Laparoscopic versus open sigmoid resection for diverticular disease: follow-up assessment of the randomized control Sigma trial.

BACKGROUND: The short-term results of the Sigma trial show that laparoscopic sigmoid resection (LSR) used electively for diverticular disease offers advantages over open sigmoid resection (OSR). This study aimed to compare the overall mortality and morbidity rates after evaluation of the clinical outcomes at the 6-month follow-up evaluation. METHODS: In a prospective, multicenter, double-blind, parallel-arm, randomized control trial, eligible patients were randomized to either LSR or OSR. The short-term results and methodologic details have been published previously. Follow-up evaluation was performed at the outpatient clinic 6 weeks and 6 months after surgery. RESULTS: In this trial, 104 patients were randomized for either LSR or OSR, and the conversion rate was 19.2%. The LSR approach was associated with short-term benefits such as a 15.4% reduction in the major complications rate, less pain, and a shorter hospital stay at the cost of a longer operating time. At the 6-month follow-up evaluation, no significant differences in morbidity or mortality rates were found. Two patients died of cardiac causes (overall mortality, 3%). Late complications (7 LSR vs. 12 OSR; p = 0.205) consisted of three incisional hernias, five small bowel obstructions, four enterocutaneous fistulas, one intraabdominal abscess, one retained gauze, two anastomotic strictures, and three recurrent episodes of diverticulitis. Nine of these patients underwent additional surgical interventions. Consideration of the major morbidity over the total follow-up period (0-6 months) shows that the LSR patients experienced significantly fewer complications than the OSR patients (9 LSR vs. 23 OSR; p = 0.003). The Short Form-36 (SF-36) questionnaire showed significantly better quality of life for LSR at the 6-week follow-up assessment. However, at the 6-month follow-up assessment, these differences were decreased. CONCLUSIONS: The late clinical outcomes did not differ between LSR and OSR during the 30-day to 6-month follow-up period. Consideration of total postoperative morbidity shows a 27% reduction in major morbidity for patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery for diverticular disease.

Trauma surgery by general surgeons: Still an option for proximal femoral fractures?

INTRODUCTION: Surgery for proximal femoral fractures in the Netherlands is performed by trauma surgeons, general surgeons and orthopaedic surgeons. The aim of this study was to assess whether there is a difference in outcome for patients with proximal femoral fractures operated by trauma surgeons versus general surgeons. Secondly, the relation between hospital and surgeon volume and postoperative complications was explored. METHODS: Patients of 18 years and older were included if operated for a proximal femoral fracture by a trauma surgeon or a general surgeon in two academic, eight teaching and two non-teaching hospitals in the Netherlands from January 2010 until December 2013. The combined endpoint was defined as reoperation or surgical site infection. Multivariate analysis was used to adjust for patient and fracture characteristics and hospital and surgeon volume. Categories for hospital volume were>170/year (high volume), 96-170/year (medium volume) and <96/year (low volume). RESULTS: In 4552 included patients 2382 (52.3%) had surgery by a trauma surgeon. Postoperative complications occurred in 276 (11.6%) patients operated by a trauma surgeon and in 258 (11.9%) operated by a general surgeon (p=0.751). When considering confounders in a multivariate analysis, surgery by trauma surgeons was associated with less postoperative complications (OR 0.746; 95%CI 0.580-0.958; p=0.022). Surgery in high volume hospitals was also associated with less complications (OR 0.997; 95%CI 0.995-0.999; p=0.012). Surgeon volume was not associated with complications (OR 1.008; 95%CI 0.997-1.018; p=0.175). CONCLUSION: Surgery by trauma surgeons and high hospital volume are associated with less reoperations and surgical site infections for patients with proximal femoral fractures.