Abdominal drainage after elective colorectal surgery: propensity score-matched retrospective analysis of an Italian cohort.

BACKGROUND: In Italy, surgeons continue to drain the abdominal cavity in more than 50 per cent of patients after colorectal resection. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of abdominal drain placement on early adverse events in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery. METHODS: A database was retrospectively analysed through a 1:1 propensity score-matching model including 21 covariates. The primary endpoint was the postoperative duration of stay, and the secondary endpoints were surgical site infections, infectious morbidity rate defined as surgical site infections plus pulmonary infections plus urinary infections, anastomotic leakage, overall morbidity rate, major morbidity rate, reoperation and mortality rates. The results of multiple logistic regression analyses were presented as odds ratios (OR) and 95 per cent c.i. RESULTS: A total of 6157 patients were analysed to produce two well-balanced groups of 1802 patients: group (A), no abdominal drain(s) and group (B), abdominal drain(s). Group A versus group B showed a significantly lower risk of postoperative duration of stay >6 days (OR 0.60; 95 per cent c.i. 0.51-0.70; P < 0.001). A mean postoperative duration of stay difference of 0.86 days was detected between groups. No difference was recorded between the two groups for all the other endpoints. CONCLUSION: This study confirms that placement of abdominal drain(s) after elective colorectal surgery is associated with a non-clinically significant longer (0.86 days) postoperative duration of stay but has no impact on any other secondary outcomes, confirming that abdominal drains should not be used routinely in colorectal surgery.

Impact of formalin fixation on mismatch repair protein evaluation by immunohistochemistry.

Mismatch repair/microsatellite instability (MMR/MSI) status in colorectal cancer (CRC) has become fundamental as a diagnostic, prognostic, and predictive factor. MMR immunohistochemistry (IHC) is considered a simple and reliable approach; however, its effectiveness depends on pre-analytic factors. Aim of this study was to investigate the impact of different fixation times/protocols on MMR protein IHC quality. Left over tissue from surgically resected CRC samples (cold ischemia time < 30 min) where fixed as follows: standard formalin fixation (24-48 h); hypo-fixation (<20 h); hyper-fixation (>90 h); cold (4°C) fixation (24-48 h); standard fixation for small sample size (0.5×0.5 cm). Samples for each group were collected from 30 resected CRC and the following parameters were evaluated on 600 immunohistochemical stains: intensity of expression; patchiness of staining; presence of central artefact. Forty-six immunoreactions were inadequate (score 0 intensity), the majority regarding MLH1 or PMS2 in the hypo-fixation group (47.8%), followed by the hyper-fixation group (28.1%); cold formalin fixation showed the least inadequate cases. Patchiness and central artefact were more frequent in hypo-fixation and standard fixation group compared to the others. MLH1 (closely followed by PMS2) performed worse with regard to immunostaining intensity (p=0.0002) in the standard and in the hypo-fixation group (p< 0.00001). Using a small sample size improved patchiness/central artefacts. This is the first study specifically created to evaluate the impact of fixation on MMR protein IHC, showing that both formalin hypo- and hyper-fixation can cause problems; 24-h formalin fixation as well as cold (4°C) formalin fixation are recommended for successful IHC MMR evaluation.

The experience of the COMRE group (REctal COMmittee): can magnetic resonance imaging and endosonography really help the clinical pathway after NCRT in rectal cancer?

BACKGROUND: MRI and rectal endosonography (EUS) are routinely used for preoperative tumor staging and assessment of response to therapy in patients with rectal cancer. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of the two techniques in predicting the pathological response compared to the resected specimen and the agreement between MRI and EUS and to define the factors that could affect the ability of EUS and MRI to predict pathological responses. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study included 151 adult patients with middle or low rectal adenocarcinoma treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, followed by curative intent elective surgery in the Oncologic Surgical Unit of a hospital in the north of Italy between January 2010 and November 2020. All patients underwent MRI and rectal EUS. RESULTS: The accuracy of EUS to evaluate the T stage was 67.48%, and for the N stage was 75.61%; the accuracy of MRI to evaluate the T stage was 75.97%, and that for the N stage was 51.94%. The agreement in detecting the T stage between EUS and MRI was 65.14% with a Cohen's kappa of 0.4070 and that for the evaluation of the lymph nodes between EUS and MRI was 47.71% with a Cohen's kappa of 0.2680. Risk factors that affect the ability of each method to predict pathological response were also investigated using logistic regression. CONCLUSIONS: EUS and MRI are accurate tools for rectal cancer staging. However, after Radiotherapy - Chemotherapy RT-CT, neither method is reliable for establishing the T stage. EUS seems significantly better than MRI for assessing the N stage. Both methods can be used as complementary tools in the preoperative assessment and management of rectal cancer, but their role in the assessment of residual rectal tumors cannot predict the complete clinical response.

Right Colectomy with Intracorporeal Anastomosis: A European Multicenter Propensity Score Matching Retrospective Study of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Procedures.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of robotic (RRC-IA) versus laparoscopic (LRC-IA) right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis using a propensity score matching (PSM) analysis based on a large European multicentric cohort of patients with nonmetastatic right colon cancer. METHODS: Elective curative-intent RRC-IA and LRC-IA performed between 2014 and 2020 were selected from the MERCY Study Group database. The two PSM-groups were compared for operative and postoperative outcomes, and survival rates. RESULTS: Initially, 596 patients were selected, including 194 RRC-IA and 402 LRC-IA patients. After PSM, 298 patients (149 per group) were compared. There was no statistically significant difference between RRC-IA and LRC-IA in terms of operative time, intraoperative complication rate, conversion to open surgery, postoperative morbidity (19.5% in RRC-IA vs. 26.8% in LRC-IA; p = 0.17), or 5-yr survival (80.5% for RRC-IA and 74.7% for LRC-IA; p = 0.94). R0 resection was obtained in all patients, and > 12 lymph nodes were harvested in 92.3% of patients, without group-related differences. RRC-IA procedures were associated with a significantly higher use of indocyanine green fluorescence than LRC-IA (36.9% vs. 14.1%; OR: 3.56; 95%CI 2.02-6.29; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Within the limitation of the present analyses, there is no statistically significant difference between RRC-IA and LRC-IA performed for right colon cancer in terms of short- and long-term outcomes.

The MIS-COVID-AGICT Study: Trend of Minimally Invasive Surgery for Gastrointestinal Cancer Treatment During the First Waves of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Italy. Subgroup Analysis from the COVID-AGICT Study: COVID-19 and Advanced Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgical Treatment.

Background: A preliminary analysis from the COVID-Advanced Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgical Treatment (AGICT) study showed that the rate of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for elective and urgent procedures did not decrease during the pandemic year. In this article, we aimed to perform a subgroup analysis using data from the COVID-AGICT study to evaluate the trend of MIS during the COVID-19 pandemic period in Italy. Methods: This study was conducted collecting data of MIS patients from the COVID-AGICT database. The primary endpoint was to demonstrate whether the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic scenario reduced MIS for elective treatment of gastrointestinal cancer (GIC) in Italy in 2020. The secondary endpoint was to evaluate the impact of the pandemic period on perioperative outcomes in the MIS group. Results: In the pandemic year, 62% of patients underwent surgery with a minimally invasive approach, compared to 63% in 2019 (P = .23). In 2020, the proportion of patients undergoing elective MIS decreased compared to the previous year (80% versus 82%, P = .04), and the rate of urgent MIS did not differ between the 2 years (31% and 33% in 2019 and 2020 - P = .66). Colorectal cancer was less likely to be treated with MIS approach during 2020 (78% versus 75%, P < .001). Conversely, the rate of MIS pancreatic resection was higher in 2020 (28% versus 22%, P < .002). Conversion to an open approach was lower in 2020 (7.2% versus 9.2% - P = .01). Major postoperative complications were similar in both years (11% versus 11%, P = .9). Conclusion: In conclusion, although MIS for elective treatment of GIC in Italy was reduced during the COVID-19 pandemic period, our study revealed that the overall proportion of MIS (elective and urgent) and postoperative outcomes were comparable to the prepandemic period. ClinicalTrial.gov (NCT04686747).

The COVID - AGICT study: COVID-19 and advanced gastro-intestinal cancer surgical treatment. A multicentric Italian study on the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic impact on gastro-intestinal cancers surgical treatment during the 2020. Analysis of perioperative and short-term oncological outcomes.

BACKGROUND: This Italian multicentric retrospective study aimed to investigate the possible changes in outcomes of patients undergoing surgery for gastrointestinal cancers during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHOD: Our primary endpoint was to determine whether the pandemic scenario increased the rate of patients with colorectal, gastroesophageal, and pancreatic cancers resected at an advanced stage in 2020 compared to 2019. Considering different cancer staging systems, we divided tumors into early stages and advanced stages, using pathological outcomes. Furthermore, to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical outcomes, perioperative data of both 2020 and 2019 were also examined. RESULTS: Overall, a total of 8250 patients, 4370 (53%) and 3880 (47%) were surgically treated during 2019 and 2020 respectively, in 62 Italian surgical Units. In 2020, the rate of patients treated with an advanced pathological stage was not different compared to 2019 (P = 0.25). Nevertheless, the analysis of quarters revealed that in the second half of 2020 the rate of advanced cancer resected, tented to be higher compared with the same months of 2019 (P = 0.05). During the pandemic year 'Charlson Comorbidity Index score of cancer patients (5.38 ± 2.08 vs 5.28 ± 2.22, P = 0.036), neoadjuvant treatments (23.9% vs. 19.5%, P < 0.001), rate of urgent diagnosis (24.2% vs 20.3%, P < 0.001), colorectal cancer urgent resection (9.4% vs. 7.37, P < 0.001), and the rate of positive nodes on the total nodes resected per surgery increased significantly (7 vs 9% - 2.02 ± 4.21 vs 2.39 ± 5.23, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Although the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic did not influence the pathological stage of colorectal, gastroesophageal, and pancreatic cancers at the time of surgery, our study revealed that the pandemic scenario negatively impacted on several perioperative and post-operative outcomes.

SB202190 Predicts BRAF-Activating Mutations in Primary Colorectal Cancer Organoids via Erk1-2 Modulation.

The p38 inhibitor SB202190 is a necessary component of the medium used for normal colorectal mucosa cultures. Sato et al. suggested that the primary activity of SB202190 may be EGFR signaling stabilization, causing an increased phosphorylation of Erk1-2 sustaining organoid proliferation. However, the growth of some colorectal cancer (CRC)-derived organoid cultures is inhibited by this molecule via an unknown mechanism. We biochemically investigated SB202190 activity on a collection of 25 primary human CRC organoids, evaluating EGFR, Akt and Erk1-2 activation using Western blot. We found that Erk1-2 phosphorylation was induced by SB202190 in 20 organoid cultures and inhibited in 5 organoid cultures. A next-generation sequencing (NGS) analysis revealed that the inhibition of p-Erk1-2 signaling corresponded to the cultures with BRAF mutations (with four different hits, one being undescribed), while p-Erk1-2 induction was apparently unrelated to other mutations involving the EGFR pathway (Her2, KRAS and NRAS). We found that SB202190 mirrored the biochemical activity of the BRAF inhibitor Dabrafenib, known to induce the paradoxical activation of p-Erk1-2 signaling in BRAF wild-type cells. SB202190 was a more effective inhibitor of BRAF-mutated organoid growth in the long term than the specific BRAF inhibitors Dabrafenib and PLX8394. Overall, SB202190 can predict BRAF-activating mutations in patient-derived organoids, as well as allowing for the identification of new BRAF variants, preceding and enforcing NGS data.

Conversion to Open Surgery During Minimally Invasive Right Colectomy for Cancer: Results from a Large Multinational European Study.

Background: The risk of conversion to open surgery is inevitably present during any minimally invasive colorectal surgical procedure. Conversions have been associated with adverse postoperative and oncologic outcomes. No previous study has evaluated the specific causes and consequences of conversion during a minimally invasive right colectomy (MIS-RC). Materials and Methods: We analyzed the Minimally invasivE surgery for oncologic Right ColectomY (MERCY) study database including patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic RC because of colon cancer between 2014 and 2020. Descriptive analyses were performed to determine the different reasons for conversion. Uni- and multivariate logistic regressions were run to identify potential variables associated with this outcome. Cox regression analyses were used to evaluate the impact of conversion on tumor recurrence. Results: Over a total of 1574 MIS-RC, 120 (7.6%) were converted to open surgery. The main reasons for conversion were procedural difficulties related to adherences from previous abdominal surgical procedures (39.2%), or owing to large tumor size or infiltration of adjacent structures (26.7%). Only 16.7% of the conversions were caused by intraoperative medical or surgical complications. Converted patients required longer operative times and developed more postoperative complications, both overall (39.2% versus 27.5%; P = .006) and severe ones (13.3% versus 8.3%; P = .061). Male gender (odds ratio [OR] = 1.89 [95% confidence interval: 1.31-2.71]), obesity (OR = 1.99 [1.4-2.83]), prior abdominal surgery (OR = 1.68 [1.19-2.37]), and pT4 cancers (OR = 4.04 [2.86-5.69]) were independently associated with conversion. Conversion to open surgery was not significantly associated with tumor recurrence (hazard ratios = 1.395 [0.724-2.687]). Conclusions: Although conversion to open surgery during MIS-RC for cancer is associated with worsened postoperative outcomes, it seems not to impact on the oncologic prognosis.

Minimally invasive vs. open segmental resection of the splenic flexure for cancer: a nationwide study of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology-Colorectal Cancer Network (SICO-CNN).

BACKGROUND: Evidence on the efficacy of minimally invasive (MI) segmental resection of splenic flexure cancer (SFC) is not available, mostly due to the rarity of this tumor. This study aimed to determine the survival outcomes of MI and open treatment, and to investigate whether MI is noninferior to open procedure regarding short-term outcomes. METHODS: This nationwide retrospective cohort study included all consecutive SFC segmental resections performed in 30 referral centers between 2006 and 2016. The primary endpoint assessing efficacy was the overall survival (OS). The secondary endpoints included cancer-specific mortality (CSM), recurrence rate (RR), short-term clinical outcomes (a composite of Clavien-Dindo > 2 complications and 30-day mortality), and pathological outcomes (a composite of lymph nodes removed ≧12, and proximal and distal free resection margins length ≧ 5 cm). For these composites, a 6% noninferiority margin was chosen based on clinical relevance estimate. RESULTS: A total of 606 patients underwent either an open (208, 34.3%) or a MI (398, 65.7%) SFC segmental resection. At univariable analysis, OS and CSM were improved in the MI group (log-rank test p = 0.004 and Gray's tests p = 0.004, respectively), while recurrences were comparable (Gray's tests p = 0.434). Cox multivariable analysis did not support that OS and CSM were better in the MI group (p = 0.109 and p = 0.163, respectively). Successful pathological outcome, observed in 53.2% of open and 58.3% of MI resections, supported noninferiority (difference 5.1%; 1-sided 95%CI - 4.7% to ∞). Successful short-term clinical outcome was documented in 93.3% of Open and 93.0% of MI procedures, and supported noninferiority as well (difference - 0.3%; 1-sided 95%CI - 5.0% to ∞). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with SFC, the minimally invasive approach met the criterion for noninferiority for postoperative complications and pathological outcomes, and was found to provide results of OS, CSM, and RR comparable to those of open resection.

The Multidisciplinary Approach of Rectal Cancer: The Experience of "COMRE Group" Model.

Background: Total mesorectal excision (TME) is the gold standard to treat locally advanced rectal cancer. This monocentric retrospective study evaluates the results of laparotomic, laparoscopic and robotic surgery in "COMRE GROUP" (REctalCOMmittee). Methods: 327 selected stage I-II-III patients (pts) underwent TME between November 2005 and April 2020 for low or middle rectal cancer; 91 pts underwent open, 200 laparoscopic and 36 robotic TME. Of these, we analyzed the anthropomorphic, intraoperative, anatomopathological parameters and outcome during the follow up. Results: The length of hospital stay was significantly different between robotic TME and the other two groups (8.47 ± 3.54 days robotic vs. 11.93 ± 5.71 laparotomic, p < 0.001; 8.47 ± 3.54 robotic vs. 11.10 ± 7.99 laparoscopic, p < 0.05). The mean number of harvested nodes was higher in the laparotomic group compared to the other two groups (19 ± 9 laparotomic vs. 15 ± 8 laparoscopic, p < 0.001; 19 ± 9 laparotomic vs. 15 ± 7 robotic, p < 0.05). Median follow-up was 52 months (range: 1−169). Overall survival was significantly shorter in the open TME group compared with the laparoscopic one (Chi2 = 13.36, p < 0.001). Conclusions: In the experience of the "COMRE" group, laparoscopic TME for rectal cancer is a better choice than laparotomy in a multidisciplinary context. Robotic TME has a significant difference in terms of hospital stay compared to the other two groups.

HLA-G as a prognostic marker in stage II/III colorectal cancer: not quite there yet.

Identifying innovative molecules involved in the tumor immune escape process could help refine the survival stratification of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. HLA-G, a non-classical HLA molecule, physiologically involved in tolerogenic mechanisms, has recently emerged as a relevant prognostic marker in other tumor types, but ambiguous data are reported in the CRC setting. This study aims to evaluate the HLA-G expression and prognostic potential in a series of stage II/III CRCs. HLA-G expression was evaluated in 100 pT3 CRC cases by means of immunohistochemistry using the 4H84 and MEM-G/2 monoclonal antibodies. We observed heterogeneous expression of HLA-G showing different ranges: 4H84 expression ranged from > 1 to 40%-median 7%; MEM-G/2 expression ranged from 20 to 90%-median 50%. HLA-G positivity (any intensity > 1%) varied according to the antibody employed, identifying: 8 4H84 positive, 34 MEM-G/2 positive, 6 double-positive and 52 negative cases. Correlation with clinico-pathologic data showed a significant association with a poor tumor differentiation in stage III right-sided CRC subgroup (p = 0.043), while no other pathologic variable was significantly associated. Survival analysis revealed a reduced disease-free survival rate (HR 4.304613; p = 0.031) in the subgroup of CRC-related death cases, while no correlations were observed considering the whole series and the overall survival. In conclusion, HLA-G is a promising CRC prognostic marker however much work is still required regarding technical aspects and evaluation of expression.

Impact of operation duration on postoperative outcomes of minimally-invasive right colectomy.

AIM: Operation time (OT) is a key operational factor influencing surgical outcomes. The present study aimed to analyse whether OT impacts on short-term outcomes of minimally-invasive right colectomies by assessing the role of surgical approach (robotic [RRC] or laparoscopic right colectomy [LRC]), and type of ileocolic anastomosis (i.e., intracorporal [IA] or extra-corporal anastomosis [EA]). METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of the Minimally-invasivE surgery for oncological Right ColectomY (MERCY) Study Group database, which included adult patients with nonmetastatic right colon adenocarcinoma operated on by oncological RRC or LRC between January 2014 and December 2020. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used. RESULTS: The study sample was composed of 1549 patients who were divided into three groups according to the OT quartiles: (1) First quartile, <135 min (n = 386); (2) Second and third quartiles, 135-199 min (n = 731); and (3) Fourth quartile ≥200 min (n = 432). The majority (62.7%) were LRC-EA, followed by LRC-IA (24.3%), RRC-IA (11.1%), and RRC-EA (1.9%). Independent predictors of an OT ≥ 200 min included male gender, age, obesity, diabetes, use of indocyanine green fluorescence, and IA confection. An OT ≥ 200 min was significantly associated with an increased risk of postoperative noninfective complications (AOR: 1.56; 95% CI: 1.15-2.13; p = 0.004), whereas the surgical approach and the type of anastomosis had no impact on postoperative morbidity. CONCLUSION: Prolonged OT is independently associated with increased odds of postoperative noninfective complications in oncological minimally-invasive right colectomy.

Efficacy of High-Resolution Preoperative 3D Reconstructions for Lesion Localization in Oncological Colorectal Surgery-First Pilot Study.

When planning an operation, surgeons usually rely on traditional 2D imaging. Moreover, colon neoplastic lesions are not always easy to locate macroscopically, even during surgery. A 3D virtual model may allow surgeons to localize lesions with more precision and to better visualize the anatomy. In this study, we primary analyzed and discussed the clinical impact of using such 3D models in colorectal surgery. This is a monocentric prospective observational pilot study that includes 14 consecutive patients who presented colorectal lesions with indication for surgical therapy. A staging computed tomography (CT)/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan and a colonoscopy were performed on each patient. The information gained from them was provided to obtain a 3D rendering. The 2D images were shown to the surgeon performing the operation, while the 3D reconstructions were shown to a second surgeon. Both of them had to locate the lesion and describe which procedure they would have performed; we then compared their answers with one another and with the intraoperative and histopathological findings. The lesion localizations based on the 3D models were accurate in 100% of cases, in contrast to conventional 2D CT scans, which could not detect the lesion in two patients (in these cases, lesion localization was based on colonoscopy). The 3D model reconstruction allowed an excellent concordance correlation between the estimated and the actual location of the lesion, allowing the surgeon to correctly plan the procedure with excellent results. Larger clinical studies are certainly required.

Effect of Geriatric Comanagement in Older Patients Undergoing Surgery for Gastrointestinal Cancer: A Retrospective, Before-and-After Study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of geriatric comanagement on clinical outcomes of older patients undergoing surgery for gastrointestinal cancer. DESIGN: This was a single-center, nonrandomized, before-and-after study, which compared patient outcomes before and after the implementation of geriatric comanagement in an oncological surgery division. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: The study included patients aged 70 or older, who were treated for a gastrointestinal cancer at the Oncological Surgery Division of the Policlinico San Martino Hospital (Genoa, Italy). Patients from the control group were treated between January 2015 and October 2018, and the patients who received geriatric comanagement during their stay in the surgical ward were treated between November 2018 and December 2019. METHODS: Patients from both groups received a preoperative comprehensive geriatric assessment in the preoperative phase and were followed according to the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery model in the perioperative period. In the geriatric comanagement group, targeted interventions during daily geriatrician-led ward rounds were performed. Inverse probability weighting was used to adjust estimates for potential baseline confounders. RESULTS: A total of 207 patients were included: 107 in the control group and 90 who received geriatric comanagement. Overall, patients from both groups had similar demographic and clinical characteristics with a median [interquartile range (IQR)] age of 80.0 (77.0, 84.0) years and a pre-frail phenotype [median (IQR) 40-item Frailty Index 0.15 (0.10, 0.26)]. In the geriatric comanagement group, a significant reduction in grade I-V complications (adjusted odds ratio 0.29; 95% CI 0.21-0.40); P < .001) and in 1-year readmissions (adjusted hazard ratio 0.53; 95% CI 0.28-0.98; P < .044) was observed. No difference between the 2 groups in terms of 1-year mortality was detected. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Our study supports the implementation of geriatric comanagement in the care of older patients undergoing surgery for gastrointestinal cancer.

Risk factors for anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer (RALAR study): A nationwide retrospective study of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology Colorectal Cancer Network Collaborative Group.

AIM: Anastomotic leakage after restorative surgery for rectal cancer shows high morbidity and related mortality. Identification of risk factors could change operative planning, with indications for stoma construction. This retrospective multicentre study aims to assess the anastomotic leak rate, identify the independent risk factors and develop a clinical prediction model to calculate the probability of leakage. METHODS: The study used data from 24 Italian referral centres of the Colorectal Cancer Network of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology. Patients were classified into two groups, AL (anastomotic leak) or NoAL (no anastomotic leak). The effect of patient-, disease-, treatment- and postoperative outcome-related factors on anastomotic leak after univariable and multivariable analysis was measured. RESULTS: A total of 5398 patients were included, 552 in group AL and 4846 in group NoAL. The overall incidence of leaks was 10.2%, with a mean time interval of 6.8 days. The 30-day leak-related mortality was 2.6%. Sex, body mass index, tumour location, type of approach, number of cartridges employed, weight loss, clinical T stage and combined multiorgan resection were identified as independent risk factors. The stoma did not reduce the leak rate but significantly decreased leak severity and reoperation rate. A nomogram with a risk score (RALAR score) was developed to predict anastomotic leak risk at the end of resection. CONCLUSIONS: While a defunctioning stoma did not affect the leak risk, it significantly reduced its severity. Surgeons should recognize independent risk factors for leaks at the end of rectal resection and could calculate a risk score to select high-risk patients eligible for protective stoma construction.

Association of Delayed Surgery With Oncologic Long-term Outcomes in Patients With Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Not Responding to Preoperative Chemoradiation.

Importance: Extending the interval between the end of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and surgery may enhance tumor response in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. However, data on the association of delaying surgery with long-term outcome in patients who had a minor or poor response are lacking. Objective: To assess a large series of patients who had minor or no tumor response to CRT and the association of shorter or longer waiting times between CRT and surgery with short- and long-term outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This is a multicenter retrospective cohort study. Data from 1701 consecutive patients with rectal cancer treated in 12 Italian referral centers were analyzed for colorectal surgery between January 2000 and December 2014. Patients with a minor or null tumor response (ypT stage of 2 to 3 or ypN positive) stage greater than 0 to neoadjuvant CRT were selected for the study. The data were analyzed between March and July 2020. Exposures: Patients who had a minor or null tumor response were divided into 2 groups according to the wait time between neoadjuvant therapy end and surgery. Differences in surgical and oncological outcomes between these 2 groups were explored. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were overall and disease-free survival between the 2 groups. Results: Of a total of 1064 patients, 654 (61.5%) were male, and the median (IQR) age was 64 (55-71) years. A total of 579 patients (54.4%) had a shorter wait time (8 weeks or less) 485 patients (45.6%) had a longer wait time (greater than 8 weeks). A longer waiting time before surgery was associated with worse 5- and 10-year overall survival rates (67.6% [95% CI, 63.1%-71.7%] vs 80.3% [95% CI, 76.5%-83.6%] at 5 years; 40.1% [95% CI, 33.5%-46.5%] vs 57.8% [95% CI, 52.1%-63.0%] at 10 years; P < .001). Also, delayed surgery was associated with worse 5- and 10-year disease-free survival (59.6% [95% CI, 54.9%-63.9%] vs 72.0% [95% CI, 67.9%-75.7%] at 5 years; 36.2% [95% CI, 29.9%-42.4%] vs 53.9% [95% CI, 48.5%-59.1%] at 10 years; P < .001). At multivariate analysis, a longer waiting time was associated with an augmented risk of death (hazard ratio, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.50-2.26; P < .001) and death/recurrence (hazard ratio, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.39-2.04; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, a longer interval before surgery after completing neoadjuvant CRT was associated with worse overall and disease-free survival in tumors with a poor pathological response to preoperative CRT. Based on these findings, patients who do not respond well to CRT should be identified early after the end of CRT and undergo surgery without delay.

ICG fluorescence imaging in colorectal surgery: a snapshot from the ICRAL study group.

BACKGROUND: Fluorescence-guided visualization is a recently proposed technology in colorectal surgery. Possible uses include evaluating perfusion, navigating lymph nodes and searching for hepatic metastases and peritoneal spread. Despite the absence of high-level evidence, this technique has gained considerable popularity among colorectal surgeons due to its significant reliability, safety, ease of use and relatively low cost. However, the actual use of this technique in daily clinical practice has not been reported to date. METHODS: This survey was conducted on April 2020 among 44 centers dealing with colorectal diseases and participating in the Italian ColoRectal Anastomotic Leakage (iCral) study group. Surgeons were approximately equally divided based on geographical criteria from multiple Italian regions, with a large proportion based in public (89.1%) and nonacademic (75.7%) centers. They were invited to answer an online survey to snapshot their current behaviors regarding the use of fluorescence-guided visualization in colorectal surgery. Questions regarding technological availability, indications and techniques, personal approaches and feelings were collected in a 23-item questionnaire. RESULTS: Questionnaire replies were received from 37 institutions and partially answered by 8, as this latter group of centers do not implement fluorescence technology (21.6%). Out of the remaining 29 centers (78,4%), fluorescence is utilized in all laparoscopic colorectal resections by 72.4% of surgeons and only for selected cases by the remaining 27.6%, while 62.1% of respondents do not use fluorescence in open surgery (unless the perfusion is macroscopically uncertain with the naked eye, in which case 41.4% of them do). The survey also suggests that there is no agreement on dilution, dosing and timing, as many different practices are adopted based on personal judgment. Only approximately half of the surgeons reported a reduced leak rate with fluorescence perfusion assessment, but 65.5% of them strongly believe that this technique will become a minimum requirement for colorectal surgery in the future. CONCLUSION: The survey confirms that fluorescence is becoming a widely used technique in colorectal surgery. However, both the indications and methods still vary considerably; furthermore, the surgeons' perceptions of the results are insufficient to consider this technology essential. This survey emphasizes the need for further research to reach recommendations based on solid scientific evidence.