS (Enhanced Recovery after Surgery) protocol revolutionized perioperative care for gastrointestinal surgical procedures. However, little is known about the association between adherence to the ERAS protocol in gastric cancer surgery and the oncological outcome. AIM: To explore the relation between adherence to the ERAS protocol and the oncological outcome in gastric cancer patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected database of patients treated for gastric cancer between 2013 and 2016. All patients were treated perioperatively with a 14-item ERAS protocol. Every patient underwent regular follow-up every 3 months for 3 years after surgery. 80% compliance to the ERAS protocol was the goal during perioperative care. Based on the level of compliance, patients were divided into group 1 and group 2 (compliance of ≥ 80% and < 80%, respectively). RESULTS: Compliance to the ERAS protocol was not a risk factor for diminished overall survival - probability of 3-year survival was 63% in group 1 and 56% in group 2 (p = 0.75). The proportional Cox model revealed that only stage III gastric cancer was a risk factor of poor prognosis in patients operated on for gastric cancer (HR = 7.89, 95% CI: 2.96-20.89; p = 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: High adherence to the ERAS protocol did not improve overall survival in our 3-year observation. Only the stage of the disease, according to the AJCC classification, was identified as a risk factor for poor prognosis.

The hundred most frequently cited studies on sleeve gastrectomy.

INTRODUCTION: Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is one of the most popular bariatric operations and one of the most frequently studied areas in bariatric surgery. AIM: To summarise the characteristics of the most frequently cited studies focusing on SG. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We used the Web of Science database to identify all studies focused on SG published from 2000 to 2018. The term "sleeve gastrectomy" and synonyms were used to reveal the 100 most cited records. RESULTS: The most frequently cited publication had 493 citations. The highest mean number of citations per year was 73.00. Studies were most frequently published in the years 2010 and 2012. Articles were most commonly published in bariatric surgery-oriented journals. CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicates an increase in medical researchers' interest in the subject of SG and underlines the need to perform studies with a higher level of evidence to further analyse the outcomes and basic science behind SG.

Impact of Adherence to the ERAS® Protocol on Short-term Outcomes after Bariatric Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Enhanced recovery after surgery had been introduced with success in many surgical fields, including bariatrics. There are numerous studies presenting how ERAS® has positively affected the outcomes following weight loss surgery. The effect of compliance with the protocol on postoperative results has not been extensively researched in the literature. METHODOLOGY: The 15-element protocol used in our department was analyzed, and compliance was calculated based on pre- and peri-operative elements. We gathered data on recovery parameters, complications, and length of hospital stay. Patients were divided into two groups according to their compliance: group 1 < 80%, group 2 > 80%. Multivariate analysis was used to determine which element had the greatest effect. RESULTS: Our study group consisted of 764 patients operated in between 2009 and 2017. The median compliance was 87.94%; group 1 had 68.1% compliance and group 2 reached 92.7%. There were significant differences in morbidity (group 1 13.6% vs. group 2 2.8%, p < 0.001) and length of hospital stay (4 vs. 3 days, p < 0.001). Compliance, early mobilization, and day of food tolerance have been identified as affecting morbidity, whereas for prolonged hospital stays, it was multimodal analgesia, food tolerance, the volume of oral fluids, and intravenous fluids. CONCLUSIONS: Compliance with the ERAS® protocol affects morbidity and length of hospital stay. More studies are required to establish which elements have the greatest impact and which are essential.

Investigating Risk Factors for Complications after Ileostomy Reversal in Low Anterior Rectal Resection Patients: An Observational Study.

Introduction: Defunctioning ileostomy has been widely used in patients undergoing low anterior rectal resection to reduce the rate of postoperative leakage. It is still not clear whether interval between primary procedure and ileostomy reversal has an impact on treatment outcomes. Methods: In our prospective observational study we reviewed 164 consecutive cases of patients who underwent total mesorectal excision with primary anastomosis. Univariate and multivariate regression models were used to search for risk factors for prolonged length of stay and complications after defunctioning ileostomy reversal. Receiver operating characteristic curves were utilized to set cut-off points for prolonged length of stay and perioperative morbidity. Results: In total, 132 patients were included in the statistical analysis. The median interval between primary procedure and defunctioning ileostomy reversal was 134 (range: 17-754) days, while median length of stay was 5 days (4-6 interquartile range (IQR)). Prolonged length of stay cut-off was established at 6 days. Regression models revealed that interval between primary surgery and stoma closure as well as complications after primary procedure are risk factors for complications after defunctioning ileostomy reversal. Prolonged length of stay has been found to be related primarily to interval between primary surgery and stoma closure. Conclusions: In our study interval between primary surgery and stoma closure along with complication occurrence after primary procedure are risk factors for perioperative morbidity and prolonged length of stay (LOS) after ileostomy reversal. The effort should be made to minimize the interval to ileostomy reversal. However, randomized studies are necessary to avoid the bias which appears in this observational study and confirm our findings.

Compliance with the ERAS Protocol and 3-Year Survival After Laparoscopic Surgery for Non-metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways have been proven to enhance postoperative recovery, reduce morbidity, and reduce length of hospital stay after colorectal cancer surgery. However, despite the benefits of the ERAS program on short-term results, little is known about its impact on long-term results. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to determine the association between adherence to the ERAS protocol and long-term survival after laparoscopic colorectal resection for non-metastatic cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODOLOGY: Between 2013 and 2016, 350 patients underwent laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection in the 2nd Department of General Surgery, Jagiellonian University Medical College, and were enrolled for further analysis. The relationship between the rate of compliance with the ERAS protocol and 3-year survival was analyzed according to the Kaplan-Meier method with log-rank tests. Patients were divided into two groups according to their degree of adherence to the ERAS interventions: Group 1 (109 patients), < 80% adherence, and Group 2 (241 patients), ≥ 80% adherence. The primary outcome was overall 3-year survival. The secondary outcomes were postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, and recovery parameters. RESULTS: The groups were similar in terms of demographics and surgical parameters. The median compliance to ERAS interventions was 85.2%. The Cox proportional model showed that AJCC III (HR 3.28, 95% CI 1.61-6.59, p = 0.0021), postoperative complications (HR 2.63, 95% CI 1.19-5.52, p = 0.0161), and compliance with ERAS protocol < 80% (HR 3.38, 95% CI 2.23-5.21, p = 0.0102) were independent predictors for poor prognosis. Additionally, analysis revealed that adherence to the ERAS protocol in Group 2 with ≥ 80% adherence was associated with a significantly shorter length of hospital stay (6 vs. 4 days, p < 0.0001), a lower rate of postoperative complications (44.7% vs. 23.3%, p < 0.0001), and improved functional recovery parameters: tolerance of oral diet (53.4% vs. 81.5%, p < 0.0001) and mobilization (77.7% vs. 96.1%, p < 0.0001) on the first postoperative day. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This study reports an association between adherence to the ERAS protocol and long-term survival after laparoscopic colorectal resection for non-metastatic cancer. Lower adherence to the protocol, independent from stage of cancer and postoperative complications, was an independent risk factors for poorer survival rates.

Functional outcomes after resections for low rectal tumors: comparison of Transanal with laparoscopic Total Mesorectal excision.

BACKGROUND: Aim of this study was to evaluate functional outcomes of transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) in comparison to conventional laparoscopic approach (LaTME) in terms of low anterior resection syndrome (LARS). METHODS: Forty-six patients who underwent total mesorectal excision for low rectal cancer between 2013 and 2017 were enrolled. Primary outcome was the severity of faecal incontinence, assessed both before the treatment and 6 months after ileostomy reversal. LARS score and Jorge-Wexner scale were utilized to analyze its severity. RESULTS: Twenty (87%) from TaTME and 21 (91%) from LaTME group developed LARS postoperatively. There were no significant differences between groups in terms of LARS occurrence (p = 0.63) and severity. The median Wexner score was comparable in both groups (8 [IQR: 4-12] vs 7 [3-11], p = 0.83). Univariate analysis revealed that postoperative complications were a risk factor for LARS development (p = 0.02). Perioperative outcomes, including operative time, blood loss and intraoperative adverse events did not differ significantly between groups either. Five TaTME patients developed postoperative complications, while there were morbidity 6 cases in LaTME group. Quality of mesorectal excision was comparable with 20 and 19 complete cases in TaTME and LaTME groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: TaTME provided comparable outcomes in terms of functional outcomes in comparison to LaTME for total mesorectal excision in low rectal cancers. Having said that, LARS prevalence is still high and requires further evaluation of the technique.

Laparoscopic treatment of large gastrointestinal stromal tumors (> 5 cm).

INTRODUCTION: Although laparoscopic techniques are currently a recognized type of treatment of small stromal tumors (GISTs) of the stomach, their application in the case of larger tumors has been the subject of debate. AIM: To evaluate the technical feasibility, safety and early results of the laparoscopic treatment of large GISTs with a diameter of more than 5 cm. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed using data on patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery for gastric GIST in the period from 2009 to 2016. The patients selected for the study were divided into two groups based on the diameter of the tumor: patients who developed a tumor with a diameter smaller than or equal to 5 cm (group 1), and those whose tumors exceeded 5 cm in diameter (group 2). The following factors were established and compared for the two groups: duration of surgery, amount of intra-operative blood loss, length of hospital stay, and the number and nature of post-operative complications. RESULTS: No deaths occurred in the 30-day post-operative period, and no statistically significant differences regarding complications in the post-operative period were observed. In group 2, statistically significantly more pronounced blood loss and longer hospital length of stay were observed. No difference in the duration of surgery between the investigated groups was observed. CONCLUSIONS: It appears that the surgical treatment of GISTs with a diameter of more than 5 cm by means of minimally invasive procedures is a viable and safe alternative.

Gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors: clinical features and short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic resection.

INTRODUCTION: Although minimally invasive techniques are currently recognized as effective and validated treatment for small gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs), the role of laparoscopy is not yet established, especially in the institutions that have less experience in minimally invasive surgery. AIM: To evaluate the outcomes of laparoscopic treatment of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors compared to the results obtained in a group of patients treated with conventional surgery. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of data collected for a group of 68 patients treated for gastric GIST in the period from 2002 to 2017 was performed. Forty-six patients were treated laparoscopically (group 1) and 22 patients underwent conventional surgery (group 2). The analyzed medical data included clinical and pathomorphological features of removed tumors, perioperative parameters as well as short and long-term results of surgical treatment. RESULTS: Histopathological examination confirmed radical resection for all patients. No deaths were reported in the 30-day post-operative period. Patients in group 1 had significantly shorter length of hospital stay (3 vs. 9 days), less intra-operative blood loss (25 vs. 175 ml) and fewer perioperative complications (13% vs. 41%) compared to group 2. The mean post-operative follow-up was 57 months. During this period, four patients died for reasons unrelated to the primary disease. None of the patients who underwent a laparoscopic procedure had a recurrence of the tumor in the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopy in the treatment of gastric GISTs has unquestionable advantages, including decreased blood loss, reduced risk of complications, and shorter hospital stay.

Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Bariatric Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy and Laparoscopic Roux-En-Y Gastric Bypass.

BACKGROUND: Few investigations have been conducted that compared blood glucose in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM2) and morbid obesity who had undergone laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) or gastric bypass (LRYGB). We aimed to compare the effects of these procedures using continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). METHODS: We prospectively studied patients that had qualified for LSG or LRYGB. The inclusion criteria were DM2 of ≤ 5 years, for which patients were taking oral anti-diabetic drugs, or no glucose metabolism disorder; and morbid obesity. CGM was performed between admission and the 10th postoperative day. RESULTS: We studied 16 patients with DM2 and 16 without. Eighteen patients underwent LSG and 14 underwent LRYGB. The median hemoglobin A1c was 5.5% (5.4-5.9%) in DM2 patients, which did not differ from control (p = 0.460). Preoperative mean daily glucose concentration was similar between DM2 and control patients (p = 0.622). For patients with DM2, LRYGB was associated with more frequent low glucose status, and these episodes lasted longer than in DM2 patients that underwent LSG (p = 0.035 and 0.049, respectively). DM2 patients that underwent LRYGB demonstrated lower glucose concentrations from third postoperative day than those that underwent LSG. Patients without DM2 did not demonstrate differences in daily mean glucose concentrations, or in incidence nor duration of hypoglycemia throughout the observation period. CONCLUSION: A significantly larger reduction in interstitial glucose concentration is present from third day in patients with DM2 who undergo LRYGB vs. LSG, accompanied by a lower incidence and shorter duration of low glucose episodes.

Patients' opinions on enhanced recovery after surgery perioperative care principles: a questionnaire study.

INTRODUCTION: The enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol relies on patients' compliance and their awareness of its principles. Patients' views on ERAS implementation have never been evaluated in Poland before. AIM: To analyse patients' opinions about this protocol. MATERIAL AND METHODS: One hundred forty consecutive patients undergoing elective laparoscopic procedures in which ERAS was implemented were asked to join the study. Out of them, 120 fulfilled the trial criteria and were surveyed once before and twice after surgery. A 22-question survey about the patient's perception of ERAS principles was presented upon admission and on the day of discharge. A telephone follow-up was performed 2 weeks after discharge. RESULTS: Patients reported the need for being counselled by the anaesthetist/surgeon as the most important element of the protocol. Items such as being free of pain, being free of gastrointestinal symptoms, and being free of catheter were rated more highly preoperatively than on the day of discharge, whereas telephone check-up call, being able to drink and eat early after surgery, avoiding bowel preparation, avoiding preoperative fasting and reducing postoperative intravenous fluids were rated more highly on the day of discharge. Pain was still present in over half of patients two weeks after discharge. Only 4.76% of patients admitted in the telephone survey that they were afraid of early discharge. Shortening of the length of hospital stay thanks to ERAS was widely appreciated among all patients who did not find it necessary to spend a longer time in the hospital. CONCLUSIONS: Polish patients approve the ERAS protocol as modern perioperative care. Patients emphasize the need for preoperative counselling and painless recovery.

Influence of Preoperative Weight Loss on Outcomes of Bariatric Surgery for Patients Under the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol.

INTRODUCTION: The enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol, which emphasizes preoperative interventions, is safely implemented in patients undergoing bariatric surgery. Patients are additionally encouraged to achieve weight loss preoperatively. We aimed to identify factors contributing to preoperative weight loss and assess their influence on outcomes of bariatric surgery among patients under the ERAS protocol. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed a prospectively created database in two bariatric centers with 909 bariatric patients treated in accordance with ERAS principles. The database included demographic characteristics, factors related to the surgery or perioperative period, and short-term outcomes. Our endpoints included analyses of (1) factors potentially contributing to preoperative weight loss and (2) the influence of preoperative weight loss on short-term outcomes of bariatric treatment. RESULTS: Diabetes mellitus (p = 0.007), obstructive sleep apnea (p < 0.001), and previous surgery (p = 0.012) were identified as predictors of preoperative weight loss. Steatohepatitis (p < 0.001) and respiratory disorder (p = 0.004) decreased the chance of achieving satisfactory preoperative body mass reduction. Except for operative time, early outcomes of bariatric surgery were not influenced by preoperative weight loss. Patients who achieved preoperative weight loss were less likely to be lost to follow-up (p = 0.023). Postoperative weight loss was better in patients who could lose ≥ 5% total weight preoperatively (p = 0.009). CONCLUSION: Unsatisfactory preoperative weight loss among patients treated under ERAS principles is not associated with increased risk of complications. Satisfactory preoperative weight loss predicts superior postoperative weight loss and follow-up participation.

The influence of bariatric surgery on serum levels of irisin and nesfatin-1.

Introduction: Bariatric surgery is associated with multiple endocrine and metabolic changes. Irisin and nesfatin-1 have recently been described as regulatory peptides involved in obesity-related insulin resistance. Our aim was to analyze the changes of those two molecules observed in patients after bariatric procedures. Materials and methods: This prospective study involved 40 patients treated for morbid obesity. Irisin and nesfatin-1 were measured before, 6 months and 1 year after surgical intervention. We also gathered demographic data, information concerning comorbidities, factors related to the surgery and outcomes of bariatric treatment. Results: Twenty-seven patients completed the study (15 females). The mean age of the group was 43.5 ± 10.4 years. Six (22.2%) patients were submitted to Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy and 21 (77.8%) patients were submitted to Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass. The participants in our study achieved significant weight loss. The irisin level remained stable in the whole study group during all three measurements included in our study protocol (p = .71). Our study group presented a reduction of the nesfatin-1 level 6 months after bariatric surgery and a slight further decrease after one-year observation, although these changes were also not significant (p = .17). Conclusions: We did not find any significant correlation between changes of irisin or nesfatin-1 level and bariatric surgery, as an aid in the regulation of glucose metabolism.

Early closure of the protective ileostomy after rectal resection should become part of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol: a randomized, prospective, two-center clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Protective loop ileostomy (PLI) is used to reduce the anastomotic leak rate after resection of the rectum. It is an effective, yet burdensome procedure contradicting the aims of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) by slowing down recovery. Early closure (EC) of the PLI has the potential to change the situation, and it should become part of ERAS. AIM: To analyze the effectiveness of EC in ERAS patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A randomized clinical trial was performed between October the 1st, 2016 and December the 31st, 2017. Fifty-eight adult patients (24 females, 34 males, mean age: 55.7 and 56.2) operated on for rectal carcinoma according to the ERAS protocol with PLI were randomly assigned to the late (L) or early (E) closure group (14 days after discharge). Time to start adjuvant chemotherapy, complication rate, and health care costs were analyzed. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between groups regarding the length of surgery (83.2 ±15.9 vs. 87.1 ±21.7 min, in E and L, respectively), intraoperative blood loss (15.2 ±7.5 vs. 17.3 ±11.1 ml, respectively), median hospital stay, or the time to pass flatus and stool. The difference in the time needed to start the adjuvant treatment (38.7 ±5.7 vs. 33.2 ±5.8 days, p < 0.01), was compensated by the reduction of time living with a stoma (17.2 vs. 299.0 days) and health care costs: (43.68 vs. 698.42 USD). CONCLUSIONS: Early closure is a safe and effective therapeutic approach, improving the recovery. Therefore it should be implemented as part of the ERAS protocol for rectal cancer patients.

Is It Possible to Maintain High Compliance with the Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) Protocol?-A Cohort Study of 400 Consecutive Colorectal Cancer Patients.

The aim of our study was to evaluate the implementation and degree of adherence to the Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) protocol in a group of 400 patients operated laparoscopically for colorectal cancer, and to assess its impact on the short-term results. The prospective study included patients with histologically confirmed colorectal cancer undergoing elective laparoscopic resection from years 2012 to 2017. For the purpose of further analysis, patients were divided into four groups: 100 consecutive patients were in each group. There were no statistically significant differences between groups in demographic parameters. The mean compliance with the ERAS protocol in the entire study group was 84.8%. Median adherence differed between the groups 76.9% vs. 92.3% vs. 84.6% vs. 84.6%, respectively (p < 0.0001). There were statistically significant differences between groups in the tolerance of oral diet (54% vs. 83% vs. 83% vs. 64%) and mobilization (74% vs. 92% vs. 91% vs. 94%) on the first postoperative day. In subsequent groups, time to first flatus decreased (2.5 vs. 2.1 vs. 2.0 vs. 1.7 days, p = 0.0001). There were no statistical differences in the postoperative morbidity rate between groups (p = 0.4649). The median length of hospital stay in groups was 5 vs. 4 vs. 4 vs. 4 days, respectively (p = 0.0025). Maintaining high compliance with the ERAS protocol is possible, despite the slight decrease that occurs within a few years after its implementation. This decrease in compliance does not affect short-term results, which are comparable to those shortly after overcoming the learning curve.

Transanal total mesorectal excision for low rectal cancer: a case-matched study comparing TaTME versus standard laparoscopic TME.

BACKGROUND: Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) is emerging as a novel alternative to laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LaTME). The aim of this study was to compare clinical and pathological results from these two techniques in patients undergoing rectal resections because of low rectal cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-five patients undergoing TaTME were matched with 35 patients operated on using LaTME. Composite primary endpoint (complete TME, negative circumferential resection margin [pCRM], and distal resection margin [pDRM]) was used to assess pathological quality specimens. Secondary outcomes included operative and postoperative parameters (operative time, total blood loss, postoperative morbidity, length of stay, 30-day mortality). RESULTS: Composite primary endpoint was achieved by 85% of subjects in the TaTME group and 82% of subjects in the LaTME group (P=0.66). Mean pCRM was 1.1±1.29 vs 0.99±0.78 mm (P=0.25). Distal pDRM was 1.57±0.92 and 1.98±1.22 cm (P=0.15). In the TaTME and LaTME groups, respectively, complete mesorectal excision was achieved in 89% and 83% of subjects, while excision was nearly complete for the remaining 11% and 17% (P=0.23). CONCLUSION: TaTME appears to be a noninferior alternative to laparoscopic surgery. TaTME allows for quality retrieval of surgical specimens with comparable clinical outcomes with LaTME.

Use of inflammatory markers in the early detection of infectious complications after laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery with the ERAS protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Thanks to laparoscopy and enhanced recovery protocols (ERAS) it is possible to shorten hospitalization. Therefore, it seems reasonable to search for new early markers of infectious complications in order to select patients who are prone to development of complications. AIM: To assess the usefulness of serum levels of C-reactive protein, interleukin-6 and procalcitonin as early indicators of infectious complications in patients after laparoscopic colorectal surgery with ERAS. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The prospective analysis included consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection. The following parameters were included in the analysis: C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin 6 (IL-6) and procalcitonin measured on postoperative days (PODs) 1, 2, 3. Patients were divided into two groups: uncomplicated (group 1) and complicated (group 2). The difference in levels of the markers and the dynamics of changes observed in both groups were analyzed. RESULTS: Group 1 comprised 34 patients, and group 2 consisted of 17 patients. A significant increase of both absolute values and delta increments on all postoperative days was noted. ROC curve analysis showed that the best cut-off values indicating an infectious process were: CRP 129 mg/l on POD3 (92% sensitivity/80% specificity), IL-6 of 78 pg/ml on POD2 (91% sensitivity/97% specificity) and PCT 0.24 ng/ml on POD3 (93% sensitivity/68% specificity). CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that regular measurement of all analyzed markers in the early postoperative days may be beneficial in the detection of postoperative infectious complications. Further studies are needed to fully assess the role of routine biochemical measurements in the postoperative period after laparoscopic surgery with the ERAS protocol.

Postoperative complications are associated with worse survival after laparoscopic surgery for non-metastatic colorectal cancer - interim analysis of 3-year overall survival.

INTRODUCTION: Postoperative morbidity after colorectal resections for cancer remains a significant problem. Data on the influence of complications on survival after laparoscopic colorectal resection are still limited. AIM: To analyze the impact of postoperative complications on long-term survival after radical laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two hundred and sixty-five consecutive non-metastatic colorectal cancer patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal resection for cancer were included in the analysis. The entire study group was divided into two subgroups based on the occurrence of postoperative complications. Group 1 included patients without postoperative morbidity and group 2 included patients with complications. The primary outcome was overall survival. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 45 (IQR: 34-55) months. Group 1 consisted of 187 (70.5%) patients and group 2 comprised 78 (29.5%) patients. Studied groups were comparable in terms of sex, age, body mass index, ASA class, cancer staging, localization of the tumor and operative time. Patients in group 1 had significantly better overall 3-year survival compared to those with complications (84.9% vs. 69.8%, p = 0.022). Kaplan-Meier curves showed significantly improved survival rates in patients without complications compared with complicated cases. The Cox proportional multivariate model showed that postoperative complications (HR = 2.83; 95% CI: 1.35-5.92; p = 0.0058) and AJCC III (HR = 3.17; 95% CI: 1.52-6.6; p = 0.0021) were independent predictors of worse survival after laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis of interim results after 3 years confirms that complications after laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery have an impact on survival. For this reason, these patients should be carefully monitored after surgery aiming at early detection of recurrence.