COVID-free surgical pathways for treating patients with acute calculous cholecystitis: a retrospective comparative study.

Introduction: During the Sars-Cov-2 crisis, some of the resources committed to emergency surgery services were transiently reallocated to the care of patients with severe COVID-19, preserving immediate treatment of mostly non-deferrable conditions. Moreover, the fear of contracting infections or hindering the treatment of critical COVID-19 patients has caused many individuals to defer seeking emergency care. This situation has then possibly modified the standard of care of some common surgical conditions and the relative outcomes. Our aims was to highlight any difference in surgical outcomes in patients treated for acute cholecystitis before and during the COVID-19 outbreak. Method: This is a retrospective study on a prospectively collected database that included all consecutive patients treated for acute cholecystitis from March 2019 to February 2021 at the Lugano Regional Hospital, a COVID-free hospital for general surgery patients. Patients were divided into pre-and post-COVID-19 outbreak groups. We collected thorough clinical characteristics and intra-and postoperative outcomes. Results: We included 124 patients, of which 60 and 64 were operated on before and after the COVID-19 outbreak respectively. The two groups resulted similar in terms of patients' clinical characteristics (age, gender, body mass index, ASA score, and comorbidities). Patients in the post-outbreak period were admitted to the hospital 0.7 days later than patients in the pre-outbreak period (3.8 ± 6.0 days vs. 3.1 ± 4.1 days, p = 0.453). Operative time, recovery room time, complications, and reoperations resulted similar between groups. More patients in the post-outbreak period received postoperative antibiotic therapy (63.3% vs. 37.5%, p = 0.004) and for a longer time (6.9 ± 5.1 days vs. 4.5 ± 3.9 days, p = 0.020). No significant histopathological difference was found in operatory specimens. Discussion: Despite more frequent antibiotic therapy that suggests eventually worse inflammatory local status, our results showed similar outcomes for patients treated for acute cholecystitis before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. The local COVID management, reallocating resources, and keeping COVID-free hospitals was key to offering patients a high standard of treatment.

Safety and feasibility of emergency robot-assisted transabdominal preperitoneal repair for the treatment of incarcerated inguinal hernia: A retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Few studies assessed robotic in emergency setting and no solid evidence was demonstrated. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of robot-assisted transabdominal preperitoneal (R-TAPP) repair for the treatment of incarcerated inguinal hernia. METHODS: We retrospectively searched from a prospectively maintained database patients who underwent R-TAPP or open surgery for incarcerated inguinal hernias from January 2018 to March 2023. The primary endpoint was to assess safety and feasibility of the R-TAPP compared to the standard approach. For eligible patients, data was extracted and analyzed using a propensity score-matching (PSM). RESULTS: Thirty-four patients were retrieved from our database, 15 underwent R-TAPP, while 19 underwent open surgery. Mean age was 73.1 ± 14.6 years, 30 patients (88.2%) were male and mean BMI was 23.5 ± 3.2 kg/m2. No intraoperative complication occurred. Three cases requiring small bowel resection were all in the open surgery group (p = 0.112). The operative time was 108 ± 31 min versus 112 ± 31 min in the R-TAPP and open surgery groups (p = 0.716). Seven postoperative complications occurred, only one classified as severe was in the open surgery group. The length of hospital stay was 2.9 ± 1.8 in the R-TAPP versus 4.2 ± 2.3 min in the open surgery group (p = 0.077). PSM analysis showed similar postoperative outcomes and costs in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Despite its limitations, our study appears to endorse the safety and feasibility of the robotic-assisted treatment for incarcerated inguinal hernia. This approach yielded comparable results to open surgery, albeit in a limited number of patients, suggesting it might be a viable alternative.

Switching from robotic-assisted extended transabdominal preperitoneal (eTAPP) to totally extraperitoneal (eTEP) hernia repair for umbilical and epigastric hernias.

Our study aimed to assess the safety and effectiveness of the robotic-assisted extended totally extraperitoneal (eTEP) repair compared to transabdominal preperitoneal (eTAPP) repair with a suprapubic trocar insertion to treat umbilical and epigastric hernias. On a prospectively maintained database, we identified patients who underwent either eTEP or eTAPP for treating umbilical and epigastric hernias. During the study period, 53 patients were included, 32 in the eTEP group and 21 in the eTAPP group. The mean age was 59.0 ± 13.9 years, 45 patients (84.9%) were male, and the mean BMI was 28.0 ± 5.9 kg/m2. Most hernias were umbilical (81.1%) and primary (83.0%). The operative time for eTEP was slightly shorter than for eTAPP (106 ± 43 min vs. 126 ± 74 min, p = 0.232). Postoperatively, only one case of bleeding and one seroma were recorded. No complication occurred during a mean follow-up of 11.3 ± 6.4 months in the eTEP group and 20.5 ± 9.7 months in the eTAPP group. In conclusion, our study showed that the eTEP with suprapubic approach was safe and feasible in the treatment of epigastric and umbilical hernias. According to our experience, shorter operative time, integrity of the posterior layers and increased overlap size are the main surgical reasons of switching from eTAPP to eTEP.

Laparoscopic vs. ultrasound-guided transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block in colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: The transversus abdominis plane block (TAPB) is effective for postoperative pain management in patients undergoing colorectal surgery. However, evidence regarding the optimal delivery method, either laparoscopic (L-TAPB) or ultrasound-guided (U-TAPB) is lacking. Our study aimed to compare the effectiveness of these delivery methods. METHODS: We carried out a literature search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases to include randomized studies comparing patients receiving either L-TAPB or U-TAPB during minimally invasive colorectal surgery. The primary endpoint was opioid consumption in the first 24 h after surgery. Risk of bias was assessed with the RoB-2 tool. Effect size was estimated for each study with 95% confidence interval and overall effect measure was estimated with a random effect model. RESULTS: The literature search revealed 294 articles, of which four randomized trials were eligible. A total of 359 patients were included, 176 received a L-TAPB and 183 received a U-TAPB. We established the non-inferiority of L-TAPB, as the absolute difference of - 2.6 morphine-mg (95%CI - 8.3 to 3.0) was below the pooled non-inferiority threshold of 8.1 morphine-mg (low certainty level). No difference in opioid consumption was noted at 2, 6, 12, and 48 h (low to very low certainty level). Postoperative pain, nausea and vomiting were similar between groups at different timepoints (low to very low certainty level). No TAPB-related complications were recorded. Finally, the length of hospital stay was similar between groups. CONCLUSION: For postoperative multimodal analgesia both L-TAPB and U-TAPB may result in little to no difference in outcome in patients undergoing colorectal surgery. Registration Prospero CRD42023421141.

Bowel function recovery after laparoscopic transverse colectomy within an ERAS program: a comparison to right and left colectomy.

BACKGROUND: It is known that functional recovery of the bowel is slower after right colectomy (RC) compared to left colectomy (LC), but very little has been reported on transverse colectomy (TC). OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the clinical and early functional outcomes of TC, a more infrequent operation, to RC, and LC for colorectal cancer. METHODS: Between December 2011 and December 2017, all patients undergoing elective colon resection in our institution were treated according to a standardized ERAS protocol and entered in a prospective database. We included in the study patients undergoing laparoscopic TC, RC, or LC for cancer with curative intent. The primary endpoint was prolonged postoperative ileus (PPOI), defined as need to insert a nasogastric tube, or refractory nausea VAS > 4 on or after the third postoperative day. Secondary endpoints were postoperative morbidity and length of hospital stay (LoS). RESULTS: Out of 286 patients, 126 met the inclusion criteria: 20 underwent TC, 65 RC, and 41 LC. Patients in LC group were younger than in TC and RC groups; other baseline demographics were similar. PPOI was observed in 5 (25%), 26 (40%), and 10 (24%) patients in TC, RC, and LC groups, respectively (p = 0.417). In single group comparisons, the incidence of PPOI in the TC group was significantly lower in comparison to the RC group (OR for RC: 4.255, 95% CI 1.092-16.667, p = 0.037) and similar to the LC group. No significant differences in terms of postoperative complications or LoS stay were observed. CONCLUSION: The incidence of PPOI after segmental laparoscopic colectomy for cancer within an ERAS program appears as infrequent in TC as in LC and lower than after RC. It may be reasonable to consider a slower oral intake after RC, as it represents an independent predictor of PPOI.