"Textbook outcome(s)" in colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Textbook outcome (TO) is a composite measure used in surgery to evaluate post operative outcomes. No review has synthesised the evidence in relation to TO regarding the elements surgeons are utilising to inform their TO composite measure and the rates of TO achieved. METHODS: Our systematic review and meta analysis was conducted in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane central registry of controlled trials were searched up to 8th November 2023. Pooled proportions of TO, clinical factors considered and risk factors in relation to TO are reported. RESULTS: Fifteen studies with 301,502 patients were included in our systematic review while fourteen studies comprising of 247,843 patients were included in our meta-analysis. Pooled rates of TO achieved were 55% with a 95% confidence interval (95% CI) of 54-55%. When stratified by elective versus mixed case load, rates were 56% (95% CI 49-62) and 54% (95% CI 50-58), respectively. Studies reported differing definitions of TO. Reported predictors of achieving TO include age, left sided surgery and elective nature. CONCLUSIONS: TO is achieved, on average in 55% of reported cases and it may predict short and long term post operative patient outcomes. This study did not detect a difference in rates between elective versus mixed case load TO proportions. There is no standardised definition in use of TO. Standardisation of the composite is likely required to enable meaning comparison using TO in the future and a Delphi consensus is warranted.

Pre- and post-treatment FDG PET-CT as a predictor of patient outcomes in anal squamous cell carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Anal squamous cell carcinoma (ASCC) has a generally acceptable outlook in terms of survival. 18-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography/computer tomography (FDG PET-CT) is not recommended for routine monitoring post-ASCC treatment. We examine herein if FDG PET-CT has a use in the prognostic evaluation of patients with ASCC, what FDG PET-CT metrics are of value and if a pre- or post-chemo/radiotherapy scan is more prognostic of outcomes. PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials were comprehensively searched until 3 May, 2023. A modified Newcastle Ottawa scale was used to assess for study bias. We present our systematic review alongside pooled hazard ratios (HR) for maximum standardised uptake values (SUV) as a predictor of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Seven studies including 523 patients were included in our systematic review. Current evidence suggests that SUV maximum and median, metabolic tumour volume, total lesion glycolysis and complete and partial metabolic response may be prognostic when considering overall or progression-free survival (OS)/(PFS) along with local recurrence (LR). Pooled HR from two included studies indicate SUV max is prognostic of OS, HR 1.179, CI (1.039-1.338), P = 0.011 and PFS 1.176, CI (1.076-1.285), P < 0.01. FDG PET-CT may have a role to play in the prognostic evaluation of ASCC patients. Current evidence suggests post-treatment scanning may hold superior prognostic value at this time.

Enhanced recovery after surgery protocols and emergency surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: This systematic review and meta-analysis seeks to assess the modified protocols used and patient outcomes when enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols are utilized in an emergency setting. METHODS: PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials were comprehensively searched until 13 March 2023. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool was used to assess for bias, along with funnel plot asymmetry. We present log risk ratios for dichotomous variables and raw mean differences for continuous variables. RESULTS: Seven randomized trials were included, comprising 573 patients. Results of the primary outcomes when comparing ERAS to standard care are as follows; withdrawal of nasogastric tube (raw mean difference -1.87 CI: -2.386 to -1.359), time to first liquid diet (raw mean difference -2.56 CI: -3.435 to -1.669), time to first solid diet (raw mean difference -2.35 CI: -2.933 to -1.76), time to first flatus (raw mean difference -2.73 CI: -5.726 to 0.257), time to first stool passed (raw mean difference -1.83 CI: -2.307 to -1.349), time to removal of drains (raw mean difference -3.23 CI: -3.609 to -2.852), time to removal of urinary catheter (raw mean difference -1.57 CI: -3.472 to 0.334), mean pain score (raw mean difference -1.79 CI: -2.222 to -1.351) and length of hospital stay (raw mean difference -3.16 CI: -3.688 to -2.63). CONCLUSIONS: The adoption of ERAS protocols in an emergency surgery setting was observed to enhance patient recovery, while not indicating any statistically significant increase in adverse outcomes.