Achieving a Textbook Outcome in Colon Cancer Surgery Is Associated with Improved Long-Term Survival.

BACKGROUND: Colon cancer surgery is a complex clinical pathway and traditional quality metrics may exhibit significant variability between hospitals and healthcare providers. The Textbook Outcome (TO) is a composite quality marker capturing the fraction of patients, in whom all desired short-term outcomes of care are realised. The aim of the present study was to assess the TO in a series of non-metastatic colon cancer patients treated with curative intent, with emphasis on long-term survival. METHODS: Stage I-III colon cancer patients, who underwent curative colectomy following the Complete Mesocolic Excision principles, were retrospectively identified from the institutional database. TO was defined as (i) hospital survival, (ii) radical resection, (iii) no major complications, (iv) no reintervention, (v) no unplanned stoma and (vi) no prolonged hospital stay or readmission. RESULTS: In total, 128 patients (male 61%, female 39%, mean age 70.7 ± 11.4 years) were included in the final analysis. Overall, 60.2% achieved a TO. The highest rates were observed for "hospital survival" and "no unplanned stoma" (96.9% and 97.7%), while the lowest rates were for "no major complications" and "no prolonged hospital stay" (69.5% and 75%). Older age, left-sided resections and pT4 tumours were factors limiting the chances of a TO. The 5-year overall and 5-year cancer-specific survival were significantly better in the TO versus non-TO subgroup (81% vs. 59%, p = 0.009, and 86% vs. 65%, p = 0.02, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes in colon cancer surgery may be affected by patient-, doctor- and hospital-related factors. TO represents those patients who achieve the optimal perioperative results, and is furthermore associated with improved long-term cancer survival.

Elective surgery for conservatively treated acute uncomplicated diverticulitis: a systematic review of postoperative outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Elective surgery has been proposed, after at least two episodes of acute diverticulitis, initially treated conservatively, in order to prevent further episodes or chronic complaints. However, prophylactic surgery has been questioned, due to the associated risks of postoperative mortality and morbidity, as well as the risk of recurrent diverticulitis. This systematic review attempts to assess the role of prophylactic left colonic resection, after episodes of uncomplicated acute diverticulitis treated either conservatively with antibiotics and/or other supportive measures. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic search was performed using Medline, Embase, Ovid, and Cochrane databases for studies reporting on the treatment of acute uncomplicated diverticulitis (Hinchey I). The main endpoint was treatment failure, defined as persistent/recurrent symptoms or need for readmission and/or reintervention. Secondary endpoints were the immediate postoperative outcomes. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: In total, 24 studies with 2855 patients were included in the analysis. Intra- and postoperative complications rate were 5% and 16%, respectively. Anastomotic leak was 1.3% and emergency reoperation was 2.4%. Long-term symptomatic resolve was reported at 91%. Persistent or recurrent symptoms were observed in 5.4% of cases. Meta-analysis showed no significant difference in recurrence rates between surgical and conservative management. CONCLUSIONS: Elective surgery to prevent recurrent diverticulitis is not recommended, irrespective of the number of previous episodes. Generally, elective sigmoidectomy should not be recommended to patients with ongoing atypical lower abdominal symptoms after acute diverticulitis, but should aim primarily at improving quality of life. It should be offered to patients with ongoing inflammation, or diverticular complications.

Revisiting Amyand's Hernia: A 20-Year Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: Protrusion of the appendix within an inguinal hernia is termed an Amyand's hernia. A systematic review of case reports and case series of Amyand's hernia was performed, with emphasis on surgical decision-making. METHODS: The English literature (2000-2019) was reviewed, using PubMed and Embase, combining the terms "hernia", "inguinal", "appendix", "appendicitis" and "Amyand". Overall, 231 studies were included, describing 442 patients. RESULTS: Mean age of patients was 34 ± 32 years (adults 57.5%, children 42.5%). 91% were males, while a left-sided Amyand's hernia was observed in 9.5%. Of 156 elective hernia repairs, 38.5% underwent appendectomy and 61.5% simple reduction of the appendix. 88% of the adult patients had a mesh repair, without complications. Of 281 acute cases, hernial complications (76%) and acute appendicitis (12%) were the most common preoperative surgical indications. Appendectomy was performed in 79%, more extensive operations in 8% and simple reduction in 13% of cases. A mesh was used in 19% of adult patients following any type of resection and in 81% following reduction of the appendix. Among acute cases, mortality was 1.8% and morbidity 9.2%. Surgical site infections were observed in 3.6%, all of which in patients without mesh implantation. CONCLUSION: In elective Amyand's hernia cases, appendectomy may be considered in certain patients, provided faecal spillage is avoided, to prevent mesh infection. In cases of appendicitis, prosthetic mesh may be used, if the surgical field is relatively clean, whereas endogenous tissue repairs are preferred in cases of heavy contamination.

Detailed and applied anatomy for improved rectal cancer treatment.

Rectal anatomy is one of the most challenging concepts of visceral anatomy, even though currently there are more than 23,000 papers indexed in PubMed regarding this topic. Nonetheless, even though there is a plethora of information meant to assist clinicians to achieve a better practice, there is no universal understanding of its complexity. This in turn increases the morbidity rates due to iatrogenic causes, as mistakes that could be avoided are repeated. For this reason, this review attempts to gather current knowledge regarding the detailed anatomy of the rectum and to organize and present it in a manner that focuses on its clinical implications, not only for the colorectal surgeon, but most importantly for all colorectal cancer-related specialties.

Definition of the Rectum: An International, Expert-based Delphi Consensus.

BACKGROUND: The wide global variation in the definition of the rectum has led to significant inconsistencies in trial recruitment, clinical management, and outcomes. Surgical technique and use of preoperative treatment for a cancer of the rectum and sigmoid colon are radically different and dependent on the local definitions employed by the clinical team. A consensus definition of the rectum is needed to standardise treatment. METHODS: The consensus was conducted using the Delphi technique with multidisciplinary colorectal experts from October, 2017 to April, 2018. RESULTS: Eleven different definitions for the rectum were used by participants in the consensus. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was the most frequent modality used to define the rectum (67%), and the preferred modality for 72% of participants. The most agreed consensus landmark (56%) was "the sigmoid take-off," an anatomic, image-based definition of the junction of the mesorectum and mesocolon. In the second round, 81% of participants agreed that the sigmoid take-off as seen on computed tomography or MRI achieved consensus, and that it could be implemented in their institution. Also, 87% were satisfied with the sigmoid take-off as the consensus landmark. CONCLUSION: An international consensus definition for the rectum is the point of the sigmoid take-off as visualized on imaging. The sigmoid take-off can be identified as the mesocolon elongates as the ventral and horizontal course of the sigmoid on axial and sagittal views respectively on cross-sectional imaging. Routine application of this landmark during multidisciplinary team discussion for all patients will enable greater consistency in tumour localisation.

Primary curative surgery and preemptive or adjuvant hyperthermic peritoneal chemotherapy in colorectal cancer patients at high risk to develop peritoneal carcinomatosis. A systematic review.

PURPOSE: Τo evaluate all available data on the effect of preemptive intervention in patients who have curative surgery for colorectal cancer (CRC) and are at high risk to develop peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC). METHODS: The authors conducted a systematic review of all published studies from January 2000 to July 2016. Twelve studies were eventually considered for analysis, and were divided in four categories, according to different approaches for adjuvant intra-peritoneal chemotherapy: a) hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), during primary surgery for CRC; b) early postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (EPIC), after primary surgery for CRC; c) early re-intervention (laparotomy or laparoscopy) and HIPEC; and d) as second look laparotomy and HIPEC + cytoreductive surgery (CRS), several months after primary surgery. RESULTS: Considering prophylactic HIPEC during primary surgery, the studies that were analysed showed a peritoneal recurrence rate of 0-12.9%, a 3- and 5-year disease free survival (DFS) of 67-97.5% and 54.8-84% respectively, and a 3- and 5-year overall survival (OS) of 67-100% and 84%, respectively. These oncological results are probably better than what is expected in patients at high risk to develop PC and have only adjuvant systemic chemotherapy. Because of the great heterogeneity in inclusion criteria (risk factors for PC) and methodology of intra-peritoneal chemotherapy (different timing, different techniques, different agents), a meta-analysis was not performed. CONCLUSIONS: At present and because of the insufficient available evidence, preemptive intervention at the immediate postoperative adjuvant setting is recommended only in the setting of a registered clinical trial.

Does Conversion to Open of Laparoscopically Attempted Rectal Cancer Cases Affect Short- and Long-Term Outcomes? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopy for rectal cancer is a challenge as it presents many technical difficulties and requires high level of expertise. That is the reason for the high conversion rate. Reports on outcomes of converted cases after laparoscopic rectal resection for cancer are conflicting. AIM: The present meta-analysis compares short- and long-term outcomes between converted rectal cancer cases with both open and laparoscopically completed cases. METHOD: All studies reporting on outcomes separately for the converted cases were reviewed systematically. Main outcomes were intraoperative complications, procedure duration, short-term mortality and morbidity, length of stay, local recurrence, number of lymph nodes retrieved, and distant metastases. Quality assessment and data extraction were performed independently by 3 reviewers. RESULTS: Fourteen studies were eligible for analysis, including 10,845 patients. Overall conversion rate was 11.9%. Converted cases had significantly longer duration, hospital stay, and higher rates of wound infection compared with laparoscopic cases. All other outcomes had no difference. When compared with open cases, conversions displayed longer operative times, but there was no other significant difference in the short- or long-term outcomes. CONCLUSION: Converted cases seem to have some short-term unfavorable outcomes. Further retrospective analysis of big registries will be helpful for further investigation of converted cases.

Is complete mesocolic excision oncologically superior to conventional surgery for colon cancer? A retrospective comparative study.

BACKGROUND: During the last decade, many efforts have been made in order to improve the oncologic outcomes following colonic resection. Complete mesocolic excision (CME) has proved to provide high rates of disease-free and overall survival rates in patients undergoing resection for colonic malignancies. The aim of our study was to further investigate the role of CME in colonic surgery through comparison with a series of conventional resections. METHODS: All data regarding resections for colonic cancer since 2006 were obtained prospectively from two surgical departments. Retrieved data from 290 patients were analyzed and compared between those who underwent CME and those who had conventional surgery. RESULTS: The CME group presented a higher rate of postoperative morbidity and readmissions. Histopathological features were in favor of CME surgery compared with the conventional group, in terms of both resected bowel length (33 vs. 20 cm) and lymph node harvest (27 vs. 18). Although CME was associated with better disease-free and overall survival times, only tumor differentiation, adjuvant chemotherapy and age had a statistically significant affect on those outcome values (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: CME improves histopathologic features, but without presenting oncologic superiority. Larger prospective studies following adequate surgical training are needed to prove the technique's advantages in oncologic outcomes.

Gastrointestinal motility following thoracic surgery: the effect of thoracic epidural analgesia. A randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUNDS: Impairment of gastrointestinal (GI) motility is an undesirable but inevitable consequence of surgery. This prospective randomised controlled study tested the hypothesis that postoperative thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) with ropivacaine or a combination of ropivacaine and morphine accelerates postoperative GI function and shortens the duration of postoperative ileus following major thoracic surgery compared to intravenous (IV) morphine. METHODS: Thirty patients scheduled for major thoracic surgery were randomised to three groups. All patients had bowel motility assessments 1 week preoperatively. All patients received general anaesthesia. Group Ep-R received TEA with ropivacaine; group Ep-RM received TEA with ropivacaine and morphine and group IV-M received IV morphine via patient controlled analgesia pump (PCA). Bowel motility was assessed by clinical examination in addition to oro-ceacal transit time (OCTT) on the first and third postoperative days and colonic transit time (CTT). RESULTS: Overall the OCTT demonstrated a 2.5-fold decrease in bowel motility on the first postoperative day. The OCTT test revealed statistically significant differences between all groups (Ep-R vs Ep-RM, p = 0.43/Ep-R vs IV-M, p = 0.039 / Ep-RM vs IV-M, p < 0.001). Also, very significant differences were found in the OCCT test between days (Ep-R vs Ep-RM, p < 0.001/Ep-R vs IV-M, p < 0.001 / Ep-RM vs IV-M, p = 0.014). There were no significant differences in the CTT test or the clinical signs between groups. However, 70% of the patients in the Ep-R group and 80% in the Ep-RM group defecated by the third day compared to only 10% in the IV-M group, (p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Objective tests demonstrated the delayed motility of the whole GI system postoperatively following thoracic surgery. They also demonstrated that continuous epidural analgesia with or without morphine improved GI motility in comparison to intravenous morphine. These differences were more pronounced on the third postoperative day. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN number: 11953159 , retrospectively registered on 20/03/2017.

Clinical practice guidelines for the management of metastatic colorectal cancer: a consensus statement of the Hellenic Society of Medical Oncologists (HeSMO).

There is discrepancy and failure to adhere to current international guidelines for the management of metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) in hospitals in Greece and Cyprus. The aim of the present document is to provide a consensus on the multidisciplinary management of metastastic CRC, considering both special characteristics of our Healthcare System and international guidelines. Following discussion and online communication among the members of an executive team chosen by the Hellenic Society of Medical Oncology (HeSMO), a consensus for metastastic CRC disease was developed. Statements were subjected to the Delphi methodology on two voting rounds by invited multidisciplinary international experts on CRC. Statements reaching level of agreement by ≥80% were considered as having achieved large consensus, whereas statements reaching 60-80% moderate consensus. One hundred and nine statements were developed. Ninety experts voted for those statements. The median rate of abstain per statement was 18.5% (range: 0-54%). In the end of the process, all statements achieved a large consensus. The importance of centralization, care by a multidisciplinary team, adherence to guidelines, and personalization is emphasized. R0 resection is the only intervention that may offer substantial improvement in the oncological outcomes.

Surgery along the embryological planes for colon cancer: a systematic review of complete mesocolic excision.

BACKGROUND: Complete mesocolic excision (CME) for colonic cancer offers a surgical specimen of higher quality, with higher number of lymph nodes compared to conventional colectomy. However, evidence on oncological outcomes is limited. The aim of the present study is to review recent literature and provide more information regarding the effect of CME colectomy on short- and long-term outcomes. METHOD: PubMed and MEDLINE databases were searched, and articles in English reporting data on CME were reviewed. Intraoperative events; postoperative morbidity and mortality; histopathological characteristics, including macroscopic assessment, number, and status of retrieved lymph nodes; and oncological outcomes were the end-points. RESULTS: Thirty-two studies were analyzed. As regards the macroscopic assessment, a larger specimen (p = 0.02) that contains a higher number of lymph nodes (p < 0.00001) is acquired after CME. Two studies report a higher disease-free survival, in stage I and II and particularly in stage III disease after CME. CME by laparoscopy offers comparable outcomes, as regards intraoperative blood loss and immediate postoperative morbidity and mortality rates. Specimen quality is similar after either approach, for cancers located at the right and left colon, but not at the transverse colon. CONCLUSION: There is strong evidence that CME offers a longer central pedicle that contains more lymph nodes than conventional surgery for colon cancer. CME represents the surgical background for the maximum lymph node harvest, an important quality marker for the surgical outcome. However, and according to present data, there is limited evidence that colectomy in terms of CME leads to improved long-term oncological outcomes.

Clinical practice guidelines for the surgical treatment of rectal cancer: a consensus statement of the Hellenic Society of Medical Oncologists (HeSMO).

In rectal cancer management, accurate staging by magnetic resonance imaging, neo-adjuvant treatment with the use of radiotherapy, and total mesorectal excision have resulted in remarkable improvement in the oncological outcomes. However, there is substantial discrepancy in the therapeutic approach and failure to adhere to international guidelines among different Greek-Cypriot hospitals. The present guidelines aim to aid the multidisciplinary management of rectal cancer, considering both the local special characteristics of our healthcare system and the international relevant agreements (ESMO, EURECCA). Following background discussion and online communication sessions for feedback among the members of an executive team, a consensus rectal cancer management was obtained. Statements were subjected to the Delphi methodology voting system on two rounds to achieve further consensus by invited multidisciplinary international experts on colorectal cancer. Statements were considered of high, moderate or low consensus if they were voted by ≥80%, 60-80%, or <60%, respectively; those obtaining a low consensus level after both voting rounds were rejected. One hundred and two statements were developed and voted by 100 experts. The mean rate of abstention per statement was 12.5% (range: 2-45%). In the end of the process, all statements achieved a high consensus. Guidelines and algorithms of diagnosis and treatment were proposed. The importance of centralization, care by a multidisciplinary team, adherence to guidelines, and personalization is emphasized.

Adjuvant chemotherapy for colon cancer: a consensus statement of the Hellenic and Cypriot Colorectal Cancer Study Group by the HeSMO.

Colorectal cancer remains a major cause of cancer mortality in the Western world both in men and women. In this manuscript a concise overview and recommendations on adjuvant chemotherapy in colon cancer are presented. An executive team from the Hellenic Society of Medical Oncology was assigned to develop a consensus statement and guidelines on the adjuvant treatment of colon cancer. Fourteen statements on adjuvant treatment were subjected to the Delphi methodology. Voting experts were 68. All statements achieved a rate of consensus above than 80% (>87%) and none revised and entered to a second round of voting. Three and 8 of them achieved a 100 and an over than 90% consensus, respectively. These statements describe evaluations of therapies in clinical practice. They could be considered as general guidelines based on best available evidence for assistance in treatment decision-making. Furthermore, they serve to identify questions and targets for further research and the settings in which investigational therapy could be considered.

Clinical practice guidelines for the surgical management of colon cancer: a consensus statement of the Hellenic and Cypriot Colorectal Cancer Study Group by the HeSMO.

Despite considerable improvement in the management of colon cancer, there is a great deal of variation in the outcomes among European countries, and in particular among different hospital centers in Greece and Cyprus. Discrepancy in the approach strategies and lack of adherence to guidelines for the management of colon cancer may explain the situation. The aim was to elaborate a consensus on the multidisciplinary management of colon cancer, based on European guidelines (ESMO and EURECCA), and also taking into account local special characteristics of our healthcare system. Following discussion and online communication among members of an executive team, a consensus was developed. Statements entered the Delphi voting system on two rounds to achieve consensus by multidisciplinary international experts. Statements with an agreement rate of ≥80% achieved a large consensus, while those with an agreement rate of 60-80% a moderate consensus. Statements achieving an agreement of <60% after both rounds were rejected and not presented. Sixty statements on the management of colon cancer were subjected to the Delphi methodology. Voting experts were 109. The median rate of abstain per statement was 10% (range: 0-41%). In the end of the voting process, all statements achieved a consensus by more than 80% of the experts. A consensus on the management of colon cancer was developed by applying the Delphi methodology. Guidelines are proposed along with algorithms of diagnosis and treatment. The importance of centralization, care by a multidisciplinary team, and adherence to guidelines is emphasized.

Impact of splenic flexure mobilization on short-term outcomes after laparoscopic left colectomy for colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Depending on the extent of left colon resection, splenic flexure mobilization is sometimes necessary to achieve a tension-free anastomosis. The aim of the study was the assessment of necessity and impact on morbidity of splenic flexure mobilization for laparoscopic colectomy with anastomosis for cancer located distally to the splenic flexure. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients subjected to laparoscopic colectomy for carcinoma located at any site from the descending colon to the distal rectum from 2004 to 2010 were reviewed. Comparisons were made between cases with and without splenic flexure mobilization. RESULTS: A total of 229 patients were operated for left colon or rectal cancer. There was no difference with regard to the intraoperative bleeding and bowel perforation and no differences concerning the conversion rates. In contrast, stoma formation rates were higher in the mobilized group. Moreover, total operative time was higher for the mobilized group except for the middle rectum cancer cases. Postoperative outcomes as far as mortality and morbidity rates and primary hospital stay are concerned, did not display any difference. CONCLUSIONS: Splenic flexure mobilization can provide a tension-free anastomosis and sufficiently vascularized anastomosis in laparoscopic colorectal surgery for distal colon pathology, with no impact on immediate postoperative outcomes, despite longer operative time.

Implementation of fast-track protocols in open and laparoscopic sphincter-preserving rectal cancer surgery: a multicenter, comparative, prospective, non-randomized study.

BACKGROUND: Data on the role of laparoscopy within an enhanced recovery protocol for rectal cancer patients is rather limited. The aim of the study was to investigate the role of laparoscopy within a 'fast-track' protocol in patients who underwent sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer. PATIENTS/METHODS: 156 consecutive patients with low rectal cancer from three centers were assigned in four groups: the open fast track (OPEN-FT), the laparoscopic fast track (LAP-FT), the open (OPEN), and the laparoscopic (LAP). The fast-track protocol was applied in one center and traditional care in the other two. All patients underwent sphincter-preserving surgery and were followed-up for 30 days. RESULTS: Overall morbidity was less in the fast-track groups (p = 0.007). On the other hand, no statistical significance could be identified in mortality, readmission or reoperations rates among the groups (p = 0.562, p = 0.896, p = 0.238). Fast-track patients required significantly less intramuscular opioids for postoperative analgesia (p < 0.001). Primary (p < 0.001) and total hospital stays (p < 0.001) were significantly shorter in the fast-track groups. CONCLUSION: The implementation of a fast-track protocol is feasible and safe in low rectal cancer patients. Laparoscopy seems to be a basic element of such protocol as it further enhances recovery and reduces morbidity.

Functional results after surgery for overt rectal prolaps.

Several procedures have been designed and applied to treat overt rectal prolapse (ORP). Transperineal procedures, such Altemeier and Delorme operations, are associated with less morbidity, but higher rate of recurrence and less optimal functional results. Transabdominal procedures include a variety of rectopexies with the use of prosthesis or sutures and with or without resection of the redundant sigmoid colon. Nowadays, they are all approached by laparoscopy. Traditional prosthesis rectopexies repair ORP and improve incontinence, but are associated with increased rate of constipation. Resection sutuere-rectopexy seems to be associated with the best functional results, particular in patients with slow transit constipation and diverticular disease. More recently, prosthesis ventral coloporectopexy seems to be less invasive and to offer very satisfactory results.

Functional results after surgery for obstructed defecation.

Obstructed defecation (OD) syndrome is associated with several abnormalities of the pelvic organs, namely anterior rectal mucosa prolapse, anterior rectocele, recto-anal intussusception, and a deep Douglas pouch which predisposes to enterocele or rectocele. Surgical repair of the anatomical deformities should be attempted, only after thorough selection of patients and conservative treatment has been exhausted. Transperineal procedures include resection-plication of the anterior rectal wall and stapled transanal rectal resection, and are indicated for the treatment of anterior rectocele and internal rectal prolapse. Functional results are satisfactory in approximately 75 percent of the cases. Transabdominal procedures include posterior prosthesis rectopexy, resection suture-rectopexy and ventral prosthesis colporectopexy. These procedures are indicated in patients with large rectocele and rectal intussusception and enterocele or sigmoidocele. The rate of repair of anatomical deformities is very high and improvement of symptoms is accounted in more than 80 percent of the cases. Ventral prosthesis colporectopexy seems a very promising approach, but further evidence is mandatory.

Fast-track vs standard care in colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis update.

BACKGROUND: Fast-track (FT) protocols accelerate patient's recovery and shorten hospital stay as a result of the optimization of the perioperative care they offer. The aim of this review is to examine the latest evidence for fast-track protocols when compared with standard care in elective colorectal surgery involving segmental colonic and/or rectal resection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All randomized controlled trials and controlled clinical trials on FT colorectal surgery were reviewed systematically. The main end points were short-term morbidity, length of primary postoperative hospital stay, length of total postoperative stay, readmission rate, and mortality. Quality assessment and data extraction were performed independently by two observers. RESULTS: Eleven studies were eligible for analysis (four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and seven controlled clinical trials (CCT)), including 1,021 patients. Primary hospital stay (weighted mean difference -2.35 days, 95% confidence interval (CI) -3.24 to -1.46 days, P < 0.00001) and total hospital stay (weighted mean difference -2.46 days, 95% CI -3.43 to -1.48 days, P < 0.00001) were significantly lower for FT programs. Morbidity was also lower in the FT group. Readmission rates were not significantly different. No increase in mortality was found. CONCLUSIONS: FT protocols show high-level evidence on reducing primary and total hospital stay without compromising patients' safety offering lower morbidity and the same readmission rates. Enhanced recovery programs should become a mainstay of elective colorectal surgery.

Quality of surgery for rectal carcinoma: comparison between open and laparoscopic approaches.

BACKGROUND: Macroscopic evaluation of a tumor specimen is an independent prognostic factor of oncologic outcome after total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer. This study aimed to assess macroscopic quality of specimens acquired after laparoscopic versus open TME in patients with low rectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventy-two patients with low rectal cancer underwent TME either by open (n = 39) or laparoscopic (n = 33) approach. In all specimens, the cut edge of the peritoneal reflection at the anterior mid-rectum, the Denonvillier's fascia, the visceral fascia covering the mesorectum both posteriorly and laterally, and the bowel wall below the mesorectum were macroscopically assessed. RESULTS: Colorectal anastomoses were located significantly lower in the laparoscopic than in the open group (P < .001). The Denonvillier's fascia was violated in 7 patients after open surgery (P = .01). A significantly more complete TME with intact visceral pelvic fascia was performed after laparoscopy compared with open surgery (P = .025). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopy offers a macroscopically more complete specimen after TME for rectal cancer than the open approach because it offers a better view in the pelvis.