Does crural repair with biosynthetic mesh improve outcomes of revisional surgery for recurrent hiatal hernia?

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic revisional surgery for recurrent hiatal hernia (HH) is technically demanding. Re-recurrences are common and esophageal hiatus mesh reinforcement might improve durability of the repair, thus minimizing the risk of re-herniation. PURPOSE: Assess safety and effectiveness of simple suture repair (no mesh group) vs. crural augmentation with a biosynthetic absorbable mesh (mesh group) in patients with recurrent HH. METHODS: Observational retrospective study from September 2012 to December 2022. Only patients undergoing redo surgery for previous failures of hiatal hernia repair were enrolled. Surgical failure was defined as symptomatic recurrent HH with > 2 cm of gastric tissue above the diaphragmatic impression at upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and/or swallow study. Gastro-Esophageal Reflux Disease Health-Related Quality of Life (GERD-HRQL) and Short Form-36 (SF-36) questionnaires were used to assess and preoperative and postoperative symptoms and quality of life. RESULTS: One hundred four patients were included. Overall, 60 patients (57.7%) underwent mesh-reinforced cruroplasty, whereas 44 (42.3%) underwent simple suture cruroplasty. Mesh and no mesh groups had similar baseline demographics, symptoms, prevalence of esophagitis and Barrett's esophagus, and HH size. A composite crural repair was most commonly performed in the mesh group (38.3% vs. 20.5%; p = 0.07). In addition to cruroplasty, most patients (91%) underwent a Toupet fundoplication. The 90-day postoperative complication rate was 8.6%, and there was no mortality. Recurrent HH was diagnosed in 21 patients (20.2%) with a clinical trend toward reduced incidence in the mesh group (16.7% vs. 25%; p = 0.06). Compared to baseline, there was a statistically significant improvement of median GERD-HRQL score (p < 0.01) and all SF-36 items (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic revisional surgery for recurrent HH is safe and effective. Selective use of biosynthetic mesh may protect from early recurrence and has the potential to reduce re-herniation in the long-term.

Prophylactic surgery plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC CO2) versus standard surgery for gastric carcinoma at high risk of peritoneal carcinomatosis: short and long-term outcomes (GOETH STUDY)-a collaborative randomized controlled trial by ACOI, FONDAZIONE AIOM, SIC, SICE, and SICO.

INTRODUCTION: At the time of diagnosis, 15-20% of gastric carcinomas are in stage T4 or T4b. Furthermore, 5-20% of patients undergoing potentially curative surgery suffer from synchronous or metachronous peritoneal metastases. To date, neither surgery nor systemic chemotherapy successfully controls peritoneal dissemination, offering a limited impact on survival. Peritoneal metastases are in fact responsible for death in around 60% of gastric cancer patients. Several Eastern studies in the past have focused on hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) as a prophylactic measure in patients with serosal extension, nodal involvement, and positive peritoneal fluid cytology. Therefore, a new multimodal therapeutic strategy based on aggressive surgery plus new locoregional treatment may prolong survival in this particular clinical scenario. METHODS: This study compares the efficacy of prophylactic surgery (radical gastric resection, appendectomy, resection of the round ligament of the liver, and bilateral adnexectomy) plus hybrid CO2 HIPEC system versus standard surgery in patients with T3-T4 N0-N + gastric adenocarcinoma. Patients will be randomly assigned (1:1 ratio) to the experimental arm or standard surgery. The primary endpoint is to establish the difference in disease-free survival between the groups. The secondary objective is to compare the safety and tolerability of prophylactic surgery plus HIPEC CO2 versus standard surgery. DISCUSSION: Considering the poor prognosis of patients with peritoneal dissemination from gastric cancer, a prophylactic strategy to prevent peritoneal metastases may be beneficial. In patients with gastric cancer at high risk of peritoneal carcinomatosis, we propose aggressive surgical treatment with radical gastrectomy, removal of organs at risk of harbouring tumour cells, and HIPEC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03917173. Registered on 16 April 2019. PROTOCOL VERSION: v1, March 27, 2019. Protocol number: IRFMN-GCC-7813. EudraCT number: 2019-001478-27.

Fit-for-Discharge Criteria after Esophagectomy: An International Expert Delphi Consensus.

There are no internationally recognized criteria available to determine preparedness for hospital discharge after esophagectomy. This study aims to achieve international consensus using Delphi methodology. The expert panel consisted of 40 esophageal surgeons spanning 16 countries and 4 continents. During a 3-round, web-based Delphi process, experts voted for discharge criteria using 5-point Likert scales. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Consensus was reached if agreement was ≥75% in round 3. Consensus was achieved for the following basic criteria: nutritional requirements are met by oral intake of at least liquids with optional supplementary nutrition via jejunal feeding tube. The patient should have passed flatus and does not require oxygen during mobilization or at rest. Central venous catheters should be removed. Adequate analgesia at rest and during mobilization is achieved using both oral opioid and non-opioid analgesics. All vital signs should be normal unless abnormal preoperatively. Inflammatory parameters should be trending down and close to normal (leucocyte count ≤12G/l and C-reactive protein ≤80 mg/dl). This multinational Delphi survey represents the first expert-led process for consensus criteria to determine 'fit-for-discharge' status after esophagectomy. Results of this Delphi survey may be applied to clinical outcomes research as an objective measure of short-term recovery. Furthermore, standardized endpoints identified through this process may be used in clinical practice to guide decisions regarding patient discharge and may help to reduce the risk of premature discharge or prolonged admission.

Impact of spleen-preserving total gastrectomy on postoperative infectious complications and 5-year overall survival: systematic review and meta-analysis of contemporary randomized clinical trials.

Background: The role of splenectomy in proximal gastric cancer is still debated. The objective of the present meta-analysis was to provide more-robust evidence about the effect of spleen-preserving total gastrectomy on postoperative infectious complications, overall morbidity, and 5-year overall survival (os). Methods: PubMed, embase, and the Web of Science were consulted. Pooled effect measures were calculated using an inverse-variance weighted or Mantel-Haenszel in random effects meta-analysis. Heterogeneity was evaluated using I2 index and Cochran Q-test. Results: Three randomized controlled trials published between 2000 and 2018 were included. Overall, 451 patients (50.1%) underwent open total gastrectomy with spleen preservation and 448 (49.9%) underwent open total gastrectomy with splenectomy. The patients ranged in age from 24 to 78 years. No differences were found in the number of harvested lymph nodes (p = 0.317), the reoperation rate (p = 0.871), or hospital length of stay (p = 0.347). The estimated pooled risk ratios for infectious complications, overall morbidity, and mortality were 1.53 [95% confidence interval (ci): 1.09 to 2.14; p = 0.016], 1.51 (95% ci: 1.11 to 2.05; p = 0.008), and 1.23 (95% ci: 0.40 to 3.71; p = 0.719) respectively. The estimated pooled hazard ratio for 5-year os was 1.06 (95% ci: 0.78 to 1.45; p = 0.707). Conclusions: Spleen-preserving total gastrectomy should be considered in patients with curable gastric cancer because it is significantly associated with decreased postoperative infectious complications and overall morbidity, with no difference in the 5-year os. Those observations appear worthwhile for establishing better evidence-based treatment for gastric cancer.

Quality of life following ostomy reversal with purse-string vs linear skin closure: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The importance of the defunctioning stoma on minimizing anastomotic leak in colorectal surgery is well established. However, a defunctioning stoma can substantially impact on quality of life (QoL). Circumferential purse-string approximation (PSA) and linear skin closure (LSC) are the most commonly performed surgical technique for reversal of stoma. The aim of this review was to systemically review and meta-analyze available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PSA and LSC. METHODS: An electronic systematic search using MEDLINE databases (PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science) of RCTs comparing PSA and LSC was performed. Eight RCTs totalling 647 patients met the inclusion criteria and were included in this meta-analysis. RESULTS: Patient's satisfaction is significantly lower in PSA group during the first postoperative week, but it sharply improves afterwards and no difference were noted at 1 and 6 months between the two groups. Relative risk (RR) of developing a SSI is significantly lower in PSA compared to LSC group (RR 0.16 95% CI 0.09; 0.30; p = 0.0001), whereas incisional hernia (RR 0.53 95% CI 0.08; 3.53; p = 0.512), operative time (MD - 0.06 95% CI - 0.30; 0.17; p = 0.593), and hospital stay (MD - 0.09 (95% CI - 0.29-0.11; p = 0.401) remain similar. DISCUSSION: QoL was similar in both patients groups after the first postoperative week. PSA significantly reduced SSI rate. No difference was observed in incisional hernia rate, operative time, or length of hospital stay.

Comparison of endoscopic vacuum therapy versus endoscopic stenting for esophageal leaks: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Esophageal leaks remain a life-threatening postoperative complication of esophagectomy. Currently, self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) represent the endoscopic mainstay of treatment. Recently, endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) has emerged and shown promising results in these patients. We conducted an electronic systematic search using MEDLINE databases (PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science) looking for studies comparing EVT and SEMS for the treatment of esophageal leak and/or perforation. Four studies including 163 patients matched the inclusion criteria. Esophageal leak closure rate is significantly higher with EVT than SEMS [pooled odds ratio 5.51 (95% CI 2.11-14.88; P < 0.001)]. Additionally, EVT has a shorter treatment duration [pooled mean difference -9.0 days (95% CI 16.6-1.4; P = 0.021)], lower major complication (P = 0.011), and in-hospital mortality (P = 0.002) rate compared to SEMS. EVT for esophageal leak is feasible and safe. It has the potential to become the new gold standard in the endoscopic treatment of esophageal leaks and perforations. However, further comparative studies with SEMS are needed to strengthen the current evidence.

Esophagectomy in patients with liver cirrhosis: a systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with esophageal carcinoma and concomitant liver cirrhosis carry a high operative risk and may be denied esophagectomy. We performed a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis to investigate postoperative outcomes in these patients. METHODS: Studies reporting outcomes after esophagectomy in patients with liver cirrhosis were searched in Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, ISI Web of Science, and Scopus until June 2017, matching the terms "liver cirrhosis", "esophageal neoplasm" and/or "esophageal surgery". Extracted data included study characteristics, demographic and clinical patient characteristics, type of surgical procedure, and postoperative outcomes. A systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis were performed. RESULTS: Five observational, retrospective and single-arm studies with a total of 157 patients were included. The main cause of death was liver failure followed by pneumonia/sepsis and anastomotic leak. Ascites and pleural effusion were the most frequent postoperative complications (pooled rates 36% and 34%, respectively). The pooled morbidity rate was 74% (95% HPD=46-81%) while the pooled mortality was 18% (95% HPD=17-27%). Study heterogeneity (τ2) was low, ranging from 0.046 to 0.080. An incidental diagnosis of liver cirrhosis was reported in 15.6% of patients in one series. Five-year survival was similar between cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic patients but was statistically significantly higher in patients with MELD score<10. CONCLUSIONS: Sound scientific evidence with regard to efficacy and outcomes of esophagectomy in patients with concomitant liver cirrhosis is lacking. There is a need to properly select these frail patients to reduce postoperative morbidity and mortality rates.

Perforated esophageal intervention focus (PERF) study: a multi-center examination of contemporary treatment.

The treatment of esophageal perforation (EP) remains a significant clinical challenge. While a number of investigators have previously documented efficient approaches, these were mostly single-center experiences reported prior to the introduction of newer technologies: specifically endoluminal stents. This study was designed to document contemporary practice in the diagnosis and management of EP at multiple institutions around the world and includes early clinical outcomes. A five-year (2009-2013) multicenter retrospective review of management and outcomes for patients with thoracic or abdominal esophageal perforation was conducted. Demographics, etiology, diagnostic modalities, treatments, subsequent early outcomes as well as morbidity and mortality were captured and analyzed. During the study period, 199 patients from 10 centers in the United States, Canada, and Europe were identified. Mechanisms of perforation included Boerhaave syndrome (60, 30.1%), iatrogenic injury (65, 32.6%), and penetrating trauma (25, 12.6%). Perforation was isolated to the thoracic segment alone in 124 (62.3%), with 62 (31.2%) involving the thoracoabdominal esophagus. Mean perforation length was 2.5 cm. Observation was selected as initial management in 65 (32.7%), with only two failures. Direct operative intervention was initial management in 65 patients (32.6%), while 29 (14.6%) underwent esophageal stent coverage. Compared to operative intervention, esophageal stent patients were significantly more likely to be older (61.3 vs. 48.3 years old, P < 0.001) and have sustained iatrogenic mechanisms of esophageal perforation (48.3% vs.15.4%). Secondary intervention requirement for patients with perforation was 33.7% overall (66). Complications included sepsis (56, 28.1%), pneumonia (34, 17.1%) and multi-organ failure (23, 11.6%). Overall mortality was 15.1% (30). In contemporary practice, diagnostic and management approaches to esophageal perforation vary widely. Despite the introduction of endoluminal strategies, it continues to carry a high risk of mortality, morbidity, and need for secondary intervention. A concerted multi-institutional, prospectively collected database is ideal for further investigation.

Crura augmentation with Bio-A® mesh for laparoscopic repair of hiatal hernia: single-institution experience with 100 consecutive patients.

BACKGROUND: The potential utility of both non-absorbable and absorbable meshes to reinforce the esophageal hiatus and prevent recurrent hernia has been investigated in observational studies and a few randomized clinical trials. Use of absorbable mesh has been associated with lesser side-effects, but the long-term safety and effectiveness are still debated. This rather scanty clinical evidence is due to heterogeneity and bias regarding the type of mesh and operation used, the modalities of follow-up, and the reporting of objective results. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to assess safety, quality of life, and recurrence-free probability after laparoscopic repair of hiatal hernia reinforced with a synthetic absorbable mesh. METHODS: Observational, retrospective, single-center cohort study. All patients with hiatal hernia who underwent laparoscopic crura repair using a biosynthetic mesh (Gore Bio A® tissue reinforcement, Flagstaff, AZ) were included. Pre- and post-operative symptoms were assessed with the GERD-HRQL questionnaire. Objective follow-up consisted of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and barium swallow study. RESULTS: From September 2011 to March 2016, a total of 100 patients underwent hiatal hernia repair using a Bio-A® mesh. All surgical procedures were completed laparoscopically. Postoperative morbidity rate was 10%. All patients had a minimum follow-up of 6 months, and the median follow-up was 30 (IQR = 22) months. No mesh-related complications occurred. The incidence of recurrent hernia ≥2 cm was 9%, and eight of the nine patients had a preoperative type III hernia. The median GERD-HRQL score was significantly reduced after operation (p < 0.001). The recurrence-free probability at 1 and 5 years was, respectively, 0.99 (CI 0.97-1.00) and 0.84 (CI 0.74-0.97), and no reoperation was required. No association was found between age, BMI, hernia size, previously failed surgical repairs and hernia recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a synthetic absorbable mesh to reinforce the esophageal hiatus is safe and appears to be effective and durable over a medium-term follow-up.

A systematic review examining quality of life following pelvic exenteration for locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer.

AIM: Pelvic exenteration is a complex surgical procedure associated with considerable morbidity. Quality of life (QoL) is a crucial metric of surgical outcome. The aim of this review was to assess the QoL following pelvic exenteration for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) and local recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC). METHOD: A comprehensive search of studies published between 2000 and 2016 that examined QoL outcome following pelvic exenteration was performed. Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Colorectal (FACT-C), SF-36 version 2, European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30, and Brief Pain Inventory assessments from these studies were reviewed. RESULTS: Seven studies reporting on 382 patients were included. Baseline QoL was the strongest predictor of postoperative QoL. Female gender, total pelvic exenteration with or without bone resection, and positive surgical margins were associated with a reduced QoL. In the majority of patients, QoL gradually improved between 2 and 9 months post-operation. CONCLUSION: QoL is an important patient-reported outcome. This review highlights factors associated with reduced postoperative QoL that should be borne in mind when surgical resection is being considered.

Erratum to: 2016 WSES guidelines on acute calculous cholecystitis.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1186/s13017-016-0082-5.].

2016 WSES guidelines on acute calculous cholecystitis.

Acute calculus cholecystitis is a very common disease with several area of uncertainty. The World Society of Emergency Surgery developed extensive guidelines in order to cover grey areas. The diagnostic criteria, the antimicrobial therapy, the evaluation of associated common bile duct stones, the identification of "high risk" patients, the surgical timing, the type of surgery, and the alternatives to surgery are discussed. Moreover the algorithm is proposed: as soon as diagnosis is made and after the evaluation of choledocholitiasis risk, laparoscopic cholecystectomy should be offered to all patients exception of those with high risk of morbidity or mortality. These Guidelines must be considered as an adjunctive tool for decision but they are not substitute of the clinical judgement for the individual patient.

Laparoscopic alternatives to fundoplication for gastroesophageal reflux: the role of magnetic augmentation and electrical stimulation of the lower esophageal sphincter.

Reflux symptoms are very common, and despite modern medication they are a major cause of disease burden and loss of quality of life worldwide. Laparoscopic anti-reflux surgery is the only current effective alternative but suffers from the risks of long-term side effects. Surgery also suffers variation in standards and outcomes. Magnetic augmentation and electrical stimulation of the lower esophageal sphincter represent promising innovative procedures in the field.

Quality of Life and Late Complications After Minimally Invasive Compared to Open Esophagectomy: Results of a Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: The minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is widely being implemented for esophageal cancer in order to reduce morbidity and improve quality of life. Non-randomized studies investigating the mid-term quality of life after MIE show conflicting results at 1-year follow-up. Therefore, the aim of this study is to determine whether MIE has a continuing better mid-term 1-year quality of life than open esophagectomy (OE) indicating both a faster recovery and less procedure-related symptoms. METHODS: A one-year follow-up analysis of the quality of life was conducted for patients participating in the randomized trial in which MIE was compared with OE. Late complications as symptomatic stenosis of anastomosis are also reported. RESULTS: Quality of life at 1 year was better in the MIE group than in the OE group for the physical component summary SF36 [50 (6; 48-53) versus 45 (9; 42-48) p .003]; global health C30 [79 (10; 76-83) versus 67 (21; 60-75) p .004]; and pain OES18 module [6 (9; 2-8) versus 16 (16; 10-22) p .001], respectively. Twenty six patients (44%) in the MIE and 22 patients (39%) in the OE group were diagnosed and treated for symptomatic stenosis of the anastomosis. CONCLUSIONS: This first randomized trial shows that MIE is associated with a better mid-term one-year quality of life compared to OE.

Treatment of esophageal perforation in octogenarians: a multicenter study.

Esophageal perforation is associated with significant mortality, and this may markedly increase with advanced age. This multicenter study investigates this issue in patients older than 80 years. Data on 33 patients >80 years old who underwent conservative (10 patients), endoclip (one patient), stent grafting (11 patients), or surgical treatment (11 patients) for esophageal perforation were collected from nine centers. Surgical repair consisted of repair on drain in one patient, primary repair in seven patients, and esophagectomy in two patients. Among patients who underwent stent grafting, one required repeat stenting and another stent graft repositioning. One patient was converted to surgical repair after stent grafting. Thirteen patients (39.4%) died during the 30-day and/or in-hospital stay. Their mortality was significantly higher than in a series of patients<80 years old (13.0%, 21/161 patients, P=0.001). Three patients (30.0%) died after conservative treatment, one (100%) after treatment with endoclips, five (45.5%) after stent grafting, and four (36.4%) after surgical repair (P=0.548). Early survival with salvaged esophagus was 42.4% (conservative treatment: 70.0% endoclips 0%, stent grafting: 54.5%, and surgical repair: 54.5%, respectively, P=0.558). Estimated glomerular filtration rate<60 mL/minute/1.73 m2 (70.0% vs. 25.0%, P=0.043) and sepsis (100% vs. 32.1%, P=0.049) at presentation were associated with increased risk of early mortality in univariate analysis. Esophageal perforation in octogenarians is associated with very high early and intermediate high mortality irrespective of the treatment method used.