Optimising surgical anastomosis in ileocolic resection for Crohn's disease with respect to recurrence and functionality: two international parallel randomized controlled trials comparing handsewn (END-to-end or Kono-S) to stapled anastomosis (HAND2END and the End2End STUDIES).

BACKGROUND: The most common intestinal operation in Crohn's disease (CD) is an ileocolic resection. Despite optimal surgical and medical management, recurrent disease after surgery is common. Different types of anastomoses with respect to configuration and construction can be made after resection for example, handsewn (end-to-end and Kono-S) and stapled (side-to-side). The various types of anastomoses might affect endoscopic recurrence and its assessment, the functional outcome, and costs. The objective of the present study is to compare the three types of anastomoses with respect to endoscopic recurrence at 6 months, gastrointestinal function, and health care consumption. METHODS: This is a randomized controlled multicentre superiority trial, allocating patients either to side-to-side stapled anastomosis as advised in current guidelines or a handsewn anastomoses (an end-to-end or Kono-S). It is hypothesized that handsewn anastomoses do better than stapled, and end-to-end perform better than the saccular Kono-S. Two international studies with a similar setup will be conducted mainly in the Netherlands (End2End) and Italy (HAND2END). Patients diagnosed with CD, aged over 16 years in the Netherlands and 18 years in Italy requiring (re)resection of the (neo)terminal ileum are eligible. The first part of the study compares the two handsewn anastomoses with the stapled anastomosis. To detect a clinically relevant difference of 25% in endoscopic recurrence, a total of 165 patients will be needed in the Netherlands and 189 patients in Italy. Primary outcome is postoperative endoscopic recurrence (defined as Rutgeerts score ≥ i2b) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes are postoperative morbidity, gastrointestinal function, quality of life (QoL) and costs. DISCUSSION: The research question addresses a knowledge gap within the general practice elucidating which type of anastomosis is superior in terms of endoscopic and clinical recurrence, functionality, QoL and health care consumption. The results of the proposed study might change current practice in contrast to what is advised by the guidelines. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05246917 for HAND2END and NCT05578235 for End2End ( http://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov/ ).

A narrative on diversity, equity, and inclusion in surgery: insights from the European Society of Coloproctology and identification of points for action.

The focus of the 2022 European Society of Coloproctology (ESCP) annual campaign was diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in surgery. The ESCP "Operation Equal Access" campaign sought to interview key-opinion leaders and trainees, to raise awareness on inequalities, inform the community of the status of the topic, and to identify future areas for improvement. The ESCP Social Media Working Group interviewed experts who have made significant contributions to DEI in colorectal surgery and were acknowledged opinion leaders in the field. The interviews focused on their career, professional life, experiences, and opportunities during their training, and their views on DEI in colorectal surgery. DEI principles, education, and values need further promotion to reduce and address bias within the profession and overall improve the experience of minority community including health professionals and patients. International Societies are working to facilitate training opportunities and overcome DEI, and networking have contributed to that. Collaborations between societies will be pivotal to contribute to offering research and leadership opportunities equally. Access to advanced workshops including cadaveric training and simulation can be consistently promoted and provided globally via societies through telemonitoring. Involving patients in research should be encouraged, as it brings the perspective of a living experience.

Crossing barriers: the burden of inflammatory bowel disease across Western Europe.

An estimated 2.5-3 million individuals (0.4%) in Europe are affected by inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Whilst incidence rates for IBD are stabilising across Europe, the prevalence is rising and subsequently resulting in a significant cost to the healthcare system of an estimated 4.6-5.6 billion euros per year. Hospitalisation and surgical resection rates are generally on a downward trend, which is contrary to the rising cost of novel medication. This signifies a large part of healthcare cost and burden. Despite publicly funded healthcare systems in most European countries, there is still wide variation in how patients receive and/or pay for biologic medication. This review will provide an overview and discuss the different healthcare systems within Western Europe and the barriers that affect overall management of a changing IBD landscape, including differences to hospitalisation and surgical rates, access to medication and clinical trial participation and recruitment. This review will also discuss the importance of standardising IBD management to attain high-quality care for all patients with IBD.

Ambulatory laparoscopic colectomies: a systematic review.

AIM: Ambulatory laparoscopic colectomy (ALC), meaning discharge within 24 h of surgical colonic resection, has recently been proposed in a few, selected patients. This systematic review was performed with the aim of reviewing protocols for ALC and assessing feasibility, safety and outcomes after ALC. METHOD: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and pooled analysis was performed searching all English studies published until October 2022 in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science (PROSPERO, CRD42022334463). Inclusion criteria were original articles including patients undergoing ALC, specifying at least one outcome of interest. Exclusion criteria were articles reporting a robotic-assisted procedure; unable to retrieve patient data from articles; the same patient series included in different studies. Primary outcomes were success, overall complications and readmission rates. Secondary outcomes included mortality and specific complications such us surgical site infection, anastomotic leak, ileus, bleeding, rate of ALC acceptance, and unscheduled consultation and reoperation rate. RESULTS: Among 1087 studies imported for screening, 11 were included (1296 patients). The success rate was 47% with an overall morbidity of 14%. Readmission and reoperation rates were 5% and 1%, respectively. No mortality was recorded. Protocols of ALC differ significantly among published studies. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, ALC appears to be safe and feasible in selected cases with an acceptable success rate and a low risk of readmission after hospital discharge. Future studies should evaluate patients' benefits and discharge criteria, as well as uniformity and standardization of eligibility criteria. This systematic review may help inform on ALC adoption in clinical practice.

Definition and reporting of lymphadenectomy and complete mesocolic excision for radical right colectomy: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Several procedures have been proposed to reduce the rates of recurrence in patients with right-sided colon cancer. Different procedures for a radical right colectomy (RRC), including extended D3 lymphadenectomy, complete mesocolic excision and central vascular ligation have been associated with survival benefits by some authors, but results are inconsistent. The aim of this study was to assess the variability in definition and reporting of RRC, which might be responsible for significant differences in outcome evaluation. METHODS: PRISMA-compliant systematic literature review to identify the definitions of RRC. Primary aims were to identify surgical steps and different nomenclature for RRC. Secondary aims were description of heterogeneity and overlap among different RRC techniques. RESULTS: Ninety-nine articles satisfied inclusion criteria. Eight surgical steps were identified and recorded as specific to RRC: Central arterial ligation was described in 100% of the included studies; preservation of mesocolic integrity in 73% and dissection along the SMV plane in 67%. Other surgical steps were inconstantly reported. Six differently named techniques for RRC have been identified. There were 35 definitions for the 6 techniques and 40% of these were used to identify more than one technique. CONCLUSIONS: The only universally adopted surgical step for RRC is central arterial ligation. There is great heterogeneity and consistent overlap among definitions of all RRC techniques. This is likely to jeopardise the interpretation of the outcomes of studies on the topic. Consistent use of definitions and reporting of procedures are needed to obtain reliable conclusions in future trials. PROSPERO CRD42021241650.

The "Phillips" Ileostomy Correction Technique for Prolapsed Stoma.

INTRODUCTION: Stoma prolapse is a common complication associated with ostomy creation, causing leakage, obstruction, and sometimes incarceration. Sometimes ileostomy prolapse cannot be treated with resection and alternative methods must be applied. We propose a new surgical revisional technique for ileostomy prolapse. TECHNIQUE: Under general anesthesia, the prolapsed stoma is dissected and freed from the fascia and skin. The bowel is everted to create a nipple of 2-3 cm and subsequently fixed with a 3-row linear stapler, creating a "Phillips ileostomy." The ileostomy is then sutured to the skin with 3-0 full thickness stitches. RESULTS: In our center, 3 patients were treated in a day surgery setting, and no complication occurred. One patient reported a prolapse recurrence after 6 months and was successfully treated with the same technique with no recurrence at 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: The 3-row stapler fixation of prolapsed ileostomy is simple to perform, preserves the bowel, and can be performed in the day surgery setting.

A Multidisciplinary Approach to Rectal Cancer Treatment in Ulcerative Colitis Results in High Rate of Restorative Minimally Invasive Surgery.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Few recent studies focus on the treatment of rectal cancer in patients with ulcerative colitis. We report treatment options and results for this subset of patients with a multimodal approach at two European referral centres. METHODS: Ulcerative colitis patients diagnosed with rectal cancer arising at less than 15 cm from the anal verge between January 2010 and December 2020 were analysed. Demographics, clinical data, and details of medical and surgical treatment were retrieved from prospectively collected institutional databases. RESULTS: Of 132 patients with ulcerative colitis and concomitant colorectal cancer, rectal cancer was diagnosed in 46. The median time between disease onset and rectal cancer diagnosis was 17.5 years; 21/46 were preoperatively staged as early tumours [cT1-T2/N0]. Eleven patients received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced extraperitoneal adenocarcinoma, and the rest underwent surgery first. Over two-thirds of the procedures were restorative [68%]; a minimally invasive approach was used in 96% of patients, with no conversion to open. The median follow-up was 44 months. Local recurrence occurred in three patients [6%]. The cumulative 3-year cancer-specific survival rate was 94% [and the 3-year disease-free rate was 86%]. CONCLUSIONS: Rectal cancer in ulcerative colitis is a very complex condition. Our results show that surgery for rectal cancer can be delivered with excellent oncological and functional outcomes in patients with ulcerative colitis. A multidisciplinary discussion among surgeons, gastroenterologists, and medical oncologists is key to ensure the appropriate treatment pathway for individual patients.

Long-term Oncological Outcome of Segmental Versus Extended Colectomy for Colorectal Cancer in Crohn's Disease: Results from an International Multicentre Study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Crohn's disease increases colorectal cancer risk, with high prevalence of synchronous and metachronous cancers. Current guidelines for colorectal cancer in Crohn's disease recommend pan-proctocolectomy. The aim of this study was to evaluate oncological outcomes of a less invasive surgical approach. METHODS: This was a retrospective database analysis of Crohn's disease patients with colorectal cancer undergoing surgery at selected European and US tertiary centres. Outcomes of segmental colectomy were compared with those of extended colectomy, total colectomy, and pan-proctocolectomy. Primary outcome was progression-free survival. Secondary outcomes included overall survival, synchronous and metachronous colorectal cancer, and major postoperative complications. RESULTS: Ninety-nine patients were included: 66 patients underwent segmental colectomy and 33 extended colectomy. Segmental colectomy patients were older [p = 0.0429], had less extensive colitis [p = 0.0002] and no preoperatively identified synchronous lesions [p = 0.0109].Median follow-up was 43 [31-62] months. There was no difference in unadjusted progression-free survival [p = 0.2570] or in overall survival [p = 0.4191] between segmental and extended colectomy. Multivariate analysis adjusting for age, sex, ASA score, and AJCC staging, confirmed no difference for progression-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 1.00, p = 0.9993) or overall survival [HR 0.77, p = 0.6654]. Synchronous and metachronous cancers incidence was 9% and 1.5%, respectively. Perioperative mortality was nil and major complications were comparable [7.58% vs 6.06%, p = 0.9998]. CONCLUSIONS: Segmental colectomy seems to offer similar long-term outcomes to more extensive surgery. Incidence of synchronous and metachronous cancers appears much lower than previously described. Further prospective studies are warranted to confirm these results.

Complete mesocolic excision and central vascular ligation in colorectal cancer in the era of minimally invasive surgery.

Since the 19th century, appropriate lymphadenectomy has been considered a cornerstone of oncologic surgery and one of the most important prognostic factors. This approach can be applied to any surgery for gastrointestinal cancer. During surgery for colon and rectal cancer, an adequate portion of the mesentery is removed together with the segment of bowel affected by the disease. The adequate number of lymph nodes to be removed is standardized and reported by several guidelines. It is mandatory to determine the appropriate extent of lymphadenectomy and to balance its oncological benefits with the increased morbidity associated with its execution in cancer patients. Our review focuses on the concept of "complete mesenteric excision (CME) with central vascular ligation (CVL)," a radical lymphadenectomy for colorectal cancer that has gained increasing interest in recent years. The aim of this study was to evaluate the evolution of this approach over the years, its potential oncologic benefits and potential risks, and the improvements offered by laparoscopic techniques. Theoretical advantages of CME are improved local-relapse rates due to complete removal of the intact mesocolic fascia and improved distance recurrence rates due to ligation of vessels at their origin (CVL) which guarantees removal of a larger number of lymph nodes. The development and worldwide diffusion of laparoscopic techniques minimized postoperative trauma in oncologic surgery, providing the same oncologic results as open surgery. This has been widely applied to colorectal cancer surgery; however, CME entails a technical complexity that can limit its wide minimally-invasive application. This review analyzes results of these procedures in terms of oncological outcomes, technical feasibility and complexity, especially within the context of minimally invasive surgery.

Feasibility and outcomes of ERAS protocol in elective cT4 colorectal cancer patients: results from a single-center retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Programs of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery reduces morbidity and shorten recovery in patients undergoing colorectal resections for cancer. Patients presenting with more advanced disease such as T4 cancers are frequently excluded from undergoing ERAS programs due to the difficulty in applying established protocols. The primary aim of this investigation was to evaluate the possibility of applying a validated ERAS protocol in patients undergoing colorectal resection for T4 colon and rectal cancer and to evaluate the short-term outcome. METHODS: Single-center, retrospective cohort study. All patients with a clinical diagnosis of stage T4 colorectal cancer undergoing surgery between November 2016 and January 2020 were treated following the institutional fast track protocol without exclusion. Short-term postoperative outcomes were compared to those of a control group treated with conventional care and that underwent surgical resection for T4 colorectal cancer at the same institution from January 2010 to October 2016. Data from both groups were collected retrospectively from a prospectively maintained database. RESULTS: Eighty-two patients were diagnosed with T4 cancer, 49 patients were included in the ERAS cohort and 33 in the historical conventional care cohort. Both, the mean time of tolerance to solid food diet and postoperative length of stay were significantly shorter in the ERAS group than in the control group (3.14 ± 1.76 vs 4.8 ± 1.52; p < 0.0001 and 6.93 ± 3.76 vs 9.50 ± 4.83; p = 0.0084 respectively). No differences in perioperative complications were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this cohort study from a single-center registry support the thesis that the adoption of the ERAS protocol is effective and applicable in patients with colorectal cancer clinically staged T4, reducing significantly their length of stay and time of tolerance to solid food diet, without affecting surgical postoperative outcomes.

Management of Low Rectal Cancer Complicating Ulcerative Colitis: Proposal of a Treatment Algorithm.

Low rectal Carcinoma arising at the background of Ulcerative Colitis poses significant management challenges to the clinicians. The complex decision-making requires discussion at the multidisciplinary team meeting. The published literature is scarce, and there are significant variations in the management of such patients. We reviewed treatment protocols and operative strategies; with the aim of providing a practical framework for the management of low rectal cancer complicating UC. A practical treatment algorithm is proposed.

Risk of metachronous peritoneal metastases in patients with pT4a versus pT4b colon cancer: An international multicentre cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: With evolving treatment strategies aiming at prevention or early detection of metachronous peritoneal metastases (PM), identification of high-risk colon cancer patients becomes increasingly important. This study aimed to evaluate differences between pT4a (peritoneal penetration) and pT4b (invasion of other organs/structures) subcategories regarding risk of PM and other oncological outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From eight databases deriving from four countries, patients who underwent curative intent treatment for pT4N0-2M0 primary colon cancer were included. Primary outcome was the 5-year metachronous PM rate assessed by Kaplan-Meier analysis. Independent predictors for metachronous PM were identified by Cox regression analysis. Secondary endpoints included 5-year local and distant recurrence rates, and 5-year disease free and overall survival (DFS, OS). RESULTS: In total, 665 patients with pT4a and 187 patients with pT4b colon cancer were included. Median follow-up was 38 months (IQR 23-60). Five-year PM rate was 24.7% and 12.2% for pT4a and pT4b categories, respectively (p = 0.005). Independent predictors for metachronous PM were female sex, right-sided colon cancer, peritumoral abscess, pT4a, pN2, R1 resection, signet ring cell histology and postoperative surgical site infections. Five-year local recurrence rate was 14% in both pT4a and pT4b cancer (p = 0.138). Corresponding five-year distant metastases rates were 35% and 28% (p = 0.138). Five-year DFS and OS were 54% vs. 62% (p = 0.095) and 63% vs. 68% (p = 0.148) for pT4a vs. pT4b categories, respectively. CONCLUSION: Patients with pT4a colon cancer have a higher risk of metachronous PM than pT4b patients. This observation has important implications for early detection and future adjuvant treatment strategies.

Preoperative Immunonutrition vs. Standard Dietary Advice in Normo-Nourished Patients Undergoing Fast-Track Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery.

Immunonutrition (IN) appears to reduce infective complications and in-hospital length of stay (LOS) after major gastrointestinal surgery, but its use in normo-nourished patients is still controversial. The primary aim of this comparative observational study was to evaluate if pre-operative IN reduces in-hospital stay in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal resection for cancer under an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program. The influence of IN on time to first bowel movements, time to full oral diet tolerance, number and type of complications, reasons of prolonged LOS and readmission rate was evaluated as secondary outcome. Patients undergoing ERAS laparoscopic colorectal resection between December 2016 and December 2019 were reviewed. Patients who have received preoperative IN (group A) were compared to those receiving standard dietary advice (group B). Mean in-hospital LOS was significantly shorter in patients receiving preoperative IN than standard dietary advice (4.85 ± 2.25 days vs. 6.06 ± 3.95 days; p < 0.0492). No differences in secondary outcomes were observed. Preoperative IN associated with ERAS protocol in normo-nourished patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection seems to reduce LOS.

Macrophages produce and functionally respond to interleukin-34 in colon cancer.

In colorectal cancer (CRC), macrophages represent a major component of the tumor mass and exert mostly functions promoting tumor cell survival, proliferation, and dissemination. Interleukin-34 (IL-34) is a cytokine overproduced by colon cancer (CRC) cells and supposed to make a valid contribution to the growth and diffusion of CRC cells. The biological functions of IL-34 are mediated by the macrophage colony-stimulating factor receptor (M-CSFR-1), which controls monocyte/macrophage differentiation, growth, and survival. We here investigated whether, in CRC, tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs) express M-CSFR-1 and functionally respond to IL-34. By flow-cytometry analysis of tumor-infiltrating cells (TICs) and lamina propria mononuclear cells (LPMCs) isolated from normal, adjacent mucosa of CRC patients, we showed that CD68/HLA-DRII-expressing TICs and LPMCs expressed M-CSFR-1. Both these cell types produced IL-34 even though the expression of the cytokine was more pronounced in TICs as compared to normal LPMCs. Moreover, in CRC samples, there was a positive correlation between IL-34-producing cells and CD68-positive cells. Stimulation of LPMCs and TICs with IL-34 resulted in enhanced expression of CD163 and CD206, two markers of type II-polarized macrophages, and this was evident at both RNA and protein level. In the same cell cultures, IL-34 stimulated expression and production of IL-6, a cytokine known to promote CRC cell growth and diffusion. Finally, knockdown of IL-34 in TICs with specific antisense oligonucleotides with: a specific antisesne oligonucleotide decreased IL-6 production and the number of TAMs producing this cytokine. This is the first to show a positive role of IL-34 in the control of TAMs in CRC, further supporting the notion that IL-34 sustains colon tumorigenesis.

Screening policies, preventive measures and in-hospital infection of COVID-19 in global surgical practices.

BACKGROUND: In a surgical setting, COVID-19 patients may trigger in-hospital outbreaks and have worse postoperative outcomes. Despite these risks, there have been no consistent statements on surgical guidelines regarding the perioperative screening or management of COVID-19 patients, and we do not have objective global data that describe the current conditions surrounding this issue. This study aimed to clarify the current global surgical practice including COVID-19 screening, preventive measures and in-hospital infection under the COVID-19 pandemic, and to clarify the international gaps on infection control policies among countries worldwide. METHODS: During April 2-8, 2020, a cross-sectional online survey on surgical practice was distributed to surgeons worldwide through international surgical societies, social media and personal contacts. Main outcome and measures included preventive measures and screening policies of COVID-19 in surgical practice and centers' experiences of in-hospital COVID-19 infection. Data were analyzed by country's cumulative deaths number by April 8, 2020 (high risk, >5000; intermediate risk, 100-5000; low risk, <100). RESULTS: A total of 936 centers in 71 countries responded to the survey (high risk, 330 centers; intermediate risk, 242 centers; low risk, 364 centers). In the majority (71.9%) of the centers, local guidelines recommended preoperative testing based on symptoms or suspicious radiologic findings. Universal testing for every surgical patient was recommended in only 18.4% of the centers. In-hospital COVID-19 infection was reported from 31.5% of the centers, with higher rates in higher risk countries (high risk, 53.6%; intermediate risk, 26.4%; low risk, 14.8%; P < 0.001). Of the 295 centers that experienced in-hospital COVID-19 infection, 122 (41.4%) failed to trace it and 58 (19.7%) reported the infection originating from asymptomatic patients/staff members. Higher risk countries adopted more preventive measures including universal testing, routine testing of hospital staff and use of dedicated personal protective equipment in operation theatres, but there were remarkable discrepancies across the countries. CONCLUSIONS: This large international survey captured the global surgical practice under the COVID-19 pandemic and highlighted the insufficient preoperative screening of COVID-19 in the current surgical practice. More intensive screening programs will be necessary particularly in severely affected countries/institutions. STUDY REGISTRATION: Registered in ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04344197.