Two sides of one coin: pan-gastrointestinal Kaposi sarcoma presenting with small bowel intussusception and severe gastrointestinal haemorrhage.

SUMMARY: We report a case of multi-focal pan-gastrointestinal Kaposi sarcoma in an HIV positive patient, presenting with two life-threatening complications of the disease, intestinal obstruction and upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage. The patient responded well to combined surgical and oncological treatment. The reported complications of the disease are regarded as relatively rare events, and this report aims to highlight the need for more intensive screening for Kaposi sarcoma in immune-compromised individuals.

Single-incision laparoscopic reversal of Hartmann's operation through the stoma site: comparative outcomes with conventional laparoscopic and open surgery.

AIM: Restoration of bowel continuity after Hartmann's procedure (RoH) can be challenging and associated with considerable morbidity. A technique using single-incision laparoscopic surgery through the stoma site (SIL RoH) has been shown to be feasible and safe. In this study, we compared clinical outcomes of SIL RoH with conventional laparoscopic surgery (CL) and open surgery (OS). METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database between 2007 and 2017 in a UK colorectal unit. The access technique was decided by the surgeon on a case by case basis. RESULTS: A total of 106 patients underwent RoH. It was carried out for diverticular disease (n = 71, 67.6%), cancer (n = 19, 17.9%) and anastomotic leak (n = 4, 3.8%). The remainder (n = 12, 11.3%) were for miscellaneous reasons including trauma. Most RoHs were performed via OS (n = 87, 81.1%). The most common intended approaches for RoH were SIL (n = 56, 52.8%) and OS (n = 34, 32.1%) with fewer starting with CL (n = 16, 15.1%). Conversion to OS took place in five (8.9%) patients with SIL and six (37.5%) with CL (P = 0.005). Postoperative complications occurred in 17 (30.4%) for SIL, seven (43.8%) for CL and 17 (50.0%) for OS (P = 0.162). Median operating time for SIL was 146 min (range 44-389), 211 min (109-320) for CL and 211 min (85-420) for OS (P < 0.001). Median length of stay was 4 days (2-44) for SIL compared to 6 (3-34) for CL and 7 (4-34) for OS (P < 0.001). Discharge on or before day 5 was achieved in 41 (74.5%) patients for SIL compared to six (37.5%) for CL and seven (20.6%) for OS (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Compared to OS and CL, SIL RoH appears to have shorter operating times and hospitalization, with no discernible difference in morbidity; this finding requires further evaluation in a randomized setting.

Clinical outcomes and inflammatory response to single-incision laparoscopic (SIL) colorectal surgery: a single-blinded randomized controlled pilot study.

AIM: Single-incision laparoscopic (SIL) surgery is expanding, but its benefits, efficacy and safety compared with conventional laparoscopic (CL) surgery remain unclear. This pilot study examined clinical outcomes and biochemical markers of inflammation for colorectal resections by SIL and CL in a randomized controlled pilot trial. METHOD: Fifty patients undergoing elective colorectal resection were randomized to either SIL or CL. Primary outcomes were operating time and length of stay (LoS); secondary outcomes included combined length of scars, pain scores, complications, Quality of Life EQ5D-VAS and the inflammatory markers interleukin-6 (IL-6), IL-8 and C-reactive protein (CRP) at baseline, 2, 6, 24 and 72 h. RESULTS: There was no difference in age, gender, body mass index, indications and site of surgery, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade or incidence of previous surgery between the groups. Except for one conversion from SIL to open surgery, surgery was completed as intended. No difference between SIL and CL was found for operating time [median 130 (72-220) vs 130 (90-317) min, respectively, P = 0.528], LoS [median 4 (3-8) vs 4 (2-19)days, P = 0.888] and time to first flatus [2 (1-4) vs 2 (1-5) days, P = 0.374]. The combined length of scars was significantly shorter for SIL [4 (2-18) vs 7 (5-8) cm, P < 0.001]; in each group, four postoperative complications occurred (16%). Postoperative pain scores were similar [mean 7.67 (interquartile range 4) vs 7.25 (interquartile range 3.75), P = 0.835] to day 3. EQ5D-VAS was no different for both groups at discharge [72.5 (40-90) vs 70 (30-100), P = 0.673] but slightly higher for CL at 3 months [79 (45-100) vs 90 (50-100), P = 0.033].The IL-6, IL-8 and CRP levels between both groups showed similar peaks and no significant differences. CONCLUSION: SIL colorectal surgery by experienced laparoscopic surgeons appears to be safe and equivalent to CL, with no discernible difference in its effect on the physiological response to surgical trauma.

Primary care referral practice, variability and socio-economic deprivation in colorectal cancer.

AIM: The reasons for pre-hospital delay of the diagnosis of cancer are multifactorial, but include a physician-related component. Urgent cancer pathways and direct-to-test approaches have been implemented, but the emergency presentation of colorectal cancer (CRC) remains little changed over recent years. We examined the variability between primary care providers in referral patterns and its effect on outcome. METHOD: A retrospective analysis was performed of a prospectively maintained database for 2009-2014 in a UK district hospital providing bowel cancer screening and tertiary rectal cancer services. RESULTS: Of 1145 CRC patients, 937 (81.8%) were diagnosed with a symptomatic cancer; 229/937 (24.4%) initially presented as an emergency. Between 44 primary care providers, emergency presentation varied between 8.3% and 57.1%. Patients of providers with high levels of emergency presentations (HV) had more advanced cancers than those of providers with medium (MV) or low levels (LV) [103/253 (40.7%), 154/461 (33.4%), 65/223 (29.1%); P = 0.025] and a lower 3-year overall survival (50.2%, 57.8%, 65.6%; P = 0.013), but with no difference in case-mix or deprivation levels. In adjusted analysis, this difference remained significant (advanced disease, OR 1.663, P = 0.011; 3-year hazard ratio 1.479, P = 0.010; comparing HV with LV). Conversely, elective suspected cancer referrals were less often used amongst diagnosed cancers [LV 136/223 (61.0%), MV 228/461 (49.5%), HV 114/253 (45.1%), P < 0.001] with limited evidence for a more selective approach in the use of the 2-week rule amongst all 2-week rule referrals [LV 136/2508 (5.4%); MV 228/4239 (5.4%); HV 115/1526 (7.8%); positive cancer diagnosis, P = 0.005]. CONCLUSION: Significant variability in emergency presentation of CRC requires local audit and examination of the reasons for delay in diagnosis and targeted measures to improve performance in non-emergency referral pathways.

Managing perianal Crohn's fistula in the anti-TNFα era.

Perianal fistulas in Crohn's disease are common and difficult to treat. Their aetiology is poorly understood. Assessment is clinical, endoscopic and radiological, and management is undertaken by a multidisciplinary team of gastroenterologists, surgeons and radiologists. Surgical drainage of the fistula tract system with the placement of loose setons precedes combined therapy with immunosuppressant and anti-TNFα agents in most patients. Proctitis should be rigorously eliminated where possible. Definitive surgical repair is sometimes possible and diversion or proctectomy are occasionally required. Combined medical and surgical management represents a promising avenue for the future.

Intra-arterial methylene blue injection into ex vivo colorectal cancer specimens improves lymph node staging accuracy: a randomized controlled trial.

AIM: A randomized controlled trial was carried out to study the effect of a recently proposed technique of ex vivo intra-arterial methylene blue injection of the surgical specimen removed for colorectal cancer on lymph node harvest and staging. METHOD: Between May 2012 and February 2013, 100 consecutive colorectal cancer resection specimens in a single institution were randomly assigned to intervention (methylene blue injection) and control (standard manual palpation technique) groups before formalin fixation. The specimen was then examined by the histopathologist for lymph nodes. RESULTS: Both groups were similar for age, sex, site of tumour, operation and tumour stage. In the intervention group, a higher number of nodes was found [median 23 (5-92) vs. 15 (5-37), P < 0.001], with only one specimen not achieving the recommended minimum standard of 12 nodes [1/50 (2%) vs. 8/50 (16%), P = 0.014]. However, there was no upstaging effect in the intervention group [23/50 (46.0%) vs. 20/50 (40.0%); P = 0.686]. With a significantly lower number of nodes harvested in rectal cancer, the positive effect of the intervention was particularly observed in the patients who underwent preoperative neoadjuvant radiotherapy [median 30 nodes (12-57) vs. 11 (7-15); P = 0.011; proportion of cases with < 12 nodes 0/5 vs. 5/8 (62.5%), P = 0.024]. CONCLUSION: Ex vivo intra-arterial methylene blue injection increases lymph node yield and can help to reduce the number of cases with a lower-than-recommended number of nodes, particularly in patients with rectal cancer having neoadjuvant treatment. The technique is easy to perform, cheap and saves time.

Comparative study of safety and outcomes of single-port access versus conventional laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

BACKGROUND: Single-port access (SPA) offers cosmetic advantages in addition to the well-recognised benefits of conventional multi-port laparoscopic (CL) surgery, and can be carried out using standard straight instruments. We report the outcomes of our early experience with SPA colorectal resections in comparison with CL surgery. METHODS: We compared the following data, patient characteristics, operating time, morbidity, operative mortality, length of hospital stay and tumour variables, of patients who underwent SPA right, left, sigmoid and total colon resections, as well as high anterior resections and panproctocolectomies, with that of patients who underwent equivalent conventional laparoscopic (CL) operations. The 40 SPA and 78 CL patients studied underwent surgery between February 2008 and September 2011. RESULTS: There was no difference between the SPA and CL operations, as regards the patient's sex (55.0 vs. 62.8% males, p = 0.411), comorbidity (ASA I 10.0 vs. 12.8%; ASA II 57.5 vs. 59.0%; ASA III 32.5 vs. 25.6%; ASA IV 0 vs. 2.6%, p = 0.722) and body mass index (26.2 vs. 28.0 kg/m(2), p = 0.073). However, SPA patients were younger (mean age 54.1 vs. 64.8 years, p = 0.001), and malignancy was a less common indication for surgery (25.0 vs. 71.8%, p < 0.001). There were no conversions to open surgery, and one death occurred in the CL group (1.3%). Mean operating time (162 vs. 170 min, p = 0.547), median post-operative hospital stay (4 vs. 4 days, p = 0.255) and morbidity (7.5 vs. 12.8%, p = 0.538) were comparable. CONCLUSIONS: SPA laparoscopic surgery appears safe in the hands of experienced laparoscopic surgeons, with no increase in operating time, length of stay, morbidity and mortality. Selection of patients with indications for surgery for benign disease may be of importance to ensure an oncologically safe initial uptake of SPA colorectal practice.

Single-port access laparoscopic reversal of Hartmann operation.

BACKGROUND: Single-port access offers cosmetic advantages in addition to the well-recognized benefits of standard multiport laparoscopic surgery, and can be performed with the use of standard straight instruments. We describe a technique of single-port access reversal of Hartmann colostomy by use of the colostomy site for access. METHODS: After routine skin preparation and laparoscopic setup, the colostomy is mobilized from its mucocutaneous border, and the anvil of a circular stapler is secured to the distal lumen. By the use of a GelPoint system with 3 or 4 trocars, the intra-abdominal adhesions are divided and the splenic flexure is mobilized to achieve sufficient access to the abdominal and pelvic cavities and proximal colonic mobility. The rectal stump is mobilized to the mid rectum, starting from the posterior mesorectal fascia around to the anterior rectal wall. A tension-free colorectal anastomosis is secured with a standard circular stapling device inserted transanally, and leak tested. The colostomy wound is closed in standard fashion. RESULTS: Five patients underwent single-port access reversal of Hartmann resection (4 diverticular perforations and 1 pT3N0 colon cancer), with a mean operating time of 155 (range, 137-187) minutes and a median length of stay of 3 (range, 2-11) days. There were no conversions, major surgical morbidity, or deaths. CONCLUSION: Single-port access reversal of Hartmann colostomy through the stoma site is safe, and it offers additional cosmetic advantages with no apparent additional morbidity in comparison with standard multiport surgery.

Impact of deprivation on short- and long-term outcomes after colorectal cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to determine the association between short- and long-term outcomes and deprivation for patients undergoing operative treatment for colorectal cancer in the Northern Region of England. METHODS: This was a retrospective analytical study based on the Northern Region Colorectal Cancer Audit Group database for the period 1998-2002. The Index of Multiple Deprivation 2004, an area-based measure, was recalibrated and used to quantify deprivation. Patients were ranked based on their postcode of residence and grouped into five categories. RESULTS: Of 8159 patients in total, 7352 (90·1 per cent) had surgery; 6953 (94·6 per cent) of the 7352 patients underwent tumour resection and 4935 (67·7 per cent) of 7294 had a margin-negative (R0) resection. Deprivation was not associated with age, sex, tumour site, stage or other tumour-related factors. Compared with the most affluent group, the most deprived patients had fewer elective operations (72·9 versus 76·4 per cent; P = 0·014), more adverse co-morbidity (P < 0·001) and fewer curative resections (65·5 versus 71·2 per cent; P < 0·001). In multivariable analysis, deprivation was not an independent predictor of postoperative death (odds ratio (OR) 0·72, 95 per cent confidence interval 0·48 to 1·06; P = 0·101) but it was a predictor of curative resection (OR 1·24, 1·01 to 1·52; P = 0·042), overall survival (HR 0·83, 0·73 to 0·95; P = 0·006) and relative survival (HR 0·74, 0·58 to 0·95; P = 0·023). CONCLUSION: Deprivation, both independently and by influencing other surgical predictors, impacts on short- and long-term outcomes of patients with colorectal cancer.

Effect of the circumferential resection margin on survival following rectal cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND: The aim was to determine the effect of the circumferential resection margin (CRM) on overall survival following surgical excision of rectal cancer. METHODS: The effect of CRM on survival was examined by case mix-adjusted analysis of patients undergoing potentially curative excision of a rectal cancer between 1998 and 2002. RESULTS: Of 1896 patients, 1561 (82.3 per cent) had recorded data on the CRM. In 232 patients (14.9 per cent) tumour was found 1 mm or less from the CRM. In 370 patients (23.7 per cent) it was over 1 mm but no more than 5 mm from the CRM, and in 288 (18.4 per cent) it was over 5 mm but no more than 10 mm from the CRM. The remaining 671 patients (43.0 per cent) had a CRM exceeding 10 mm. Overall 5-year survival rates for these groups were 43.2, 51.7, 66.6 and 66.0 per cent respectively. Compared with patients with a CRM exceeding 10 mm, the adjusted risk of death was significantly increased for patients with a CRM of 1 mm or less (hazard ratio (HR) 1.61, P < 0.001) and those with a margin greater than 1 mm but no larger than 5 mm (HR 1.35, P = 0.005). There was no added risk for patients with tumour more than 5 mm but 10 mm or less from the CRM (HR 1.02, P = 0.873). The adverse effect of a CRM greater than 1 mm but no larger than 5 mm was found particularly in mid-rectal cancers. CONCLUSION: A predicted CRM of 5 mm or less on preoperative staging should be considered for neoadjuvant treatment.

Impact of surgeon volume on outcomes of rectal cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIM: To clarify the relationship between surgeon caseload and patient outcomes for patients undergoing rectal cancer surgery in order to inform debate about organisation of services. METHODS: We searched Medline and Embase for articles published up to March 2010, and included studies examining surgeon caseload and outcomes in rectal cancer patients treated after 1990. Outcomes considered were 30-day mortality, overall survival, anastomotic leak, local recurrence, permanent stoma and abdominoperineal excision rates. We assessed the risk of bias in included studies and performed random effects meta-analyses based on both unadjusted and casemix adjusted data. RESULTS: Eleven included studies enrolled 18,301 rectal cancer patients undergoing resective surgery. Unadjusted meta-analysis showed a statistically significant benefit in favour of high volume surgeons for 30-day postoperative mortality (OR = 0.57, 95% CI: 0.43-0.77; based on three studies, 4809 patients) and overall survival (HR = 0.76, 95% CI 0.63-0.90; based on two studies, 1376 patients), although the former relationship was attenuated and non-significant when based on two studies (9685 patients) that adjusted for casemix (OR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.59-1.06). Pooling of three studies (2202 patients) showed no significant relationship between surgeon volume and anastomotic leak rate. Permanent stoma formation was less likely for high volume surgeons (adjusted OR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.64 to 0.88; based on two studies, 9685 patients) and APER rates were lower for high volume surgeons (unadjusted OR = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.45 to 0.76); based on six studies, 3921 participants. CONCLUSIONS: This review gives evidence that higher surgeon volume is associated with better overall survival, lower permanent stoma and APER rates.

Volume-outcome analysis of colorectal cancer-related outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Significant associations between caseload and surgical outcomes highlight the conflict between local cancer care and the need for centralization. This study examined the effect of hospital volume on short-term outcomes and survival, adjusting for the effect of surgeon caseload. METHODS: Between 1998 and 2002, 8219 patients with colorectal cancer were identified in a regional population-based audit. Outcomes were assessed using univariable and multivariable analysis to allow case mix adjustment. Surgeons were categorized as low (26 or fewer operations annually), medium (27-40) or high (more than 40) volume. Hospitals were categorized as low (86 or fewer), medium (87-109) or high (more than 109) volume. RESULTS: Some 7411 (90.2 per cent) of 8219 patients underwent surgery with an anastomotic leak rate of 2.9 per cent (162 of 5581), perioperative mortality rate of 8.0 per cent (591 of 7411) and 5-year survival rate of 46.8 per cent. Medium- and high-volume surgeons were associated with significantly better operative mortality (odds ratio (OR) 0.74, P = 0.010 and OR 0.66, P = 0.002 respectively) and survival (hazard ratio (HR) 0.88, P = 0.003 and HR 0.93, P = 0.090 respectively) than low-volume surgeons. Rectal cancer survival was significantly better in high-volume versus low-volume hospitals (HR 0.85, P = 0.036), with no difference between medium- and low-volume hospitals (HR 0.96, P = 0.505). CONCLUSION: This study has confirmed the relevance of minimum volume standards for individual surgeons. Organization of services in high-volume units may improve survival in patients with rectal cancer.

Involvement of surgical trainees in surgery for colorectal cancer and their effect on outcome.

OBJECTIVE: Surgical training in the UK is undergoing substantial changes. This study assessed: 1) the training opportunities available to trainees in operations for colorectal cancer, 2) the effect of colorectal specialization on training, and 3) the effect of consultant supervision on anastomotic complications, postoperative stay, operative mortality and 5-year survival. METHOD: Unadjusted and adjusted comparisons of outcomes were made for unsupervised trainees, supervised trainees and consultants as the primary surgeon in 7411 operated patients included in the Northern Region Colorectal Cancer Audit between 1998 and 2002. RESULTS: Surgery was performed in 656 (8.8%) patients by unsupervised trainees and in 1578 (21.3%) patients by supervised trainees. Unsupervised operations reduced from 182 (12.4%) in 1998 to 82 (6.1%) in 2002 (P < 0.001). Consultants with a colorectal specialist interest were more likely than nonspecialists to be present at surgical resections (OR 1.35, 1.12-1.63, P = 0.001) and to provide supervised training (OR 1.34, 1.17-1.53, P < 0.001). Patients operated on by unsupervised trainees were more often high-risk patients, however, consultant presence was not significantly associated with operative mortality (OR 0.83, 0.63-1.09, P = 0.186) or survival (HR 1.02, 0.92-1.13, P = 0.735) in risk-adjusted analysis. Supervised trainees had a case-mix similar to consultants, with shorter length of hospital stay (11.4 vs 12.4 days, P < 0.001), but similar mortality (OR 0.90, 0.71-1.16, 0.418) and survival (HR 0.96, 0.89-1.05, P = 0.378). CONCLUSION: One third of patients were operated on by trainees, who were more likely to perform supervised resections in colorectal teams. There was no difference in anastomotic leaks rates, operative mortality or survival between unsupervised trainees, supervised trainees and consultants when case-mix adjustment was applied. This study would suggest that there is considerable underused training capacity available.

Impact of surgeon volume and specialization on short-term outcomes in colorectal cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND: Several studies have shown a relationship between surgeon volume and outcomes in colorectal cancer surgery. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of surgeon volume and specialization on primary tumour resection rate, restoration of bowel continuity following rectal cancer resection, anastomotic leakage and perioperative mortality. METHODS: The Northern Region Colorectal Cancer Audit Group conducts a population-based audit of patients with colorectal cancer managed by surgeons. This study examined 8219 patients treated between 1998 and 2002. Outcomes were modelled using multivariate logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Tumour resection was performed in 6949 (93.8 per cent) of 7411 patients. High-volume surgeons with an annual caseload of at least 18.5 (odds ratio (OR) 1.53 (95 per cent confidence interval (c.i.) 1.10 to 2.12); P = 0.012) and colorectal specialists (OR 1.42 (95 per cent c.i. 1.06 to 1.90); P = 0.018) were more likely to perform elective sphincter-saving rectal surgery. In elective surgery, the risk of perioperative death was lower for high-volume surgeons (OR 0.58 (95 per cent c.i. 0.44 to 0.76); P < 0.001), but this was not the case in emergency surgery. CONCLUSION: High-volume surgeons had lower perioperative mortality rates for elective surgery, and were more likely to use restorative rectal procedures.